Cleaner Barr hard at work

Here4money said:
https://thehill.com/regulation/cour...urce=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf

DOJ tells Supreme Court that subpoenas for Trump's finances are unconstitutional
The Department of Justice is arguing in filings to the Supreme Court that the multiple subpoenas for President Trump's financial records are unconstitutional.

The solicitor general's office is siding with the president in his appeal of lower court rulings upholding subpoenas issued by House committees and the Manhattan District Attorney's Office.

The Justice Department argued that the Constitution prohibits local law enforcement from investigating the president and that Congress must overcome high hurdles when seeking information from him.

"These cases involve the first attempts by congressional committees to demand the personal records of a sitting President of the United States," the Justice Department said in one of the filings, submitted Tuesday. "That use of their limited and implied investigatory powers poses a serious risk of harassing the President and distracting him from his constitutional duties."

The administration made a similar argument against the Manhattan DA's subpoena in a filing submitted Monday.

"State grand-jury subpoenas for a sitting President’s personal records pose serious risks to the independent functioning of the Office of the President," the department wrote. "State prosecutors could use such subpoenas to harass the President in retaliation for the President’s official policies. Such subpoenas could also subject the President to significant burdens, threatening to divert the President’s time and energy from his singularly important public duties."

In April of last year, the House Oversight and Reform Committee issued a subpoena for the president's personal financial records to his accounting firm, Mazars USA, and the House Intelligence and House Financial Services committees issued wide-ranging subpoenas for personal and business records to Deutsche Bank and Capital One.

The committees cited investigations into Russian interference in U.S. elections and money laundering.

That same month, Cyrus Vance, the Manhattan district attorney, issued a subpoena to Mazars for the tax returns and other financial records.

The D.C. and 2nd Circuit courts of appeals ruled last year that Trump's accounting firm and bank would have to comply with the subpoenas. Trump's personal legal team appealed the rulings, arguing that the president has broad immunity to subpoenas and even law enforcement investigation.

In the cases over the House subpoenas, the Justice Department argued that the committees failed to identify legitimate legislative needs to justify the demands for the highly personal information.

"Together, those documents encompass a constellation of transactions that would permit the committees to reconstruct in detail the President’s financial history with those institutions—including fund transfers, deposits, withdrawals, investments, loans, mortgages, and lines of credits," the Justice Department wrote.

"To be sure, congressional committees ordinarily have considerable latitude about which private transactions and events to examine," the department's filing added. "But committees investigating far-reaching public problems, such as money laundering, do not properly exercise that discretion by making the President the primary target of their inquiries."

Both cases will be argued before the Supreme Court on March 31.

More...
bummer:
 
https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...pt-officials-call-on-barr-to-resign-for-doing
Over 1,100 ex-Justice Dept officials call on Barr to resign for doing Trump's 'bidding'

"Barr's actions in doing the President's personal bidding unfortunately speak louder than his words," the group of ex-officials wrote in a letter shared on Sunday by Protect Democracy, a nonprofit advocacy group. "Those actions, and the damage they have done to the Department of Justice's reputation for integrity and the rule of law, require Mr. Barr to resign."
 
Here4money said:
https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...pt-officials-call-on-barr-to-resign-for-doing
Over 1,100 ex-Justice Dept officials call on Barr to resign for doing Trump's 'bidding'

"Barr's actions in doing the President's personal bidding unfortunately speak louder than his words," the group of ex-officials wrote in a letter shared on Sunday by Protect Democracy, a nonprofit advocacy group. "Those actions, and the damage they have done to the Department of Justice's reputation for integrity and the rule of law, require Mr. Barr to resign."
More...

Too bad we couldn't get a currentl list of Justice Department officials who oppose trump rather than ex-officials.

That would be beautiful. You would have a complete, downloadable, list of the swamp in doj.
 
33o8epg1yg733.png
 
Here4money said:
https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...pt-officials-call-on-barr-to-resign-for-doing
Over 1,100 ex-Justice Dept officials call on Barr to resign for doing Trump's 'bidding'

"Barr's actions in doing the President's personal bidding unfortunately speak louder than his words," the group of ex-officials wrote in a letter shared on Sunday by Protect Democracy, a nonprofit advocacy group. "Those actions, and the damage they have done to the Department of Justice's reputation for integrity and the rule of law, require Mr. Barr to resign."
More...
 
My girl Kim Strassel gives you worthless tit-tards some schooling on what the right way is to understand this Bill Barr backlash scam.

You can thank her and thank me too for this opportunity to wise up. You are welcome.


Kimberley Strassel: Bill Barr delivers on his pledge of accountability as AG and bureaucrats bristle

The Roger Stone sentencing uproar is deeply important, and not because it’s another Trump “scandal.” Rather, it’s a clash that was always coming—the moment at which an ungoverned bureaucracy smacked up against Attorney General William Barr’s promise to restore equal justice and accountability at the Justice Department.

Democrats and the media are in a tizzy over the department leadership’s Tuesday decision to file a sentencing memo calling for Mr. Stone to receive a shorter prison sentence than four line prosecutors originally recommended. The reversal came not long after President Trump tweeted his own outrage over the initial sentencing memo, leading to the inevitable conspiracy theories and calls for investigation.

Democrats claimed Mr. Trump politically interfered with justice, bullying the department into going easy on a political crony. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer proclaims “a crisis in the rule of law.” Rep. Adam Schiff (D., Impeachment) declared another “abuse of power.” The press is casting it as Example A of how a postacquittal Trump feels emboldened to ignore the law. This has it entirely backward. Here’s what actually happened: read further in the link.


https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/bill-barr-ag-accountability-kimberley-strassel
 
Here4money said:
More...


Yes. The little DOJ current member and alumni club is very upset with Mr. Barr for questioning the swamp- without regard to whether they are republican or dem appointees.

These vocal clowns vigorously argue that Barr is just a puppet and does whatever Trump wants. Except when you ask them how that squares with the fact that Trump has desperately clamored for locking up Hillary, Comey, Page, Strzok, and McCabe, etc, etc, and Barr has refused to go there they have nothing to say in return. Can one of you tards explain that? Didn't think so. Go back to your robo-posts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top