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.
originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: PRSpinster
Huh???
I'm pretty sure a law carrying criminal penalty has to pass through congress and such..
I'm pretty sure presidential guidelines do not carry criminal penalties.. for those you need a law.
Criminal laws are meant to enforce a commonly accepted moral code backed by the full force and authority of the government. Regulations, on the other hand, are meant to establish rules of the road in a variety of areas designed to curb excesses and to address consequences in a complex, rapidly evolving, highly industrialized society, with penalties attached for violations of those rules. As this Legal Memorandum will explain, blurring the two comes at a cost. Nonetheless, the reality today is that unelected officials in a myriad of federal agencies—many of which are likely unknown to the average citizen—promulgate regulations that carry criminal penalties. In fact, the regulations carrying criminal penalties have grown so voluminous that nobody really knows how many there are. The total has been conservatively estimated at over 300,000, with dozens or hundreds more being promulgated every year.[8] The mere existence of criminal regulations dramatically alters the relationship between the regulatory agency and the regulated power. All an agency has to do is suggest that a regulated person or entity might face criminal prosecution and penalties for failure to follow an agency directive, and the regulated person or entity will likely fall quickly into line without questioning the agency’s authority.[9]
Still to this day, your average conservative would agree with it, while your average liberal thinks it is horrible..
originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: SlapMonkey
What is yours "slapmonkey"?? Lol..
2) I'm pretty sure a guideline is not a law.. a law requires being passed by congress and the senate, then signed by the president..
I don't think the president alone can make laws with criminal penalties solo..
3) this wasn't even a good attempt not to be correlated with Russia.. nearly everything trump and conservative media has done has been to distract from Russia, weather he is guilty or not.. they all want the story to go away.
This story never even surfaces if not for Russia..
originally posted by: JoshuaCox
originally posted by: IAMTAT
A 'red type' announcement just went up on Drudge...stating this potential bombshell will be released very soon...possibly tonight.
If true...this could be absolutely devastating for Obama and his ex-administration.
While out of office...he should still be able to be prosecuted for this!
Stand by...as this story is about to hit...and it could be B-I-G!
I just read the article and even it doesn't claim there was anything illegal...
The article says Obama MAY HAVE not followed guidelines HE put in place..
Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm betting breaking guidelines is not breaking the law...
This is a very blantant attempt to discredit the Russian conspiracy, or maybe is setting up a legal defense if a tape surfaces proving said conspiracy..
Honestly, assuming the worst case scenerio of trump being guilty.. how the evidence was gotten wouldn't change the charge...
originally posted by: toolgal462
Yah, but there was no intent to commit a crime.
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: toolgal462
Yah, but there was no intent to commit a crime.
And no crime committed either...
originally posted by: whywhynot
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: toolgal462
Yah, but there was no intent to commit a crime.
And no crime committed either...
I would think that is the problem. The intel community can openly violate, among other things, the 4th amendment of the Constitution and be outed by the FISA court for their bad actions and no law is broken.
originally posted by: whywhynot
a reply to: Indigo5
Sad but true.
it was originally passed by Bush, reauthorized and expanded by Obama and will be again reauthorized by Trump. This is truly D.C. Bipartisanship in action getting things done. George Orwell only suspected the half of it.
The FBI has illegally shared raw intelligence about Americans with unauthorized third parties and violated other constitutional privacy protections, according to newly declassified government documents that undercut the bureau’s public assurances about how carefully it handles warrantless spy data to avoid abuses or leaks.
originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE
Isn't it strange that the NYT, WaPo, CNN et al can't seem to find any 'American officials' on a daily basis to talk about this....
originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE
Isn't it strange that the NYT, WaPo, CNN et al can't seem to find any 'American officials' on a daily basis to talk about this....
With the lack of evidence provided, you only have the NYT (example) to believe. A paper that HATES Trump and HATES the direction the American people chose for the nation at our last election. Who is to say they ever received any call from anyone? Who is to say they received "leaked" information. Maybe they just pulled this out of their collective asses and lied. Yes...LIED! You know...that thing liberals do when they are loosing an argument or their control of the country.
So YES! Until there is some proof, substantiated by facts and evidence...I don't believe crap that comes from liberals. Not a word...not a vowel. They have PROVEN themselves the worshipers of rumor, lies and half-truths. They have lost ALL credibility.
THEIR WORDS HOLD NO VALUE WHAT-SO-EVER! And...they CHOSE that path.
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE
Isn't it strange that the NYT, WaPo, CNN et al can't seem to find any 'American officials' on a daily basis to talk about this....
With the lack of evidence provided, you only have the NYT (example) to believe. A paper that HATES Trump and HATES the direction the American people chose for the nation at our last election. Who is to say they ever received any call from anyone? Who is to say they received "leaked" information. Maybe they just pulled this out of their collective asses and lied. Yes...LIED! You know...that thing liberals do when they are loosing an argument or their control of the country.
So YES! Until there is some proof, substantiated by facts and evidence...I don't believe crap that comes from liberals. Not a word...not a vowel. They have PROVEN themselves the worshipers of rumor, lies and half-truths. They have lost ALL credibility.
THEIR WORDS HOLD NO VALUE WHAT-SO-EVER! And...they CHOSE that path.
Regardless, I am hopeful Jeff Sessions does not let Obama and his spy ring off the hook as easily as the NYT et al have.
originally posted by: dfnj2015
originally posted by: JoshuaCox
originally posted by: IAMTAT
A 'red type' announcement just went up on Drudge...stating this potential bombshell will be released very soon...possibly tonight.
If true...this could be absolutely devastating for Obama and his ex-administration.
While out of office...he should still be able to be prosecuted for this!
Stand by...as this story is about to hit...and it could be B-I-G!
I'm pretty sure Snowden already broke this story ..
You know what is really amazing about the Snowden story. It's nothing he said. The real story is some burger flipper off the street has access to the very highest possible security information through his employer. I'm not sure privatizing the government is a good thing to do in every case.