Republican AG calls Comey OUT!

I'm curious Jarod.......you say you're a former prosecutor.....let's say that you've just finished closing arguments......the jury has been sent out with their instructions.......a police officer comes to you and says they have just learned the identity of an eye witness to the crime but they have not had an opportunity to locate or interview him yet......

does the law impose on you a duty to inform the judge and the defense counsel of this immediately or do you wait until after the police find the witness and question him?......

knowing that your answer will be that you are obligated to inform the judge, and knowing that in this instance the role of judge is held by congress, how can you pretend that Comey didn't have an obligation to inform congress immediately?.......
 
This time, it was former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who served under President George W. Bush. In 2007, Gonzales resigned amid controversy after firing eight U.S. attorneys for what Democrats said were political reasons. He told senators more than 50 times before his resignation that he could not recall details relevant to the dismissals.
Click to expand...
that beats Clinton's 39x "I can't recall" with the FBI interview
 
PostmodernProphet said:
I'm curious Jarod.......you say you're a former prosecutor.....let's say that you've just finished closing arguments......the jury has been sent out with their instructions.......a police officer comes to you and says they have just learned the identity of an eye witness to the crime but they have not had an opportunity to locate or interview him yet......

does the law impose on you a duty to inform the judge and the defense counsel of this immediately or do you wait until after the police find the witness and question him?......

knowing that your answer will be that you are obligated to inform the judge, and knowing that in this instance the role of judge is held by congress, how can you pretend that Comey didn't have an obligation to inform congress immediately?.......
Click to expand...

1) Because no charges are filed.
2) Congress is not a judge, or even in the judicial branch.
3) What Comey has might or might not be exculpatory.
4) There are no constitutional issues here.
5) Comey should follow Departmental protocol.
6) In America we are innocent until proven guilty, so no prosecutor should throw shade before a decision to charge or not has been made.
7) The existence of an investigation should never be used to make someone look guilty, its UNAMERICAN.
 
doesn't matter Jarod

You guys hated Gonzalez his opinion shouldn't matter to you. You didn't think he had the judgement to be on the court.

I always love when you lefties trot out a republican that agrees with you as if that is supposed to change someone's mind. The horse is out of the barn.
 
Jarod said:
1) Because no charges are filed.
2) Congress is not a judge, or even in the judicial branch.
3) What Comey has might or might not be exculpatory.
4) There are no constitutional issues here.
5) Comey should follow Departmental protocol.
6) In America we are innocent until proven guilty, so no prosecutor should throw shade before a decision to charge or not has been made.
7) The existence of an investigation should never be used to make someone look guilty, its UNAMERICAN.
Click to expand...

forgive me for making an inaccurate assumption......I had not anticipated you would get this softball wrong.......was your lapse in ethics related to the fact you lost your job as a prosecuting attorney?.......
 
Jarod said:
1) Because no charges are filed.
2) Congress is not a judge, or even in the judicial branch.
3) What Comey has might or might not be exculpatory.
4) There are no constitutional issues here.
5) Comey should follow Departmental protocol.
6) In America we are innocent until proven guilty, so no prosecutor should throw shade before a decision to charge or not has been made.
7) The existence of an investigation should never be used to make someone look guilty, its UNAMERICAN.
Click to expand...

lol? i love number 7. BUt you have no problem with multiple democratic AG's reopening trump cases and filing against him one month before election yes?

Dont get made when it is done to you :)
 
tsuke said:
lol? i love number 7. BUt you have no problem with multiple democratic AG's reopening trump cases and filing against him one month before election yes?

Dont get made when it is done to you :)
Click to expand...

I don't know about any DA's opening a case a month before an election... but did they open an investigation and announce it, or file charges... two different things.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
forgive me for making an inaccurate assumption......I had not anticipated you would get this softball wrong.......was your lapse in ethics related to the fact you lost your job as a prosecuting attorney?.......
Click to expand...

I quit because I could no longer afford to live on a government salary.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
did you ever get called on the carpet for not telling a judge about evidence that hadn't been disclosed?.......or heard tell of anyone else who had?.......
Click to expand...

I have not, but I have heard of it happening, I agree if a prosecutor has exculpatory evidence in a criminal proceeding they must share it with the Defendant and possibly the Judge.
 
Jarod said:
1) Because no charges are filed.
2) Congress is not a judge, or even in the judicial branch.
3) What Comey has might or might not be exculpatory.
4) There are no constitutional issues here.
5) Comey should follow Departmental protocol.
6) In America we are innocent until proven guilty, so no prosecutor should throw shade before a decision to charge or not has been made.
7) The existence of an investigation should never be used to make someone look guilty, its UNAMERICAN.
Click to expand...
It seems Comey is guilty of what Hillary detractors are accusing Hillary, not following protocol. Nothing illegal
 
Rana said:
It seems Comey is guilty of what Hillary detractors are accusing Hillary, not following protocol. Nothing illegal
Click to expand...

If you actually paid attention to this email mess you would know removing emails from a secured government location and distributing on another network is very illegal.
 
Question for Jughead,

What do you think when the United States Attorney General (A.G.), the head of the United States Department of Justice

sees fit to use her 5th amendment rights against self incrimination rather than testify in a congressional hearing....

Truthfully, what does that tell you about this women, counselor ?

do you know if its EVER happened before....?

Even Bill Clinton didn't sink that low....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top