View Single Post
  #26  
Old January 3rd 19, 01:02 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B. Slocomb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 805
Default So who can the President fire?

On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 13:08:26 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Tuesday, January 1, 2019 at 6:23:18 PM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote:
On Tuesday, January 1, 2019 at 5:01:16 PM UTC, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, January 1, 2019 at 7:55:57 AM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote:
Jay Beattie says: " This is what the government would have proved at trial."

Really? Surely you mean "This is what the government CLAIMS it would have proved at trial." The Mueller team of Democrat donors first bankrupted General Flynn and then threatened to go after his son if he didn't roll over. There's a very large difference between extorting a confession from someone by threats to his family, and proving whatever he confesses to under duress in a contested case in court. Surely they taught you that much at college? If not, you should ask for your tuition to be returned.

This "Russia Dossier -- Mueller Special Counsel Investigation" will go down in history as the most corrupt series of incidents in all of American history.

Top-posting is a federal offense.


Kiss my ass.

Happy new year Andre!


Since I don't live in PDX, I wish you a year in which you can put up your hourly rate to a thousand dollars.

Things slow down at the pulp (fiction) mill?


Nah. The press got taken over by one of the Big Three, precisely for the literary quality of its writers, and everyone got well to several factors of capital gains, which attracts a lower tax rate, as I'm sure you keep telling your clients from Big Oil.

I know how disappointing it can be to actually look at a transcript where an intelligent, high level official represented by the greatest (over-priced) legal talent in the United States cops a plea in open court -- after ten minutes of admonitions and specifically states under oath that the plea is voluntary and not coerced. Recall that the plea was to lying and not the underlying (possible) Logan Act violation or other federal law violations. We'll learn about that later when the Mueller report is issued. Flynn lied, got caught and got prosecuted. It's pretty simple. He'll get probation or maybe a suntan opportunity at Club Fed. BTW, all criminal investigations are coercive, and when you lie and get caught, you're just throwing gasoline on the fire. Nixon and Clinton proved that point.

-- Jay Beattie.


Oh, I read that when it first became available via NR's Andy McCarthy, I think. I'm a sucker for reading deceptively nuanced prose. I'm sorry to disappoint you, but I wasn't disappointed at all. It reads to me, as I expected, like a wholelotta "intelligent, high level officials" -- what was it that judge said again, ah, yes --"composing". And certainly what they're composing isn't music.

Funny thing: the FBI agents who interviewed Flynn first said he hadn't lied. It was Mueller, who wasn't in the room, who decided that after all he was lying, and disappeared the agents' original reports, and wiped their phones, for which one hopes he will be held to account. Funny thing, that sequence, but only if your sense of justice is blunted. (Well, or if you're a lawyer who doesn't believe in the concept of exculpatory evidence.)

AJ
Who will watch the watchers?


While Lyndon Johnson was in the Oval office he was so well thought of as of his honesty that the 89th Congress passed the Freedom of Information Act. Funny how it has been the strong point in showing the people in this country what Democrats really are.


You didn't read further down the page"

The Freedom of Information Act was initially introduced as the bill S.
1160 in the 89th Congress. When the two-page bill was signed into law
it became Pub.L. 89-487, 80 Stat. 250, enacted July 4, 1966, but had
an effective date of one year after the date of enactment, or July 4,
1967.

That law was initially repealed during the period between the
enactment of the act and its effective date... A new act in Pub.L.
90-23, 81 Stat. 54, enacted June 5, 1967 (originally H.R. 5357 in the
90th Congress), repealed the original and put in its place a
substantively identical law. This statute was signed on June 5, 1967,
and had the same effective date as the original statute: July 4, 1967.

So you are wrong once again. The Freedom of Information Act was
actually enacted by the 90th congress.

You are, as they say, a day late and a dollar short.

cheers,

John B.


Ads
 

Home - Home - Home - Home - Home