Off-Topic: Saw A "Trending" alert
(Lake Martin Specific)
111,183 messages
Updated 6/9/2024 1:00:09 PM
Lakes Online Forum
83,663 messages
Updated 6/10/2024 6:28:47 PM
Lakes Online Forum
5,197 messages
Updated 6/10/2024 5:39:11 AM
(Lake Martin Specific)
4,171 messages
Updated 5/29/2024 10:51:34 PM
Lakes Online Forum
4,170 messages
Updated 6/10/2024 6:29:37 PM
Lakes Online Forum
4,261 messages
Updated 5/28/2024 6:31:10 AM
Lakes Online Forum
2,977 messages
Updated 6/10/2024 6:30:23 PM
(Lake Martin Specific)
169 messages
Updated 5/31/2023 1:39:35 PM
Lakes Online Forum
98 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM
|
|
|
|
Name:
|
MartiniMan
-
|
Subject:
|
Saw A "Trending" alert
|
Date:
|
1/26/2016 5:19:55 PM
|
|
I saw that as well and it should be taken with a grain of salt. Andy McCarthy has written a lot on this. The FBI doesn't have the authority to indict anyone. They have to make that recommendation to a "prosecutor" who then convenes a grand jury. In this case DOJ is the ultimate decision maker as to whether to convene a grand jury and that is by no means a certainty or in my view even remotely likely regardless of the evidence the FBI develops. So step one is FBI makes a recommendation. Step 2, DOJ agrees and convenes a grand jury to view the evidence. Step 3 the grand jury decides to indict or not. If they do it either goes to trial or is settled. I have no doubt based on what we know, which is probably a small amount of the daming evidence, that they will recommend this to a gradn jury. I seriously doubt that DOJ will concur.
What is then left is for the FBI to leak the information and let the public decide. A huge miscarriage of justice that sends the message that if you are politically powerful you are immune to prosecution for your misdeeds. But then again, when has that happened before?!?!? <sarc off>
|
|