• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US attorney recommends proceeding with charges against McCabe, as DOJ rejects last-ditch appeal

DiAnna said:
Absolutely. This entire charade reeks of vindictive revenge from a seething, self-aggrandizing president and a compliant DOJ of sycophantic boot-lickers. I hope in the end McCabe wins his civil suit and walks away rich.
Click to expand...

Bovine Scatology…. Horowitz the IG for the DOJ and an Obama appointee investigate and referred the prosecutions of McCabe and Comey to the DOJ based upon more than a two year investigation. Are you really trying to say that Comey, McCabe and Strzok are innocent bystanders?
 
apdst said:
Why not call perjury "lying"?
Click to expand...

If it's perjury, why didn't they call it that? If it's making false statements, why didn't they call it that? "Lacking candor" is not illegal.

Still waiting on that indictment.
 
SLC said:
They assume that you have a big enough vocabulary to understand that lack of candor means lying.
Click to expand...

Then why not indict? So far, his attorneys have been told that he is not under indictment. They had the chance to indict him today. They didn't.
 
SLC said:
They assume that you have a big enough vocabulary to understand that lack of candor means lying.
Click to expand...

I don't know of anyone who has ever been indicted for "lack of candor". Do you?
 
lwf said:
Then why not indict? So far, his attorneys have been told that he is not under indictment. They had the chance to indict him today. They didn't.
Click to expand...
They will take it to the grand jury first.
 
SLC said:
They will take it to the grand jury first.
Click to expand...

The US Attorney has recommended indictment. According to the Washington Post there was grand jury activity on Thursday and no indictment was returned. Could be unrelated. Or it could mean the government's case was too weak to move forward. Suppose we'll find out next week.
 
lwf said:
If it's perjury, why didn't they call it that? If it's making false statements, why didn't they call it that? "Lacking candor" is not illegal.

Still waiting on that indictment.
Click to expand...

can·dor
/ˈkandər/
Learn to pronounce
noun
the quality of being open and honest in expression; frankness.

A "lack of candor" is a lack of honesty. A lack of honesty can only be be defined as "lying".

Why are you defending this dude?
 
apdst said:
can·dor
/ˈkandər/
Learn to pronounce
noun
the quality of being open and honest in expression; frankness.

A "lack of candor" is a lack of honesty. A lack of honesty can only be be defined as "lying".

Why are you defending this dude?
Click to expand...

Not defending him, just wondering why they used those words. I've never heard them used to warrant an indictment before: "Lack of candor..." It sounds to me like they didn't like his "yes" and "no" answers and wanted him to elaborate. If I'm being interrogated, you better believe I'm answering "yes," "no," or "I don't know." Am I being less than truthful? You could argue that. Am I lying to investigators? Nope.
 
lwf said:
Not defending him, just wondering why they used those words. I've never heard them used to warrant an indictment before: "Lack of candor..." It sounds to me like they didn't like his "yes" and "no" answers and wanted him to elaborate. If I'm being interrogated, you better believe I'm answering "yes," "no," or "I don't know." Am I being less than truthful? You could argue that. Am I lying to investigators? Nope.
Click to expand...

Less than truthful is "lying"...lol
 
lwf said:
Not legally. ;)
Click to expand...

Scooter Libby went to prison because he mis-remembered an event.

You're defending this clown because you're afraid of the fallout. If he starts staring some real jailtime in thr face, he's going to sing like a ****ing bird.
 
apdst said:
Scooter Libby went to prison because he mis-remembered an event.

You're defending this clown because you're afraid of the fallout. If he starts staring some real jailtime in thr face, he's going to sing like a ****ing bird.
Click to expand...

They still have to get an indictment, which is questionable at this hour.
 
apdst said:
Scooter Libby went to prison because he mis-remembered an event.

You're defending this clown because you're afraid of the fallout. If he starts staring some real jailtime in thr face, he's going to sing like a ****ing bird.
Click to expand...

Scooter Libby was indicted for Making False Statements, Obstruction of Justice, and Perjury. "Lack of candor" wasn't mentioned once.

Sounds to me like the government has no case, which brings up questions of retaliation for the Trump investigation. It will be interesting if an indictment is declined how Barr will justify the DOJ decision to recommend it.
 
MTAtech said:
They still have to get an indictment, which is questionable at this hour.
Click to expand...

If they want a felony indictment, they'll get it. There's no requirement for a grand jury indictment for a misdemeanor. They can still burn his ass.
 
apdst said:
If they want a felony indictment, they'll get it. There's no requirement for a grand jury indictment for a misdemeanor. They can still burn his ass.
Click to expand...
And if they can't get that, they'll charge him with reckless parking.

You are making my earlier point that this is political retribution.
 
SLC said:
You are about the see your first then. But they will call it lying . But the act will be the same.
Click to expand...

If they're basing it on the IG's report then "lack of candor" is all they have going for them.
 
MTAtech said:
Flynn pleaded guilty facing indisputable evidence against him.
Click to expand...

Yeah I mean I’m sure all the people imprisoned by Stalin had indisputable evidence against them of BS politically motivated charges also.

I think it’s time to break up the federal code books and extensively investigate every single opponent of Donald Trump until we find whichever one of the 30,000 different federal laws they broke and push for maximum sentence. The libbos will actually agree the FedGov has too much power for once.
 
SLC said:
They will take it to the grand jury first.
Click to expand...

They already have and as of now no indictment has been returned. Rumor is that it's a "no true bill". If so they can still resubmit it. But if you were unable to persuade 12 of 23 jurors the first time around it generally a clear signal to prosecutors that they have a weak case and it will be quite difficult them to justify the commitment of even more resources to pursue it further.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom