Breaking: Congress refers Comey McCabe Clinton Page Strzok Lynch others for criminal prosecution

a reply to: screamager

Did you even read the criminal referral? They cited specific statutes for every individual they are referring for criminal investigation that they believe may have been violated...

What is your legal background?

a reply to: Xcathdra

My point is these things were already being investigated.

a reply to: Xcathdra


Sorry mate, still jet lagged all to heck... that wasn't a shot at you just meant it sounds good, not sure I have faith in anyone to make good on it.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Interesting read, but it really doesn't mean much. The language used itself indicates the people making the referral do not have, or have not seen, clear evidence of wrongdoing.

From what I can tell, this is a collection of many of the accusations that have been thrown at certain individuals over the course of the investigation and campaign.

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: soberbacchus

Not really.. Congress has the authority to send referrals for criminal prosecutions.

So? That doesn't mean the DOJ will take them up just because Congress does that.

Bet voters will take it up 😎

LOL. I see you agree with me that this letter will go nowhere.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Xcathdra

My point is these things were already being investigated.

Last I checked the OIG has not released what he is investigating with the exception of McCabe, whose report has been released.

His report should be out in early May since he is now scheduled to appear before Congressional house oversight and reform like may 8th.

originally posted by: SonOfThor
a reply to: soberbacchus

You raise a valid question; I think it would be beneficial to find instances of criminal referrals being sent from congress that amounted to nothing, not just 'letters' or 'inquiries'.

Good Question

Here you go:

Apparently Congress isn't even authorized to make any Criminal referral without 2/3rds members voting or the Specific Committee (not individuals) voting for the referral.

Even then, DOJ can ignore or pursue as it is entirely their purview whether the referral has merit.

This letter was not even a valid referral since it didn't come from a committee vote or have 2/3rds of congress signing on.
It had just 11 of even the 248 GOP members willing to sign it.

Past example here:

Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) and Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) subsequently sent a criminal referral letter to the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia requesting an investigation into whether Secretary Clinton lied under oath to Congress.

The referral was not approved by either committee.

But even if it had been, the Justice Department ultimately has prosecutorial discretion to investigate and prosecute the matter. It did nothing.

The only references to referrals to law enforcement authorities in congressional rules are in the House and Senate rules regarding their ethics committees.

They are authorized to refer to Federal or state authorities any possible law violations uncovered in their inquiries into possible ethical misconduct by a Member, officer or employee. But the referral must either be made by a two-thirds vote of the full ethics committee or by majority vote of the chamber involved.

Even when the issue is alleged criminal acts against Congress, as spelled out in laws relating to perjury, contempt of Congress, and obstruction of congressional proceedings (all of which require votes by the house involved), it is clear from a Supreme Court decision, quoted in a 2016 Congressional Research Service legal analysis, that Congress may not directly enforce federal law: “The Executive Branch has exclusive authority and absolute discretion to decide whether to prosecute a case…”

Criminal referrals by members of Congress raise procedural questions
thehill.com...

There you have it. 100% political stunt

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Xcathdra

Interesting read, but it really doesn't mean much. The language used itself indicates the people making the referral do not have, or have not seen, clear evidence of wrongdoing.

From what I can tell, this is a collection of many of the accusations that have been thrown at certain individuals over the course of the investigation and campaign.

Uhm... the referral lists the people in question, the reason for the referral, supporting documentation for the crime.

Essentially it is a congressional version of a pc affidavit.

About God damned time.

Every last one of them needs to go to jail for trying to use the US government apparatuses to ensure no abdication of power really takes place.

a reply to: Xcathdra

www.nbcnews.com...

Sessions: No special counsel to probe alleged FBI political bias, but U.S. attorney investigating

dated 3/29/18

Sessions revealed for the first time on Thursday that he had asked Huber to lead that effort and the attorney general noted he is an experienced and well regarded prosecutor who has handled high-profile cases over the course of two administrations.

The real question is how long has huber been at this?

In that same nbc story...

On Wednesday, Inspector General Michael Horowitz announced that he was opening an investigation into the FBI's handling of the warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to wiretap Carter Page, a former foreign policy adviser for the Trump campaign.

I see coordination between the AG, OIG, and Huber.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Yeah there is no law. It is a house and senate rule.

None of which prohibit members of congress from asking the DOJ to look into criminal wrong doing discovered by the House or Senate. As the article also correctly points out the ultimate determination is made by the DOJ in terms of accepting the referral or declining it.

Not sure where you think your going with this.

Care to explain so we understand.

I can't believe the wheel of justice is actually turning!
A small step for Congress, a giant leap for justice.
Possibly,
I will believe convictions when I see them.

a reply to: Grambler

I hope these investigations occur and the investigation is as rigorous as the one into trump as opposed to the light touch that occurred with the Hillary email investigation

Let their lawyer offices, and homes be RAIDED.

Indeed as Rigorous as Trump.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
I see coordination between the AG, OIG, and Huber.

Yup - that is how it works.

Since people have left the FBI / DOJ the OIG cant compel them to comply with requests. Huber was assigned to assist the OIG while at the same time reviewing all evidence tto determine if a second special counsel is needed.

The procedure that Rosenstein failed to follow before appointing Mueller.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Uhm... the referral lists the people in question, the reason for the referral, supporting documentation for the crime.

Perhaps we are not reading the same material. They suggest that a potential crime may have occurred in these cases. They do not state specifically that a crime has occurred. Just that it needs to be investigated. Much of what it contains has been known for some time and are accusations that have been tossed around quite a bit.

Also, the documentation does not support the fact a crime occurred. Only the accusation of one.

a reply to: introvert

Correct.. In our system of jurisprudence a person is innocent until proven guilty and any charges brought against a person or entity are merely accusation they broke the law.

Confirmation that a law was broke resides with the judge or jury.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: soberbacchus

Yeah there is no law. It is a house and senate rule.

Which means it is not a "Criminal Referral" since house rules require a full committee make that referral or 2/3rds congress.

11 GOPers out of 248 in congress do not qualify for either.

None of which prohibit members of congress from asking the DOJ to look into criminal wrong doing discovered by the House or Senate.

Correct, a letter "asking the DOJ to look into criminal wrong doing"..

The Dems send one of those once every two weeks, so do the GOPers, so do a bunch of ethics watchdogs, so do POed American Citizens. The DOJ gets a steady stream of those letters.

They are under no obligation to pursue any of them.

What makes this one different? Apart from the fact only 11 GOP in Congress out of 248 were even willing to sign it?

originally posted by: soberbacchus
What makes this one different? Apart from the fact only 11 GOP in Congress out of 248 were even willing to sign it?

The people on the left having a brain hemorrhage over the criminal referral while desperately trying to undercut its significance by ignoring the fact Democrats have done what you accuse these Republicans of doing.

Funny.. you seem to be ok with Democrats violating their own rules but its a problrm if a republican does it.

and yes it is in fact a criminal referral.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Try again. The Mueller special investigation had bi-partisan support when it was started.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

www.youtube.com... only a youtube edit lol but its the closest i could find to the real thing