Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Attorney General Barr Gave Mueller Permission to Indict Trump’s Three Adult Children and J

that worked for Hildabeast

Yes.

That worthless SOB Jeff Sessions wasn't "Tricked" into anything. He's a swamp dweller and some folks had some dirt on him.

Special Councils, (Mueller) do not ask for permission to indict or investigate. They are "Special", used to be called "Independent", or "Special Prosecutor" .

The AG, or DAG in the case of AG Sessions, is who the Special Council "Reports" to, the SC does not take orders from the AG. The AG cannot direct or order who will and will not be indicted by the SC.

In this case, Barr just agreed with Mueller, as any Deep State swamper would.

https://quodverum.com/2019/03/75/endgame-potus-trump-s-vindication-nears.html# I posted this on the Q thread but it will fit here as well,, read it all

Then what's the point of an "Independent" special council?

The AG cannot override the SC.

LOL, Oh, OK, Mueller is a White Hat, Rod Rosenstein and his CIA wife are White Hats, and Donald J Trump is an FBI informant against the MOB and is still breathing.

Nice try!

Sure the AG can override the SC. The AG can even fire the SC. Don't be silly... The SC works for the Justice Dept. Who is the head mogul at the Justice Dept?

Furthermore, the POTUS can fire the SC as well. Might cause some flak, but they can.

Mueller would need Barr's permission to indict a sitting President due to the current DOJ policy on the matter. Mueller is subject to following DOJ policies and regulations.

Legit question,, if the DOJ doesnt controll spec councils,,why were the dems so shook up over Wittakers taking over the Muller probe? why Have Rosenstein oversee spec counncil? why all the dems threats about DOJ interference? I thought the DOJ was the "oversight" of ALL law enforcment and investigations? BUT I am not sure about it,,

Sorry it dont fit your narrative steve,, we have a saying around here not to let facts get in the way of a good story,, Ill respect your thread and back out,,

The AG can indeed fire the SC, but while the SC is active the AG cannot order him/her not to prosecute or indict.

If that were true then the SC would be worthless.

Example,

Lisa Graham is asking Barr to appoint a SC to investigate the FBI and the DOJ because there is so much corruption in both that investigating themselves is not only impossible it is retarded.

What would be the point of Barr appointing a SC to investigate the DOJ only to have the head of the DOJ call the shots and have power over what the SC can and cannot investigate.

You know better than to think this is how a SC appointment works. They have free rain and answer to no one. Report to, yes, answer to, NO.

Where have you been? A sitting Preident cannot be indicted, only impeached. Settled precedent to keep political prosecutions from interfering with the performance of the duties of office.

Barr, Rosenstein, or Trump can fire Mueller if necessary. Rosenstein is still supervising (unless he's already left, which I haven't heard).

From the Gatewaypundit story...

"None of Cockburn’s sources was ‘in the room’ – as they say in Washington – for the (alleged) discussions between Mueller and Barr and their two staffs. And none of the sources was briefed by the people ‘in the room’. But they did talk to the people briefed by the people in the room and – twice removed from the original conversations – they all give the same account. It is that the older Trump children and Jared will be indicted for financial crimes while Mueller wants to charge Trump with obstruction of justice. The charges, Cockburn is told now, will not be about ‘Russia collusion’."


I myself have many, many sources who were "not in the room". They tell me anything I want them to.

I've read somewhere that 85% of career politicians have done something illegal over the years. From taking kickback money or stock from lobbyists, to taking campaign money from lobbyists. This is why we need term limits, to keep $100,000 a first year politicians from becoming millionaires in 8-10 years. Pelosi's family owns stock in Starkist Tuna. The minimum wage laws do not count for offshore ship canning of Tuna. They became rich investing in Starkist early on and having this little law get through attached to some bill years ago. Just an example.

DOJ "memos" are NOT setteld precedent, court rulings are, whether or not a sitting President can or cannot be indicted has not been settled by any court, nor is it prohibited by our Constitution. At the moment this is current DOJ "policy" but not settled precedent.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/05/presidential-indictment/560957/

(b) The Special Counsel shall not be subject to the day-to-day supervision of any official of the Department. However, the Attorney General may request that the Special Counsel provide an explanation for any investigative or prosecutorial step, and may after review conclude that the action is so inappropriate or unwarranted under established Departmental practices that it should not be pursued. In conducting that review, the Attorney General will give great weight to the views of the Special Counsel. If the Attorney General concludes that a proposed action by a Special Counsel should not be pursued, the Attorney General shall notify Congress as specified in § 600.9(a)(3).

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/600.7

In other words, the AG cannot order the SC to do shchit, if he disagrees with the SC, he must report his finding and his reasons to Congress.

At what point has any part of this special council followed the letter of the law?


In any court case besides this one, the investigation would have been squashed as illegal, based on false information and perjury, and therefore any findings found to be "fruits of a poisonous tree"...

If Mueller has such a free reign, why does he even report to anyone in the AG's office?

My bad then. I thought the notion had been in court.

The proper procedure, AFAIK, is for the SC to refer any criminal matter to the House for consideration for impeachment.

You need to re-read the link ... No indictments have been issued...some "UNNAMED SOURCES" have said it's going to happen.....NOT that it HAS happened...fake news, because it's NOT news, it's unverified SPECULATION, based on peoples IMAGINATIONS....