New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Do you mean protecting the reputations of your former employers Comrade Barr ?

Spamature

President
Look at this tasty tidbit the cat dragged in... Session recused himself for less.

“The legal standard is really clear about these issues. It’s not about actual conflict, it’s about the appearance of a conflict, about the appearance of bias,” Jed Shugerman, a professor at Fordham University’s School of Law and an expert on judicial and government ethics, tells Newsweek . “The problem is that we have so many flagrant conflicts that are so obvious, we get distracted from what the legal standard is.”

This much is known: On Barr’s public financial disclosure report, he admits to working for a law firm that represented Russia’s Alfa Bank and for a company whose co-founders allegedly have long-standing business ties to Russia. What’s more, he received dividends from Vector Group, a holding company with deep financial ties to Russia.

Alfa Bank
Barr’s former law firm Kirkland & Ellis LLP, where he was counsel from March 2017 until he was confirmed as attorney general in February 2019, represented Russia’s Alfa Bank. (Barr earned more than $1 million at Kirkland.)

Barr also supervises, at Justice, another Kirkland & Ellis alumnus with Alfa ties. Early last year, Trump nominated Kirkland & Ellis partner Brian Benczkowski to the Justice Department’s criminal division. In his role with the law firm, Benczkowski had represented Alfa Bank and supervised an investigation into suspicious online communications between the bank and servers belonging to the Trump Organization.

Investigators found no evidence that the Trump Organization had communicated with Alfa. Still, the bank is partially owned by Russian oligarch German Khan, whose son-in-law, the London-based lawyer Alexander van der Zwaan, was indicted by special counsel Robert Mueller for lying to investigators about a report his firm had written for Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort
.

Benczkowski was confirmed last July as assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s criminal division.


https://www.newsweek.com/so-many-conflicts-so-little-time-1396435

Why so many Trumpie ties to Russia, Russia, Russia ?
 

Spamature

President
The swampiest swamp in the history of swamps.

;-)
Barr appears to be a stooge for all season.


Barr’s Playbook: He Misled Congress When Omitting Parts of Justice Dep’t Memo in 1989



On Friday the thirteenth October 1989, by happenstance the same day as the “Black Friday” market crash, news leaked of a legal memo authored by William Barr. He was then serving as head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC). It is highly uncommon for any OLC memo to make headlines. This one did because it was issued in “unusual secrecy” and concluded that the FBI could forcibly abduct people in other countries without the consent of the foreign state. The headline also noted the implication of the legal opinion at that moment in time. It appeared to pave the way for abducting Panama’s leader, Gen. Manuel Noriega.


Members of Congress asked to see the full legal opinion. Barr refused, but said he would provide an account that “summarizes the principal conclusions.” Sound familiar? In March 2019, when Attorney General Barr was handed Robert Mueller’s final report, he wrote that he would “summarize the principal conclusions” of the special counsel’s report for the public.

Omission 1: President’s authority to violate the U.N. Charter

That proposition is a very difficult one to sustain, and as Brian Finucane and Marty Lederman have explained, Barr was wrong. The 1989 opinion ignored the President’s constitutional duty to “take care” that US laws, including ratified treaties, be faithfully executed. And the opinion conflated the so-called political question doctrine, which is about whether courts can review an executive branch action, with the question whether an executive branch action is authorized or legal.


What’s more important for our purposes is not whether the 1989 opinion was wrong on this central point, but the fact that Barr failed to disclose this “principal conclusion” to Congress.

Omission 2: Presumption that acts of Congress comply with international law

Woods also noted that the OLC opinion failed to properly apply the so-called “Charming Betsy” method for interpreting statutes. That canon of statutory construction comes from an 1804 decision, Murray v. The Schooner Charming Betsy, in which the Supreme Court stated, “an act of Congress ought never to be construed to violate the law of nations if any other possible construction remains.” In other words, Congress should be presumed to authorize only actions that are consistent with U.S. obligations under international law.




Omission 3: International law on abductions in foreign countries


Finally, Barr’s testimony failed to inform Congress that the 1989 opinion discussed international law.

Barr’s written testimony said that the opinion “is strictly a legal analysis of the FBI’s authority, as a matter of domestic law, to conduct extraterritorial arrests of individuals for violations of U.S. law.” During the hearing he added that “the opinion did not address … how specific treaties would apply in a given context.”

But the OLC opinion had addressed some questions of international law and how a specific treaty—the U.N. Charter—might apply in such contexts. The 1980 opinion, which the 1989 one reversed, included strong statements about the international legal prohibition on abductions in other countries without the state’s consent. In analyzing Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, the 1980 opinion quoted from a famous United Nations Security Council resolution which condemned the abduction of Adolf Eichmann in Argentina by Israeli forces. The 1980 OLC opinion stated, “Commentators have construed this action to be a definitive construction of the United Nations Charter as proscribing forcible abduction in the absence of acquiescence by the asylum state.”


https://www.justsecurity.org/63635/barrs-playbook-he-misled-congress-when-omitting-parts-of-justice-dept-memo-in-1989/
 

llovejim

Current Champion
19 days before being appointed by Trump to be the Acting AG after he fired Rosenstein, Barr auditioned for the part by writing an op-ed in the NY Times saying how he believed the whole collusion talk was specious, that no sitting president could be indicted anyway, and it was all a huge waste of time. Apparently, Trump got the message.

And, as Gomer Pyle would say, "Surprise! Surprise!" Trump appoints him knowing he will have such a huge role in how and what and when the Mueller Report is revealed, and whether or not the report shows that Trump or his cronies should face indictments or further indictments.

And if Obama had been so transparent if he had faced any such investigations, and had fired the original AG and the original FBI director, and then the next acting AG, and then hired someone who had publicly said he was going to protect Obama from any prosecution, Fox and Breitbart and NBC and MSNBC and CNN and Gateway Pundit and democrats AND republicans would have screamed bloody murder and demanded impeachment.
 
D

Deleted member 21794

Guest
I love watching losers refusing to admit they lost. Carry on. Please.
 
D

Deleted member 21794

Guest
How is reporting facts "a loss?" Just because Fox and Trump believe that doesn't mean you should. If Trump and Fox jumped off a bridge, would you?
Please refer to previous reply. Clearly you don't yet comprehend it. Good luck, loser.
 

Nutty Cortez

Dummy (D) NY
You're confused. The loss already took place. We are now in the excuses phase.

Come on !

Don't you know my Pink parade of pedos and Elderly pony tailed old Leftist nutcases HAVE to cry like this ??

They had NO problem with Eric Holder being held in Contempt. First AG ever. he wasn't a stooge ! He was just a black panther being loyal to another black man. Yeah !!!
 

llovejim

Current Champion
Come on !

Don't you know my Pink parade of pedos and Elderly pony tailed old Leftist nutcases HAVE to cry like this ??

They had NO problem with Eric Holder being held in Contempt. First AG ever. he wasn't a stooge ! He was just a black panther being loyal to another black man. Yeah !!!
still living the dream, eh, nutty cortez. remember, if bruce jenner can do it, so can you...quit pretending to be a chick, grow some balls and have them cut off so you can really be one!! you can do this!! you go, wanna-be girl!!

eric holder-black panther!! amazing. that is like calling Barry Manilow a metal head rocker. god, you are stupid. eric holder was a boy scout his whole life.
 

Bugsy McGurk

President
Come on !

Don't you know my Pink parade of pedos and Elderly pony tailed old Leftist nutcases HAVE to cry like this ??

They had NO problem with Eric Holder being held in Contempt. First AG ever. he wasn't a stooge ! He was just a black panther being loyal to another black man. Yeah !!!
What’s that? The GOP hacks in the House said Holder was in “contempt”? A bogus charge that went nowhere?

Child’s play. Trump and Barr snicker at such amateur alleged corruption.

;-)
 

JuliefromOhio

President
Supporting Member
19 days before being appointed by Trump to be the Acting AG after he fired Rosenstein, Barr auditioned for the part by writing an op-ed in the NY Times saying how he believed the whole collusion talk was specious, that no sitting president could be indicted anyway, and it was all a huge waste of time. Apparently, Trump got the message.

And, as Gomer Pyle would say, "Surprise! Surprise!" Trump appoints him knowing he will have such a huge role in how and what and when the Mueller Report is revealed, and whether or not the report shows that Trump or his cronies should face indictments or further indictments.

And if Obama had been so transparent if he had faced any such investigations, and had fired the original AG and the original FBI director, and then the next acting AG, and then hired someone who had publicly said he was going to protect Obama from any prosecution, Fox and Breitbart and NBC and MSNBC and CNN and Gateway Pundit and democrats AND republicans would have screamed bloody murder and demanded impeachment.
All they had on Obama was his wearing a tan suit and a bicycle helmet.....not at the same time.
 

JuliefromOhio

President
Supporting Member
Barr appears to be a stooge for all season.


Barr’s Playbook: He Misled Congress When Omitting Parts of Justice Dep’t Memo in 1989



On Friday the thirteenth October 1989, by happenstance the same day as the “Black Friday” market crash, news leaked of a legal memo authored by William Barr. He was then serving as head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC). It is highly uncommon for any OLC memo to make headlines. This one did because it was issued in “unusual secrecy” and concluded that the FBI could forcibly abduct people in other countries without the consent of the foreign state. The headline also noted the implication of the legal opinion at that moment in time. It appeared to pave the way for abducting Panama’s leader, Gen. Manuel Noriega.


Members of Congress asked to see the full legal opinion. Barr refused, but said he would provide an account that “summarizes the principal conclusions.” Sound familiar? In March 2019, when Attorney General Barr was handed Robert Mueller’s final report, he wrote that he would “summarize the principal conclusions” of the special counsel’s report for the public.

Omission 1: President’s authority to violate the U.N. Charter

That proposition is a very difficult one to sustain, and as Brian Finucane and Marty Lederman have explained, Barr was wrong. The 1989 opinion ignored the President’s constitutional duty to “take care” that US laws, including ratified treaties, be faithfully executed. And the opinion conflated the so-called political question doctrine, which is about whether courts can review an executive branch action, with the question whether an executive branch action is authorized or legal.


What’s more important for our purposes is not whether the 1989 opinion was wrong on this central point, but the fact that Barr failed to disclose this “principal conclusion” to Congress.

Omission 2: Presumption that acts of Congress comply with international law

Woods also noted that the OLC opinion failed to properly apply the so-called “Charming Betsy” method for interpreting statutes. That canon of statutory construction comes from an 1804 decision, Murray v. The Schooner Charming Betsy, in which the Supreme Court stated, “an act of Congress ought never to be construed to violate the law of nations if any other possible construction remains.” In other words, Congress should be presumed to authorize only actions that are consistent with U.S. obligations under international law.




Omission 3: International law on abductions in foreign countries


Finally, Barr’s testimony failed to inform Congress that the 1989 opinion discussed international law.

Barr’s written testimony said that the opinion “is strictly a legal analysis of the FBI’s authority, as a matter of domestic law, to conduct extraterritorial arrests of individuals for violations of U.S. law.” During the hearing he added that “the opinion did not address … how specific treaties would apply in a given context.”

But the OLC opinion had addressed some questions of international law and how a specific treaty—the U.N. Charter—might apply in such contexts. The 1980 opinion, which the 1989 one reversed, included strong statements about the international legal prohibition on abductions in other countries without the state’s consent. In analyzing Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, the 1980 opinion quoted from a famous United Nations Security Council resolution which condemned the abduction of Adolf Eichmann in Argentina by Israeli forces. The 1980 OLC opinion stated, “Commentators have construed this action to be a definitive construction of the United Nations Charter as proscribing forcible abduction in the absence of acquiescence by the asylum state.”


https://www.justsecurity.org/63635/barrs-playbook-he-misled-congress-when-omitting-parts-of-justice-dept-memo-in-1989/
Republican Bill Barr sure knows how to redact and cover-up.
There's nothing Republicans won't lie about.
 

sensible don

Governor
Supporting Member
still living the dream, eh, nutty cortez. remember, if bruce jenner can do it, so can you...quit pretending to be a chick, grow some balls and have them cut off so you can really be one!! you can do this!! you go, wanna-be girl!!

eric holder-black panther!! amazing. that is like calling Barry Manilow a metal head rocker. god, you are stupid. eric holder was a boy scout his whole life.
Hey he will report you and go cry in the corner..........
 

Nutty Cortez

Dummy (D) NY
still living the dream, eh, nutty cortez. remember, if bruce jenner can do it, so can you...quit pretending to be a chick, grow some balls and have them cut off so you can really be one!! you can do this!! you go, wanna-be girl!!

eric holder-black panther!! amazing. that is like calling Barry Manilow a metal head rocker. god, you are stupid. eric holder was a boy scout his whole life.

Your personal sexual preferences have nothing to do with this. Not that there's anything wrong with that. Just take them elsewhere, old [Unwelcome language removed].


Boy Scout. :rolleyes:
1970, while Eric Holder (Columbia '73) was occupying buildings and supporting Black Panthers in New York City, Hillary Rodham (Yale Law School '73) was actively monitoring and supporting the defense of eight Black Panthers accused of murder and torture in New Haven.

Eric Holder, as a Columbia University student and leader of the Student Afro-American Society (SAS), participated in the armed takeover of a vacant campus ROTC office. The takeover lasted five days in the spring of 1970. The online news site added: "Department of Justice spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler has not responded to questions from The Daily Caller about whether Holder himself was armed -- and, if so, with what sort of weapon."
 
Top