General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMSNBC has a story that DOJ will indict John Brennan
They had a discussion on it, mostly saying that it is hard to guess why as most things done while he was in the Obama administration are well past time limits.
What I wonder is if they charge on anything related to the Russian election probe could his lawyers demand the unredacted Mueller report?
Ocelot II
(128,249 posts)underpants
(193,864 posts)He has to spend money on lawyers. He dared do something they are sure was in opposition to Dear Leader.
Its not about winning. Its about harassment.
Irish_Dem
(77,782 posts)It is all time consuming, costly and dangerous.
Ocelot II
(128,249 posts)and expense of responding. It's as bogus as the Comey and James cases, and with the same objective.
karynnj
(60,671 posts)Mueller actually indicted several people, who took a plea or were found guilty including Manaford. Even though hidden by Barr's lies, the conclusion seemed to be there was ample evidence that Russia did interfere against HRC for Trump, but it was not clear they had enough proof that Trump colluded. (Note the latter was when he was President - so it is a pretty damning report, much of which was not made public.)
For Brennan in 2016, it would have been negligent to NOT pursue foreign interference. Not to mention, the Obama administration tried to make a bipartisan joint statement on intelligence with the Republicans, but McConnell refused. The statement put out before the election carefully limited itself to Russian interference, not collusion with Trump and his campaign.
If anything, a case could be made that the Obama administration was extremely careful in not accusing Trump before the election. This even as Manford was doing some pretty suspicious stuff. The campaign also was involved with Cambridge Analytics using Facebook data and some of that data was rumored to have sent to Russia. If so, that data may have helped the troll farm target people on Facebook with lies.
Moostache
(10,915 posts)Why are they not taking these obviously bullshit indictment pro bono and arguing the merits and seeking redress from Trump's incompetent and clearly JV-level DOJ?
I don't get it. These cases are so flimsy and full of shit that I could likely defend myself against them and win a dismissal on the merits...
Ocelot II
(128,249 posts)Anyhow, ACLU handles cases on behalf of people who have no resources that involve public defense, and prisoners' rights; they don't handle direct criminal defense cases for individuals.
PatSeg
(51,448 posts)They can only take so many cases.
UnderThisLaw
(334 posts)leftstreet
(38,208 posts)yeah, discovery could potentially be wild
LetMyPeopleVote
(172,486 posts)Link to tweet
The investigation is being supervised by the U.S. Attorney in South Florida, Jason Quinones, in consultation with Justice Department senior staff in Washington, according to a source familiar with the matter and other information obtained by MSNBC.
The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The Florida-based inquiry comes two years after a special counsel appointed by then Attorney General Bill Barr in the first Trump Administration concluded a lengthy and exhaustive investigation that found no criminal wrongdoing by Brennan or any other major figure connected with the Russian election interference matter.
A White House spokesman confirmed the existence of the grand jury investigation in August after Fox News reported that Attorney General Pam Bondi ordered the probe based on a criminal referral from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard.
I do not see how they get around the statute of limitations
rampartd
(2,958 posts)unless future justice cannon hears the case.
SheltieLover
(74,994 posts)Sneederbunk
(16,968 posts)Could call in some favors.