Judge Orders Release of DoJ Memo Justifying Not Prosecuting Trump

I think you are largely right. The level of "probable cause" differs between a U.S. criminal investigation and a foreign counter-intelligence investigation. Following 9/11, it was decided that there needed to be more "overlap" between the two and the agencies who oversaw such investigations. The FBI used a lower standard of "probable cause" to launch the counter-intelligence investigation, which Mueller eventually found to be insufficient for a U.S. criminal indictment of any linkage between the Russians (who were indicted) and members of the Trump campaign, several of whom were indicted for other crimes (tax evasion, lying to the FBI, etc.). Given the restraints placed on Mueller regarding Barr's opinion on the non-indictment of a sitting president, and the powers of that sitting president, Mueller went about as far as he could go WHILE TRUMP WAS IN THE PRESIDENCY. Trump's presidential powers now no longer exist and, in bits and pieces, case by case, we seem to be headed for a reopening of the investigation.

 

They feel silly blaming Hillary still lol

 

Barr was in fact friends with Mueller.That should have been whispered
in President Trump's ear often.
How much more sick could it have gotten then on the day
{ within the hour } of Donald Trump's Inauguration { Jan.20,2017 }
did the Newspaper of record { The Washington Post } run a feature
story { Headline } just 19 minutes after Trump's Inauguration :
- The Campaign to Impeach Trump has Begun -

 

So...Barr and Mueller (Republicans) are colluding against Trump? The Russians helped Trump win the election. Since he asked for such help at one of his rallies, many people also believe it was in coordination with the Russians. Constitutionally, he won the Presidential Election via the Electoral College, with a minority of the popular vote. The Washington Post headline was entirely predictable and not at all sick. What was sick was the election of a reprobate such as Trump as President of the United States. I largely blame the Koch's and the Wisconsin Trifecta of Walker, Ryan and Priebus who were able to move the Party toward a person whom they felt was dumb enough to control. He fooled them, along with a large minority of the country.

 

Well, it is a "big tent" party.... The more conspiracies you can drum up, the closer you get to the center ring....

 

Oh... it extends farther than that.. Include McConnell, who got Barr confirmed in the first place AND T**** for nominating Barr..

So, at the end of the day, T**** was colluding against T****...

The Awesomeness never ends...

 

Would not surprise me to discover Trump-Hyde hates Trump-Jekyll. I believe that's also called paranoid-schizophrenia.

 

Just ran a check on the take-over wanna be's. Koch's brother died and Charles announced he was withdrawing from politics. Walker, Ryan and Preibus went into the non-government sector creating new political organizations, sitting on boards and giving speeches. Priebus even obtained a direct commission in the U.S. Navy Reserve and works at the Pentagon, when on duty.

 

Sounds like the wheels are falling off the MSM narrative about sleepy joe, and bam, we get russia collusion all over again to distract from the train wreck that is uncle Uoe. She's abusing her role of judgeship to interfere in a national political agenda. Her activism isn't warranted here. She should be rebuked for her overstepping here, and her conduct should lead to her being disbarred. Funny how much this sounds like something Obama would have done....

 

So...you oppose any judical rulings on the Freedom of Information Act?

 

I understand your point. A point is well taken and I have struggled with it at first: Was Comrade Donnie's campaign just "dancing" with the Russians, but no real coordination? I believe the handing over of his campaign's private internal polling data to the Russians, then following it up with a personal meeting with a Russian agent and publicly asking for the release of Hillary Clinton's emails by the Russians sounds to me like elements of coordination.

 

There is an area of the law called double jeopardy. We can't allow a person to be tried for the same crime over and over again. Given enough time a variety of evidence and deceit can be brought down upon a person. That is why I can't agree to go with this any further.

 

"The department had argued in court that the largely redacted March 2019 memo was legal reasoning that helped then-Attorney General William Barr make a decision about Trump. But federal Judge Amy Berman Jackson said she believed Barr and his advisers had already decided they wouldn't charge the President with a crime before he got the written advice, and the memo was partly strategic planning instead of legal reasoning -- and therefore could be made public."
https://www.wrcbtv.com/story/438254...t-to-charge-trump-must-be-released-judge-says

Is she a mind reader or something? Does she believe should override that decision? From what I remember first and foremost the Mueller report was BY STATUTE a confidential report to the Attorney General. It was never intended to be a public document BY STATUTE. Barr took the unusual step of release his summary to address his conclusion on the matter announcing there would be no prosecutions. It was HIS decision and not subject to a court review. And the memos include internal deliberations which are not made public unless a person is actually charged with a crime. It is a protection WE ALL have and enjoy so that phony malicious information is not released. This like a grand jury where such testimony is sealed and not released to the public. That ends it.

 

Double jeopardy occurs after someone has been tried in a court of law for a specific crime.

 

Where does she derive the legal authority to challenge that interpretation? It is Barr who makes that interpretation not her. She has no standing deciding who does or who does not get charged with a crime ONLY the DOJ can do that. She is sticking her nose where she has no business.

 

All of which is covered by the Freedom of Information Act. They can either comply or appeal her decision. IMO, when Barr "voluntarily" got out ahead of Mueller's report with his own summary, he wavered his sole decision making authority. You are right, he did not have to do that. But, he did, thus opening the door for the evaluation of his reasoning. DoJ's choice is now to comply or appeal.

Of course, it's possible Barr knew that when he decided to write his own public summary.

 

No certain things are not subject to freedom of information like information derived in investigations of private citizens that does not result in criminal charges. And the federal statue covering Mueller's work says the Special Prosecutor sends a CONFIDENTAL report to the AG with any criminal referrals and the AG makes the decision as to prosecute and/or in the case of a high government official subject to impeachment a referral to the Speaker of the House. He's not required to make a public statement about it. We do have rights of privacy in this country. Barr was not out ahead, the report was sent him CONFIDENTIALLY as the statute requires. He could have made the decision on his but due to the nature he consulted with the DAG and OLC and they all agreed to his determination. The judge has no business sticking her nose into it it's was not her decision to make or second guess.

 

Or after Trump has been tried anytime for anything.

Donnie was tried for having a rear light out in 1965. Therefore he can never be tried again for anything at all, ever. This extends to his family and anyone who voted for him. Trumpers get ready to do anything. You're covered.

 

You need to read the Freedom of Information Act. No one is charging Barr with anything...yet. That's conjecture. She's just ruling on the case in front of her...i.e. whether or not, the memo will be released un-redacted to the public under the Act. Of course, IF it turns out that someone misled a Court or lied about something, that's another story. A judge may certainly hold someone who lies to the court in contempt.

 

Barr was acting as the AG, not a private citizen. And, read his summary letter. He does NOT say everyone agreed with his determination. he only says he consulted them. The Freedom of Information Act is law. Her job is to interpret that law in a judicial process. Barr is out of office. It's up to the present AG to determine whether or not to comply or to appeal.

 

You're being sarcastic...but it's appreciated.

 

Nice leap. Hope you land well....

 

No leap. She is presiding over a Freedom of Information law suit seeking to have the OLC memo released un-redacted. You are arguing she can't rule for the plaintiff. You're just complaining about her decision.

 

She's basing her decision on a political agenda. Perhaps you should refocus your lens...

 

Neither you or I are going to decide that, although both of us are free to state our opinions. The DoJ is going to either comply, by releasing the un-redacted version of the memo, or they're going to appeal her decision to the DC Appelate Court.