As in why was Trump involvement dropped by SDNY without comment? Must be nice to have constant immunity from serious investigation. (but lets talk about racism some more, shall we?)
Trump's DOJ has no protector in Judge Pauley. From the Guardian article
The Department of Justice had tried to continue redacting the names of people who were not charged, but was ordered on Wednesday to reveal the information by Pauley.
“The campaign finance violations discussed in the materials are a matter of national importance,” Pauley wrote. “Now that the government’s investigation into those violations has concluded, it is time that every American has an opportunity to scrutinize the materials.”
Each justice or judge of the United States shall take the following oath or affirmation before performing the duties of his office: “I, ___ ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as ___ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”
(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 907; Pub. L. 101–650, title IV, § 404, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5124.)
Comments
As in why was Trump involvement dropped by SDNY without comment? Must be nice to have constant immunity from serious investigation. (but lets talk about racism some more, shall we?)
https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5d30810be4b004b6adac33d1
by PeraclesPlease on Thu, 07/18/2019 - 4:35pm
Maybe get Hopie Hicks back to Congress to splain a few things *without* her goddamn givernment lawyer?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jul/18/trump-hope-hicks-stormy-...
by PeraclesPlease on Thu, 07/18/2019 - 4:44pm
Trump's DOJ has no protector in Judge Pauley. From the Guardian article
just following his oath of office
by artappraiser on Thu, 07/18/2019 - 8:14pm
Shorter Pauley: "if you won't do your job, I'll at least embarrass the shit out of you doing my job"
by PeraclesPlease on Fri, 07/19/2019 - 4:12am
A bit late to purge this, but the Katie Johnson case itself seems quite dodgy, via Jezebel
https://jezebel.com/heres-how-that-wild-lawsuit-accusing-trump-of-raping-a-1782447083
The Daily Mail ran with more, but then, that's their reputation.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3894806/Woman-alleged-raped-Donald-Trump-13-Jeffrey-Epstein-sex-party-DROPS-case-casting-doubt-truth-claims.html
by PeraclesPlease on Fri, 07/19/2019 - 2:29pm