It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: shooterbrody
Its the grand jury stuff. The IG aint getting it without a court order either.
The OIG is Entitled to Receive Grand Jury Materials as an “Attorney
for the Government” Under Rule 6(e)(3)(A)(i).
originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: CynConcepts
Can you tell me what ''law'' the House committee was asking the AG to break?
The power in my area is being turned off in a couple of minutes so I may not be back to read your response for several hours so if I do not get back to you with a response to your info, that is the reason.
Rule 6(e)(2), Fed.R.Crim.P., prohibits "an attorney for the government" from disclosing matters occurring before a grand jury, except as otherwise provided in the rules. Rule 1(b), Fed.R.Crim.P., defines "attorney for the government" to include as the Attorney General, an authorized assistant of the Attorney General, a United States Attorney, an authorized assistant of a United States Attorney, and certain other persons in cases arising under the laws of Guam. In United States v. Forman, 71 F.3d 1214 (6th Cir. 1995), the court of appeals held that an attorney employed in the Tax Division of the Department of Justice who had gained access to grand jury materials but had not been assigned to review the materials or to participate in the grand jury proceedings was not "an attorney for the government" because he was not an "authorized" assistant to the Attorney General with respect to the grand jury materials that he disclosed to the target of the investigation. The court of appeals, construing 28 U.S.C. § 515(a), held that an "authorized" assistant of the Attorney General is one whose superiors have assigned him or her to work in some official capacity on the criminal proceeding. Id. at 1220. Having found that Forman was not an "attorney for the government" with respect to the grand jury matter, the Sixth Circuit held that Forman was not bound by the secrecy requirement of Rule 6(e)(2), and it therefore reversed his criminal contempt conviction. United States v. Forman, 71 F.3d at 1217-1220.
originally posted by: underwerks
Hiding evidence that proves your innocence.
Totally what an innocent person does.
On April 5, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled in McKeever v. Barr, a case concerning the court’s power to release material protected under grand jury secrecy. Its opinion, which holds that a district court lacks inherent authority to disclose the grand jury records, may make it more difficult for those who have called upon Attorney General William Barr to release Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report to obtain its full and unredacted findings.
originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: butcherguy
Can you imagine the sort of insanity if it was Obama that claimed executive privilege.
Republicans would be hopping around madder than a apoplectic Rumplestiltskin with a bad case of St. Vitus dance and Alex Jones style tourettes.
originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: CynConcepts
That is why I think the Dems in the house are being illogical about this whole ordeal.
I disagree. If they see something they feel compelled to pass on to the American people, or their fellow lawmakers, now they cannot. That's exactly the opposite of their constitutional duty of oversight and checks and balances.
After the House voted to find Holder in contempt of Congress, Deputy Attorney General James Cole, Holder’s No. 2, issued a letter to the House stating: “The department will not bring the congressional contempt citation before a grand jury or take any other action to prosecute the Attorney General.”