It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

recused

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 8 2018 @ 09:41 AM
link   
So how come this seems to be turning into a permanent thing for justice? First off it seems to me that the top law peep should not bee legally allowed to remove himself from justice system because if he is positioned to not do his job then he should just step down for being unfit. I believe that exucutive action needs to be taken now by stating that the chargers have 1 week to show cause as to why the ag should still be recuse. The whole recuse should have only lasted a couple weeks in the first place.

If they can show just cause as to why he should still be recused by way of evidence of wrong doing then at that point he should be replaced and if no just cause then he needs to be unrecused now. It seems that it can not be legal for the guy to be able to dodge work permanently because someone does not like the way things look.

Grow a set and quit playing games with the justice department. The recusal should have been only temporary from the start in order to clear him of any conflicts of intrest or replace him but you people just gave away the justice dept. without a fight.

My question is should the recusal be temporary until conflicts can be determined or removal all together if conflicts exist that would be proven to hamper the investigation in a manner that is more damaging than having an ag that refuses to work on anything he deems less than necessary to gain a pay check.

also will mike savage legalize it




posted on Feb, 8 2018 @ 09:44 AM
link   
a reply to: howtonhawky

The recusal should've never happened and should be over immediately. Sessions kowtowed to manufactured liberal outrage. He never did a single damned thing wrong. Had absolutely no conflicts of interest. To me it looks like he has no backbone and would rather cave than actually stand up like a man and fight. If he were my AG I'd have fired him as soon as I heard about the recusal. Rosencrime would've been fired immediately as well. Many of us knew right away he was going to be a criminal traitor ([redacted]). Then Mueller. Then dismiss the entire senior staff of all 17 intelligence agencies, and all federal LE agencies. Then dismiss all staff attorneys and senior officials of DOJ.

Then close said agencies via EO and privatize them. Because their public counter-parts are demonstrably corrupt and the criminals hide behind "the good ones" so time for a "nuclear approach" and #-can everybody. They are completely off the deep end and have lost all credibility with a good percentage of people in this country. Including me.

The Democrats wanted their man, Rod Rosencrime running the show. Why in the h### are we giving Dems what they want? They have no power. Republicans need to get this through their head.

Rosencrime should be dragged out of the beautiful halls of the DOJ and placed in a [redacted] for the rest of his natural life. Treason is absolutely unforgivable, and Rosencrime [redacted] a tribunal for his treason/crimes.

I personally don't believe the situation is tenable. This most likely (just a guess, things don't look good at all) ends in [redacted] IMHO. The only bright side is that a [redacted] Constitutional government will ensure all criminals are actually held accountable for their crimes instead of years with endless investigations until the next tear-jerking false flag terror attack happens and distracts the bulk population.

They wanted to destroy our institutions, and they have. Congrats angry liberals. Hope you can live with the eventual consequences of that though. [redacted]

Redacted content for security reasons. This is the Internet, after all.
edit on 2/8/2018 by JBurns because: [redacted] for security reasons. This is the Internet after all.

edit on 2/8/2018 by JBurns because: More edits



posted on Feb, 8 2018 @ 10:10 AM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

I will not ever yield to privatized law enforcement. Its just begging for an uprising.

Just the thought of it pisses me off.



posted on Feb, 8 2018 @ 10:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: JBurns

I will not ever yield to privatized law enforcement. Its just begging for an uprising.

Just the thought of it pisses me off.

unless they have better weapons or you have a bad day
i feel the same way but what happens when all the justice department is recused as they follow the path of their leader jeffery. some role model we have there.



posted on Feb, 8 2018 @ 10:39 AM
link   
a reply to: howtonhawky

The one thing that anyone in law enforcement will tell you is that you cannot police the unwilling. To do so you have to occupy, and not simply police.

The timid sheep in the cities may tolerate that crap. The rest of us won't.



posted on Feb, 8 2018 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

Why do people recuse themselves? Why would a judge recuse himself or herself from hearing a case? Could it be that if one has a conflict of interest that it is a GOOD thing to recuse oneself?

If a judge was also a WITNESS in an investigation of potential wrongdoing, would it make sense for him or her to be judging and sentencing the trial of that investigation, or be in a position to either block or allow information that was in their OWN best interest, though it might not be in the best interest of justice?

(Hint - Sessions is a witness and possibly a target...)

Are you suggesting that the United States to no longer have Three separate branches of Government as written in the Constitution? Who would be in charge of that "private" security / policing company?? How "pure" would that really be? Are you asking for the Executive Branch to have their own private police force like Mr. Prince? I'm not sure how that would work. Would you have wanted Obama to be in charge of such a force and have it be "loyal" to him, or have shareholders control who the force goes after??? How corrupt could that get?????

I think Trump wants an SS police force that can go after his enemies just because they disagree with him. The kind of talk you are putting out really exacerbates those fears. I think it is dangerous talk.

I can see you are very angry. I think you are being sold a bill of goods by your news sources, and they are, shall we say, misinterpreting the data.

I say we stick with the Constitution as it is, with Three branches, checks and balances and a Justice system that it independent but not corporatized.




posted on Feb, 8 2018 @ 11:02 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I hear you and have those same self defeating thoughts.

Hunkering down and waiting for an attack on our property closest to us will only leed to a final cry in the battle for the soul of our nation.imo

i think perhaps they way to head off the current infringement of our systems is indeed a convention of states.

right now we are being held together by the markets and we are being led by a man more concerned with his legacy than justice.

We the people put the man in their by way of necessity and now his back door whispers and actions seem to only benefit the way he thinks we will view him.

yes the government will be shut down because the bottom line is that if a person was born on usa soil inside the usa then that person is indeed a full blown citizen as much as i am. That is the type of citizen spoke of in the constitution as being a natural born citizen.



posted on Feb, 8 2018 @ 11:18 AM
link   
a reply to: AboveBoard

The only thing missing there is a well informed populace that engages the system.

We are neither well informed, nor engaged with the system. We engage with the drama, the chatter...the system laughs and moves on.

Side note: it seems to be a massive conflict of interest for Uncle Sam to avail himself in education. A dumber populace benefits the federal government.



posted on Feb, 8 2018 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: AboveBoard




Why do people recuse themselves? Why would a judge recuse himself or herself from hearing a case? Could it be that if one has a conflict of interest that it is a GOOD thing to recuse oneself? If a judge was also a WITNESS in an investigation of potential wrongdoing, would it make sense for him or her to be judging and sentencing the trial of that investigation, or be in a position to either block or allow information that was in their OWN best interest, though it might not be in the best interest of justice?


If the highest judge in the land believes he has conflicts then a committee should be formed and his abilities should be called into question and dealt with in a manner that does not effect the outcome of justice. The committee should present their findings in a short period of time and if due cause if found that he can not judge the case then he would have to be replaced in a timely manner.

Imagine that the ag is a steering wheel and justice is the car. if the steering wheel is unable to do its job it needs to be replaced,fixed or cleared for safe driving but simply just sitting the steering wheel to the curb getting in and hitting the accelerator will get us in the shape we are in now.

They have had ample time to view the ag and make a determination. Recusel should not be open ended at the highest levels.it handicaps us.

This was an underhanded trick by trump to keep the status quo. If you have not noticed he likes the investigation cause it kills time. Why?
He knew from the start that collusion is not against the law and obstruction carries no consequence for him nothing would happen even if they find something wrong he is above all those types of charges.

It is akin to him telling us to go screw ourselves to kill time.

If you think the dems are on the side they pretend to be then you ignore their history of hate and yes trump is a conservative democrat just as nancy is a liberal republican.



posted on Feb, 8 2018 @ 11:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: AboveBoard

The only thing missing there is a well informed populace that engages the system.

We are neither well informed, nor engaged with the system. We engage with the drama, the chatter...the system laughs and moves on.

Side note: it seems to be a massive conflict of interest for Uncle Sam to avail himself in education. A dumber populace benefits the federal government.


Well yes, there is that. Education is essential for democracy and a free AND fair press is essential. We need the fairness doctrine back in place perhaps?



posted on Feb, 8 2018 @ 11:54 AM
link   
When we have a country run by the dirtiest politicians in all three branches, a Constitution without meaning to government politicians nor voters, what's left?

Prepare for war. It's going to be really ugly-all the mudslinging and lies. Us regular people won't know who to believe.

Not pretty times nor a pretty future. We're in trouble.



posted on Feb, 8 2018 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan




The timid sheep in the cities may tolerate that crap. The rest of us won't.


Logged in just to star that.



posted on Feb, 8 2018 @ 12:09 PM
link   
a reply to: AboveBoard

Honestly, just reinstate Smith Mundt and you will see the issue begin to heal itself.

Its all a mess because our intelligence folks, and anyone else in government, is legally allowed to draft media outlets as assets for the purpose of propaganda. Since 2004 we have seen the varitable #show grow year after year because of it.

The press should remain free. That means that they should not only be allowed to speak their voice, but not be compelled to speak the voice of a government agent.



posted on Feb, 8 2018 @ 12:14 PM
link   
a reply to: AboveBoard

The "fairness doctrine" is useless.

All that used to happen was controlled opposition to satisfy the "Laws".

And it still happens without the "Laws".

Same Sun whether your inside or outside 🌇



posted on Feb, 8 2018 @ 12:51 PM
link   
I'm just shickled titless that there's a good conversation on here without the typical eye pokes from either side.

The way I see it, the recusal actually earned Sessions some respect from me. It's a good sign that someone knows they may affect an investigation and step out of the way. (even if it means hurting his "side"). He's still able to do his duty with regard to other cases and such, so recusing himself from this one isn't that big of a deal in my eye. Especially considering it's scope and that any missteps could be trouble. (we've already seen some of that in play)

And as far as privatizing police... I can not think of a worse idea. That road leads to so many bad options, it's frightening.



posted on Feb, 8 2018 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Eshel

I too think it was the right move to do in the first place but givin that he holds power we should have a recuse process that has to be justified and rectified within months of the recuse. At this point there is no valid reason to have a crippled ag. The Justice department is being held hostage by allegations that can be decided within weeks in order to quickly seek justice. This investigation requires an A.G..
edit on 8-2-2018 by howtonhawky because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2018 @ 01:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Eshel

Yeah, recusing himself from the Trump thing freed him up to do his other important work, like figure out how to subvert medical marijuana.



posted on Feb, 8 2018 @ 01:19 PM
link   
Sessions recused himself because he is either deep state or he genuinely believed there was a chance of PERCEIVED COI.



posted on Feb, 8 2018 @ 01:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Tempter

Then either way he is compromised and needs to step down.

If one is unable to perform then get off the stage and on with the show!



posted on Feb, 8 2018 @ 02:20 PM
link   
Trump always has the option of issuing blanket immunity for any and all crimes against the United States arising from alleged (and unproven) Russian hacking. That way, he doesn't have to fire anybody for the witch-hunt(s) to end.

If any of those politicians committed crimes, then investigate/prosecute them accordingly. No need to do so under a false pretense, especially something that is as widely debunked as the Russia conspiracy theories. No way no how a criminal investigation should've arisen from these bogus claims.




top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join