View Single Post
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 05-07-2019, 12:45 PM
ShivaTD's Avatar
ShivaTD ShivaTD is offline
Progressive Libertarian
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Immigrant to Arizona
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,429
Thanks: 1,492
Thanked 2,314 Times in 1,840 Posts
Default From the White House to the Big House

Former Prosecutors: Trump Deserves to Be Charged With ‘Multiple’ Felonies
Hundreds of former Department of Justice lawyers have signed an open letter arguing Trump would be charged with obstruction of justice if he were not the president

More than 500 former federal prosecutors have signed on to an open letter declaring that President Trump appears to have has committed numerous felonies, and would already have been charged if he were not the commander in chief.

The open letter, posted to Medium, had been signed by 566 former Justice Department lawyers as of Monday night, including two former chiefs of the criminal division in the Southern District of New York, among other notables.

The letter states: “We are former federal prosecutors. We served under both Republican and Democratic administrations…. Each of us believes that the conduct of President Trump described in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report would, in the case of any other person not covered by the Office of Legal Counsel policy against indicting a sitting President, result in multiple felony charges for obstruction of justice.”

The former prosecutors make clear that charging Trump’s conduct would be an easy call if he were not living in the White House: “We emphasize that these are not matters of close professional judgment,” the lawyers write. They add that “the overwhelming weight of professional judgment would come down in favor of prosecution for the conduct outlined in the Mueller Report.”

"In our system, every accused person is presumed innocent and it is always the government’s burden to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt," the former prosecutors wrote. "But, to look at these facts and say that a prosecutor could not probably sustain a conviction for obstruction of justice — the standard set out in Principles of Federal Prosecution — runs counter to logic and our experience."

AG Barr's letter summarizing the Mueller Report before release:
Obstruction of Justice. The report’s second part addresses a number of actions by the President — most of which have been the subject of public reporting — that the Special Counsel investigated as potentially raising obstruction-of-justice concerns. After making a “thorough factual investigation” into these matters, the Special Counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under Department standards regarding prosecution and conviction but ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion — one way or the other — as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction. Instead, for each of the relevant actions investigated, the report sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as “difficult issues” of law and fact concerning whether the President’s actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction. The Special Counsel’s report states that “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

The Special Counsel’s decision to describe the facts of his obstruction investigation without reaching any legal conclusions leaves it to the Attorney General to determine whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime. Over the course of the investigation, the Special Counsel’s office engaged in discussions with certain Department officials regarding many of the legal and factual matters at issue in the Special Counsel’s obstruction investigation. After reviewing the Special Counsel’s final report on these issues; consulting with Department officials, including the Office of Legal Counsel; and applying the principles of federal prosecution that guide our charging decisions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel’s investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense. Our determination was made without regard to, and is not based on, the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president.

Robert Mueller III explicitly stated why, as the special counsel working under Department of Justice policy guidelines, his investigation could not reach a decision as to indicting a sitting president. The same criteria that Mueller applied also applied to the Attorney General unless the Attorney General waived the DOJ policy that prohibits the DOJ from prosecuting a sitting president. The Mueller Report also identifies who the evidence presented in the Report is addressed to and who is to make the determination on whether to indict President Trump. That evidence was for the review and use by federal prosecutors once President Trump is no longer in office. It was not left up to AG Barr that won't be the Attorney General once Trump leaves office.

Additionally the Mueller Report also provided the evidence for Congress that can, using the impeachment process, remove the President from office to expedite the prosecution of criminal offenses or it can choose to not impeach and allow for the prosecution after the term of the president. Congress does not play a role in the actual criminal prosecution of the President.

AG Barr also had no authority to declare a "verdict" based upon the evidence. That's pointed out by the 500 plus former federal prosecutors and members of the DOJ that signed the letter. All the DOJ can do based upon the evidence is to indict and prosecute or not indict and not prosecute.

As the 500 plus former federal prosecutors and DOJ officials explicitly establish the grounds for the indictment based upon legal precedent is overwhelmingly established by the overview of evidence provided by the ten cases presented in the Mueller Report. While Mueller was expressly prohibited from making a decision based upon the DOJ policy the signers of this letter applied "the principles of federal prosecution that guide our charging decisions" that apply in all cases except the case of a sitting president. AG Barr did not apply those standards in his four page summary of the Mueller Report.

As the letter states, a presumption of innocence exists prior to the decision of a jury "But, to look at these facts and say that a prosecutor could not probably sustain a conviction for obstruction of justice — the standard set out in Principles of Federal Prosecution — runs counter to logic and our experience."

The evidence clearly exists for the indictment and prosecution of President Trump for obstruction of justice, meeting the standard set out in Principles of Federal Prosecution, and the day that President Trump walks out of the White House for the last time, when the Attorney General is no longer William Barr that's clearly providing political cover for President Trump as opposed to representing the American People, it should be expected that federal prosecutors will obtain a multi-count indictment against President Trump, federal prosecutors will prosecute President Trump on numerous counts of Obstruction of Justice in addition to other felonies that have been identified (e.g. violation of campaign finance laws to effect the outcome of the election) or that will be identified in the ongoing FBI investigations related to Donald Trump, and the signatories of this letter overwhelmingly agree that the prosecution will be successful in many of not most of the criminal offenses that will be charged.

Short of a Presidential Pardon, similar to the Nixon pardon by President Ford, Donald Trump will be going to prison once he's no longer in office.

This is important to know for the American voters because first and foremost we must ensure that Trump is voted out of office in November 2020 so that he can face indictment and prosecution for the crimes he's committed. We also, as the American people, need to forcefully inform the future administration of our opposition to any presidential pardon or clemency by the future President of the United States that will take office in January 2021.

This is not a Republican, Democrat, or Independent political issue. This is an issue of the Rule of Law in the United States where not even the President is above the law.
"I always had a rule, if a restaurant is dirty on the outside, it's dirty on the inside." Donald Trump

"I always had a rule, if the White House is dirty on the inside, it's dirty on the outside." ShivaTD

Based upon the corruption, brutality, inhumanity, immorality, dishonesty, and incompetence of the Trump administration the White House is the dirtiest house in America and there's no known cleanser that with remove the stains of the Trump Administration.

Last edited by ShivaTD; 05-07-2019 at 12:51 PM..
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to ShivaTD For This Useful Post: