Special Counsel Mueller Impanels Washington Grand Jury in Russia Probe

originally posted by: TacSite18
a reply to: Xcathdra
Don't want to get off topic, but I was a reserve cop for about a year in a small town in Montana. We never saw a DA for traffic tickets.

I now work for the federal government, and believe me we do issue criminal complaints directly to the courts with no DA or prosecutor involved.

You still had to submit a portion of your citation to the court before the date it went before them, as all officers do. Thats the review portion by the PA. As I stated a PA can delegate that task to cops in some jurisdictions but its done so at the discretion of the PA, who is the ultimate authority if it goes anywhere or not.

Secondly the person cited still can speak with the Pa about the charge and can request a jury trial according to MT state law.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Liquesence

Again a memo written by a law professor is not law. hell its not even a dicta.

I never said it was law.

The memo, from a top independent counsel, challenges the assertion that presidents can't be indicted.

originally posted by: growler
a reply to: RazorV66

Of course there was going to be a Grand Jury impaneled ....why would anyone think there wouldn't be?

you must be new here.

Lol sure, if you say so.
I will admit I did get into the thread a little late, but I am here now.
Any other dumb questions?

originally posted by: bknapple32

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: bknapple32

Fox News Corp distanced themselves from the claim.
Sean Hannity did not retract his story or change his position and he spoke about that fact.

For the last time. Fox News Corp RETRACTED THE STORY. What hannity does on his radio program is up to him. And if hes dumb enough to keep spouting the story on fox itself, im sure that will come to an end with a firing.

Yes and again Sean Hannity did not retract the story. As a matter of fact he has continued to report on it on the fox news channel. What part of this are you not understanding.

I hear that Republicans have put together a bill in the Senate and the house to keep president Trump from firing Robert Mueller. I wish they had shown the same concern for the American public on Obamacare. What a bunch of idiots!

originally posted by: TacSite18
a reply to: Xcathdra

For speeding? What the heck are you on about. I personally cited people. If they were from out of town or state, you brought them to the JP's house. The JP would try and usually fine them. Case closed. No DA, no one else.

You don't like the law, go pund sand.

If you dont understand the law dont get pissy with me. Your actions are done with the blessing of and on behalf of the prosecuting attorney.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Any clips of Hannity discussing Rich after Tuesday?

They won't find collusion or obstruction, they are going hard at finding some kind of financial wrongdoing, just to get something.

So am guessing the Trump supports line is the usual.

"What about Hillary?"....

"It's fake news".....

"No evidence of wrong doing".....

Everyone who is worried about Russia are Libtards.

And the quite a bit of the usual.... not answering direct questions, defection, ignoring facts and a splash of insults,

Trump is going down guys, it's about time that you lot start to wake up.

I think this grand jury is a good thing. It indicates that the investigation is moving forward. What is disconcerting is that this info was leaked.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Wait a moment I thought the investigation was dying down?.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Trump is going down guys, it's about time that you lot start to wake up.

Saved for posterity.

originally posted by: mkultra11
They won't find collusion or obstruction, they are going hard at finding some kind of financial wrongdoing, just to get something.

The Al Capone strategy...

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
I think this grand jury is a good thing. It indicates that the investigation is moving forward. What is disconcerting is that this info was leaked.

I remember a time on ATS when we loved information getting leaked.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

posted on Aug, 3 2017 @ 03:04 PM link Facts are that he has a heavy hitting financial lineup of a lot of former Clinton "associates".... The Russia probe isn't about finances...at least according to the narrative, which changes weekly.

These are the facts that you have been dodging since page two of this thread.

I will put them in quotes for your " Facts are that he has a heavy hitting financial lineup of a lot of former Clinton "associates".... The Russia probe isn't about finances...at least according to the narrative, which changes weekly.

Now, about these facts that you keep deflecting from.

Do you now, or have you ever had any intention of posting a link to these "facts"?

Should I just expect more deflections?

Have a stop sign.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

I remember a time on ATS when we loved information getting leaked.

Whenever there is an injustice or government overreach, yes. This is not that. This is an instance of government overreach and injustice, not whistle-blowing.

originally posted by: bknapple32
a reply to: Xcathdra

Any clips of Hannity discussing Rich after Tuesday?

Nope but the CNN and Buzzfeed article is what i was referring to when they manipulated an interview.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
I think this grand jury is a good thing. It indicates that the investigation is moving forward. What is disconcerting is that this info was leaked.

I remember a time on ATS when we loved information getting leaked.

There was also a time where we all understood "un-named sources" meant someone from inside the government didnt want to be outed. Not- fake news.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
I think this grand jury is a good thing. It indicates that the investigation is moving forward. What is disconcerting is that this info was leaked.

I remember a time on ATS when we loved information getting leaked.

That 3was before anonymous sources became a new weapon where the facts turn out to be false.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: bknapple32
a reply to: Xcathdra

Any clips of Hannity discussing Rich after Tuesday?

Nope but the CNN and Buzzfeed article is what i was referring to when they manipulated an interview.

So then Hannity, has in fact, NOT discussed Rich on the Fox news channel after Tuesday? Cause ya said he did