Question for Legal Beagles

[Isaac]

I guess any type of repetitive, halfway-organized persecution should count, as a lot of people are persecuted for their religion but not necessarily by their government. That said, I realize it is subjective - and that's why we have people who are the gatekeepers in these interviews. One can only hope they keep their heads screwed on straight and approve the right people ..... but I really have no idea ......

 

[Pat Hartman]

persecution

Persecution is very different from Prosecution. Trump is still being persecuted because "they" don't like anything he does and so they are always making stupid arguments the way they are for the "Maryland" father who is in actuality a gang member, a wife abuser, and a member of terrorist gang. If some random judge doesn't agree with one of Trump's opinions, they charge him with some made up crime. Persecuting is identifying a person and making up some crime he can be charged with.

Prosecuting is formally charging a suspect with an actual crime which has been committed and for which sufficient investigation has identified someone who probably committed the crime..

Persecution/Prosecution is not subjective. Persecution identifies the person (or class of people) you want to charge before you even know if a crime was committed. Prosecution is investigating a crime and finding a person who may have committed it and you are sure enough of the person's guilt to spend the people's money on a trial. Tish James based her ENTIRE campaign on "getting Trump" THAT is persecution.

 

[Dick7Access]

Persecution is very different from Prosecution. Trump is still being persecuted because "they" don't like anything he does and so they are always making stupid arguments the way they are for the "Maryland" father who is in actuality in the country illegally, a wife abuser, and a member of terrorist gang. If some random judge doesn't agree with one of Trump's opinions, they charge him with some made up crime. Persecuting is identifying a person and making up some crime he can be charged with.

Prosecuting is formally charging a suspect with an actual crime which has been committed and for which sufficient investigation has identified someone who probably committed the crime..

Persecution/Prosecution is not subjective. Persecution identifies the person (or class of people) you want to charge before you even know if a crime was committed. Prosecution is investigating a crime and finding a person who may have committed it and you are sure enough of the person's guilt to spend the people's money on a trial. Tish James based her ENTIRE campaign on "getting Trump" THAT is persecution.

Pat for president

 

[Steve R.]

Most DOJ Ausa's serve both democrat and republican presidents. They don't however compromise their ethics to do so.

They are ethically obligated to serve the president. If "their ethics" are compromised in serving the president, then they are ethically obligated to resign.

 

[Dick7Access]

They are ethically obligated to serve the president. If "their ethics" are compromised in serving the president, then they are ethically obligated to resign.

certainty you jest! Please let me know when they introduce ethics in politics

 

[Steve R.]

certainty you jest! Please let me know when they introduce ethics in politics

No jest. I was responding to the unintelligent comment made by @moke123.

 

[moke123]

They are ethically obligated to serve the president.

They are ethically obligated to serve the constitution. They are not the presidents attorneys.

 

[Dick7Access]

No jest. I was responding to the unintelligent comment made by @moke123.

was 116360 comment on another tread because I don't see it here

 

[Dick7Access]

No jest. I was responding to the unintelligent comment made by @moke123.

was 116360 on another tread because I don't see it here

 

[Isaac]

Persecution is very different from Prosecution. Trump is still being persecuted because "they" don't like anything he does and so they are always making stupid arguments the way they are for the "Maryland" father who is in actuality a gang member, a wife abuser, and a member of terrorist gang. If some random judge doesn't agree with one of Trump's opinions, they charge him with some made up crime. Persecuting is identifying a person and making up some crime he can be charged with.

Prosecuting is formally charging a suspect with an actual crime which has been committed and for which sufficient investigation has identified someone who probably committed the crime..

Persecution/Prosecution is not subjective. Persecution identifies the person (or class of people) you want to charge before you even know if a crime was committed. Prosecution is investigating a crime and finding a person who may have committed it and you are sure enough of the person's guilt to spend the people's money on a trial. Tish James based her ENTIRE campaign on "getting Trump" THAT is persecution.

Yes I think I agree on most of what you said, you quoted one word persecution from my post, which was about something totally different, it was about asylum

 

[Pat Hartman]

Yes I think I agree on most of what you said, you quoted one word persecution from my post, which was about something totally different, it was about asylum

I get it. My point was subtle and I had made it earlier so I didn't repeat it. Just because you say you are being persecuted and your life is in jeopardy, doesn't make it easy to prove on a case by case basis. So, unless you live in a warzone or a country ruled by warlords, asylum isn't guaranteed.

They are ethically obligated to serve the constitution. They are not the presidents attorneys.

Do you want to tell that to Obama's wingman? How about Biden's?

I'm pretty sure that the "law" comes into play somewhere and that the DOJ employees should know. Even members of Congress have no clue what is in the Constitution as they exemplify by many of the laws they pass and their persistent and flagrant violation of their ONE specified duty which is to create a budget. They have adopted the idea that the "continuing resolution" is the way to keep the President in line because he doesn't want to shut down the country and this always get their pork projects and over spending passed. This apparently even works when the Republicans hold the majority in the House and Senate as well as the Presidency because the Republicans in Congress are simply pieces of dog poo. So, if the President has some concern that crimes are being committed and he asks the DOJ to look into it, you think that somehow violates the Constitution.

 

[moke123]

So, if the President has some concern that crimes are being committed and he asks the DOJ to look into it, you think that somehow violates the Constitution.

Once again, Not what I said.

Enlighten yourself.

Presidents Can’t Use the Justice Department as Their Personal Law Enforcement Agency

The new administration is eviscerating post-Watergate efforts to protect the DOJ from presidential overreach. The case of NYC Mayor Eric Adams illustrates the results.

www.brennancenter.org

Bondi’s “zealous advocacy” memo goes one step further, promising to punish attorneys who “deprive[ ] the President of the benefit of his lawyers” by declining to appear in court or sign briefs. This directive not only conflicts with civil service laws and legal ethics rules protecting government lawyers who refuse to sign off on improper or unethical arguments, but also misconstrues who department attorneys represent — the United States, not the president. Already, this week’s resignations have revealed the memo’s underlying ultimatum: comply with the president, or quit.

 

[AccessBlaster]

Too bad the Biden administration didn't know about this revelation.

Democrats are always eager to enforce the rule of law, the minute they are out of office.

 

[Pat Hartman]

Enlighten yourself.

Did you send that link to Biden? He was PERSECUTING Trump by having corupt AG's bring bogus lawsuits to keep Trump from running/winning. Apparently some of those people are also guilty of committing other crimes, should those charges not be pursued for actual criminal activity?

"Already, this week’s resignations have revealed the memo’s underlying ultimatum: comply with the president, or quit."
Great way to clean house. Cheaper than offering them early retirement and severance pay. I approve. Apparently only Democrats can thumb their noses at proper procedure. The federal employees need to show some respect for the Office of President regardless of how they feel about the current occupant. At least they are showing some ethics. If you don't feel you can sign a brief, then the ethical thing to do is to quit. Although, I'm not sure why a person would be expected to sign a brief he didn't write in the first place.