The 2017 General Salma Hayek discussion thread...Part 3!!!

[actaeon277]

Bring in the U.N. to solve Chicago 'genocide,' Boykin says - Chicago Tribune

Cause the UN has done so much.

 

[jamil]

No foreign troops on US soil. That's just partisan nonsense.

 

[Phase2]

Bring in the [STRIKE]U.N.[/STRIKE] Constitution to solve Chicago 'genocide,' Boykin says - Chicago Tribune

FTFY.

 

[actaeon277]

FTFY.

 

[ghitch75]

'Seriously, I'm Honored': Clinton Praises SNL Star Who Got Tattoo Of Her as 'Gift' | Fox News Insider

 

[ghitch75]

oh boy....

Trump lawyer: Mueller improperly obtained transition documents in Russia probe | Fox News

 

[SheepDog4Life]

oh boy....

Trump lawyer: Mueller improperly obtained transition documents in Russia probe | Fox News

Time for Rs to start being as litigious as Ds.

Trump should have the Solicitor General assert both Executive Privilege and Attorney/Client privilege on the transition documents... and the only remedy is for each and every investigator and lawyer who has laid a finger on any of the documents to be removed from the investigation and gag-ordered. If that includes Mueller, so be it... his fault for running a shady operation.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Seems the Trump team is getting antsy. If there's a problem, when will Trump's team be suing. Seems they would be on pretty solid ground "if" there was some actual illegal actions taking place.

 

[jamil]

Time for Rs to start being as litigious as Ds.

Trump should have the Solicitor General assert both Executive Privilege and Attorney/Client privilege on the transition documents... and the only remedy is for each and every investigator and lawyer who has laid a finger on any of the documents to be removed from the investigation and gag-ordered. If that includes Mueller, so be it... his fault for running a shady operation.

Maybe it's a shady investigation, but that article doens't really make that case very clear to me.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

Maybe it's a shady investigation, but that article doens't really make that case very clear to me.

Some of the emails are legal counsel... all of them, presumably, are advice to the President-elect or his designees on forming his administration. THAT is what a transition is...

And a prosecutor should be able to gain all of that simply by asking a friendly #Resister? No Search Warrant authorized by a court, that can be contested. No subpeona process... just ask some GSA folks, who do not OWN the emails nor their content?!?!?

Yeah, it is "fruit of the poison tree" and no ethical prosecutor would have countenanced it. Mueller could care less as he is no longer attempting to build a criminal case. It's political...

 

[jamil]

Some of the emails are legal counsel... all of them, presumably, are advice to the President-elect or his designees on forming his administration. THAT is what a transition is...

And a prosecutor should be able to gain all of that simply by asking a friendly #Resister? No Search Warrant authorized by a court, that can be contested. No subpeona process... just ask some GSA folks, who do not OWN the emails nor their content?!?!?

Yeah, it is "fruit of the poison tree" and no ethical prosecutor would have countenanced it. Mueller could care less as he is no longer attempting to build a criminal case. It's political...

I'm not sure it was ever anything other than criminal. IANAL, but if there's really shady behavior, is suing the only option? I mean, if they did something illegal it seems that there would be more options than just to sue.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

I'm not sure it was ever anything other than criminal. IANAL, but if there's really shady behavior, is suing the only option? I mean, if they did something illegal it seems that there would be more options than just to sue.

IANAL either, but I do think it is a problem with our legal system in general that when investigators or prosecutors illegally seize evidence, which by definition means they violated someone's rights, the only thing that happens is that the evidence cannot be used. Or, very rarely, if it was particularly egregious, they lose their job and are disbarred. What's odd about it is that if anybody else did it, went and took something that didn't belong to them and that they had no legal right to, at a minimum it would be theft of some sort and at least the potential of prison time.

This isn't just a Mueller problem.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I'm not sure it was ever anything other than criminal. IANAL, but if there's really shady behavior, is suing the only option? I mean, if they did something illegal it seems that there would be more options than just to sue.

From my understanding, all of the emails requested, had "dot gov" addresses. You got an uphill battle proving that they were illegally obtained since the Mueller team has stated:

“When we have obtained emails in the course of our ongoing criminal investigation, we have secured either the account owner’s consent or appropriate criminal process.”

Anyone have something to prove they were illegaly obtained, outside of simply saying they don't believe the above? I also find it tell, that he says "criminal process."

 

[jamil]

I'm not sure it was ever anything other than [STRIKE]criminal[/STRIKE] political. IANAL, but if there's really shady behavior, is suing the only option? I mean, if they did something illegal it seems that there would be more options than just to sue.

FIFM.

I meant to say "I'm not sure it was ever anything other than *political*.

 

[jamil]

From my understanding, all of the emails requested, had "dot gov" addresses. You got an uphill battle proving that they were illegally obtained since the Mueller team has stated:


Anyone have something to prove they were illegaly obtained, outside of simply saying they don't believe the above? I also find it tell, that he says "criminal process."

That's why it seems to me, if they had a case that there would be a different response than just suing.

 

[printcraft]

Hey! Trump should have used his own email server........

 

[jamil]

IANAL either, but I do think it is a problem with our legal system in general that when investigators or prosecutors illegally seize evidence, which by definition means they violated someone's rights, the only thing that happens is that the evidence cannot be used. Or, very rarely, if it was particularly egregious, they lose their job and are disbarred. What's odd about it is that if anybody else did it, went and took something that didn't belong to them and that they had no legal right to, at a minimum it would be theft of some sort and at least the potential of prison time.

This isn't just a Mueller problem.

One claims it's illegally seized, the other says legally. So who wins? And do they have to sue to settle it? Or do they just not like it, so they're suing to try to get this in the news for the sake of the faithful?

 

[jamil]

Hey! Trump should have used his own email server........

I hear that's the new "in" way to prevent your conversations as high level government officials from being subject to FOIA.

 

[Kutnupe14]

One claims it's illegally seized, the other says legally. So who wins? And do they have to sue to settle it? Or do they just not like it, so they're suing to try to get this in the news for the sake of the faithful?

Here's the thing. How could those claiming they were "illegally seized," possibly know? Does one really think Mueller has kept the counsel for investigated parties in the loop?

 

[printcraft]

I hear that's the new "in" way to prevent your conversations as high level government officials from being subject to FOIA.

If you really want to safeguard your data you pull the hard drives and give them to a Pakistani national, pay him $300,000 and have him spirt them out of the country. Hacker proof!