Six Attorneys at DOJ Resign over Corrupt Demand

[Hobby]

OMG, really? So, when in court before the judge, the attorney goes, shucks gee golly, I don't know, you have to ask Attorney General Bondi.

Stop being silly... They would simply tell the judge the Attorney General decided to withdraw the charges.  Not much the judge cab do about that...

[HighStepper]

Stop being silly... They would simply tell the judge the Attorney General decided to withdraw the charges.  Not much the judge cab do about that...

I will stop being silly, when you stop being ignorant. BTW being ignorant, unlike being silly, is not a derogatory term. It simply means not being fully informed. Perhaps the following will help you better understand the concepts previously pointed out by other posts in this thread:

The motion to dismiss the case does not immediately end it, as a federal judge must approve the decision. it is important to note that attorneys are bound by ethical rules and professional conduct standards. Lying in court is a serious violation of these standards and can result in severe consequences, including disbarment. The DOJ's motion to dismiss the case is a legal procedure, and any arguments made in court must be based on facts and law.

[Hobby]

If you been following this case you would know Judge Ho has the case now and will make his decision.  No he may not dismiss the case but he cannot force the AG prosecute.

[HighStepper]

Judge Dale E. Ho will weigh the request after the resignation of Manhattan's U.S. attorney and her accusations of misconduct. Link

[bats]

I wonder if this insane tweet by Trump has anything to do with the allegations of corruption in this case. It's completely anti-democratic and belies any sense of the rule of law that has historically allowed this country to be governable under ethical norms.

Tragically, Trump wants nothing to do with ethics or norms. (Never mind that he's destroying the country, not "saving" it.)

You cannot view this attachment.

[Hobby]

This Adams case is the most hypocrisy of bullshit I think I have ever known.  Democrats argue morals and ethics and quid pro quo. Ever since our justice system can into being deals have been made between defendants and government officials.  If the defendant has something worthwhile to sell the government is buying so a deal is struck.  The only reason this case deal is getting so much publicity is because it is Trump making the deal through his AG.  These deals are made everyday across our nation but I don't hear complaints about that! I am not angry about opposing the government making deals like this because I am against it.  I am angry that people cherry pick issues they complain about depending on who is involved.

[bats]

This Adams case is the most hypocrisy of bullshit I think I have ever known.  Democrats argue morals and ethics and quid pro quo. Ever since our justice system can into being deals have been made between defendants and government officials.  If the defendant has something worthwhile to sell the government is buying so a deal is struck.  The only reason this case deal is getting so much publicity is because it is Trump making the deal through his AG.  These deals are made everyday across our nation but I don't hear complaints about that! I am not angry about opposing the government making deals like this because I am against it.  I am angry that people cherry pick issues they complain about depending on who is involved.

Seems like you're comparing plea deals, which may be ugly at times but are not considered unethical, with the blatantly corrupt quid pro quo between the Trump administration's DOJ and the New York mayor.

There has always been tension between the political interests of the president and the DOJ's mission of impartial justice. But what Trump is doing is already orders of magnitude worse than anything we saw even under Nixon.

[HighStepper]

I wonder if this insane tweet by Trump has anything to do with the allegations of corruption in this case. It's completely anti-democratic and belies any sense of the rule of law that has historically allowed this country to be governable under ethical norms.

Tragically, Trump wants nothing to do with ethics or norms. (Never mind that he's destroying the country, not "saving" it.)
"He who saves his country, violates no law" (or "He who saves his country does not violate any law") President Donald Trump in apparent response to accusations that he is bypassing the United States government's checks and balances on the executive branch's power.
It is a purported quotation of dubious origins attributed to Napoleon Bonaparte. It is often interpreted as a justification for extraordinary actions in times of national crisis. The phrase has been cited in various political and ideological contexts, especially on the far right, to defend or rationalize actions perceived as outside legal or ethical norms but claimed to be in the service of national salvation.
It sometimes serves to justify the erosion of legal norms in pursuit of nationalist goals. It was notably used by Norwegian terrorist and convicted mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik, who identifies as a Nazi, as justification for the 2011 Norway attacks. Link


You cannot view this attachment.

Donald Trump in apparent response to accusations that he is bypassing the United States government's checks and balances on the executive branch's power.