PROSECUTOR: Mueller Staff Suggests Not Interested In Justice...

Should Weissmann resign or be fired by Mueller?

  • He should resign

  • He should be fired by Mueller

  • He should try to resign before being fired by Mueller, who should make clear that he was fired prior

Results are only viewable after voting.
Quipling said:
I like how this article takes the bold position that the prosecutor in question was too hard on Enron execs and the bankers they were conniving with, and how he's totally responsible for the collapse of the accounting firm that was cooking Enron's books. And now he's going to bully poor little Manafort who surely never did anything wrong. Not familiar with Weismann, though I gather he spent a decade or so smashing the mob, but that's certainly a perspective.
Click to expand...

Literally defending Enron and AA......
 
panamaican said:
Yes, I read all of it. The entire point of prosecutorial misconduct is the allegation that the prosecutor's conduct denied the defendant's a fair trial. That's why the cases are overturned. There is no other type of prosecutorial misconduct.

Actually, my analogy is still the most accurate because prosecutors have broad discretion in how they conduct their cases.

The issue is whether or not the chosen action within that discretion crossed an ethical line as determined by the court. Whether or not the prosecutor was intentionally trying to cross the ethical line or not is irrelevant. If the court finds that the line was crossed, intentionally or unintentionally, then you have to overturn the case. Note there are 2 different intents here. The prosecutor always intentionally chooses the course of action that led to the misconduct allegation, they don't always intend that course of action to be an ethical breach. They make the choice but might believe that they are still in the safe zone of prosecutorial discretion. When they're wrong, the case gets overturned or the charges get dismissed.

In the cases where the intended course of action also included an intent to breach an ethical line (as opposed to overly zealous prosecutors), you might see some action taken against the prosecutor. The Duke Lacrosse case is an example - that prosecutor was disbarred. There are other examples where the misconduct is severe enough to warrant additional penalty - suspension or the like. In other cases, simply overturning the case is sufficient.
Click to expand...
There are differences in prosecutorial misconduct in some ways, there is intentional misconduct designed to deprive a defendant of a fair trial, which in some instances, prohibit the retrial of the defendant.
See Commonwealth vs. Smith PA Supreme Court for one example,but to speak to your larger point, it's true that many prosecutors have engaged in this conduct and that it's not that unusual.
I suppose my main objection to all of this is the normalizing of this level of misconduct to the extent whereby a person such as Weissmann is not only not disqualified from participating in an investigation of this magnitude, but is seemingly a preferred participant due to his past actions.
I'm not sure there exists any other profession in which a single person can put an innocent person in prison, or on death row, using intentional illegal or unethical actions, and simply have no personal consequences for their actions.
The Enrons, Arthur Andersons, and other wealthy and powerful institutions in this country have resources to fight back, but most people don't. Too many innocent people are affected by tactics like this for me to accept that the people employing said tactics are acceptable.
It's difficult to believe that there isn't another person they could have used that would be an ethical investigator and also skilled enough to be part of this team.
It seems that the misconduct is so rarely severe enough to warrant additional sanctions that the problem lies in the standards themselves.
We can and should do better than we do.
 
Tol said:
Anyone who claims that the earth is flat, is trolling. You know how people think that Ripskater is putting on an act? Well, flat-earthers are putting on an act.
Click to expand...

You misspelled the word 'know'. Rip thinks the earth is flat.
 
MacDuffle said:
Because War Room's most vocal, salty and enthusiastic thread spammers are Red Pilling student-age kids still living on their parents' support system and buying into any popular cultural trends that dump on 'sensitivity' or 'multiculturalism' or 'inclusiveness' because that's not edgy or cool like Batman skirting due process to whoop some ass or Jack Bauer shooting guys in the kneecaps

The majority of War Room posters (and people posting in threads and social media across the internet) don't live in countries under strict regimes, absolute religious authority or daily human rights abuses via their own governments because they can afford an internet connection and a computing device and they aren't constantly grinding to support their families. Large swaths of the world's agrarian population too impoverished to vocalize online, subjected to the strictest regimes don't spend their time complaining about Oliver Stone tweeting something

It's a luxury brand hobby to sit online urging the silencing of charity, victimization or meme-trashing advocating for rights and protections

That's why you see all this anti-everything cynicism daily surge in War Room, because bored college kids are surrounded by communal, nurturing environments and want to lash out against "dad"
Click to expand...
Mac with the truth bombs once again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,238,276
Messages
55,548,223
Members
174,824
Latest member
Rank Wang

Share this page

Back
Top