The DOJ should not wait for the Courts to act... ...in my opinion.

[dutch508]

kentuck (103,964 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100216233802

The DOJ should not wait for the Courts to act...
...in my opinion.

They should continue with their legal obligations, and indict before a grand jury whomever refuses to cooperate with the Special Congressional Committee.

Then, if these folks wish to appeal, it then goes to Court.

But, let them be the ones to go to court. Just do your jobs.

Then let the system work as it is supposed to work.

Trump appealed his case to the Supreme Court. They are sitting on it right now. The District Court let it be known that "executive privilege" did not apply in the case of the White House documents that were stored at the Archives. The Appeals Court agreed unanimously. Now it is in the hands of Chief Justice John Roberts and the five Republicans on the Supreme Court.

 

Star Member gab13by13 (6,682 posts)

1. I get no joy out of complaining about DOJ,

Tonight I listened to Rachel Maddow, Eric Swalwell, and Neal Katyal say, why hasn't DOJ investigated the Trump phone call to Brad Rathesperger. It is great that the Fulton County Da is on the case, but it sure would be nice to have the clout of the DOJ doing this.

Kentuck, I have posted this dozens of times. If DOJ is waiting for referrals from the select committee before it acts, we are in trouble.

DOJ has more clout and more resources and more investigators than a select committee.

If DOJ would just act it would eliminate the middleman and save time. When I say act I mean investigate.

I am not sure if Merrick Garland believes he should investigate politicians, former politicians, former cabinet members, or Trump, because he would appear partisan. I hope to heck I am wrong.

Thank goodness for the states.

Beastly Boy (3,842 posts)

3. Convening a grand jury and indicting involve the courts.

Neither is an action that DOJ can take unilaterally.

Star Member gab13by13 (6,682 posts)

4. Grand Juries

The grand jury determines whether the prosecuting attorney has sufficient evidence to prosecute a suspect.

 Grand juries may also investigate criminal activity and subpoena witnesses and evidence. The prosecuting attorney assembles witnesses and conducts the presentation of cases; a judge is not present. Grand juries may convene for several months while evidence is gathered and witnesses questioned, or may sit for only a day. The size of grand juries across the country typically ranges from 15 to 23 persons.

Grand juries are often impaneled by a judge in a courtroom and then retire to a special grand jury room to review evidence. Present in the grand jury room are the jurors, the prosecuting attorney, the witness, a court reporter, and possibly a bailiff.

 

[Zathras]

kentuck (103,964 posts)

The DOJ should not wait for the Courts to act...

...in my opinion.

And you know the old saying about opinions DUmbass?

Opinions are like assholes. Everyone has one and they stink like crap.

[SVPete]

kentuck (103,964 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100216233802

The DOJ should not wait for the Courts to act...
...in my opinion.

They should continue with their legal obligations, and indict before a grand jury whomever refuses to cooperate with the Special Congressional Committee.

Then, if these folks wish to appeal, it then goes to Court.

   Does kt even know where a grand jury's proceedings are held?     Ken should have learned that in 8th Grade!