General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThis message was self-deleted by its author
This message was self-deleted by its author (OhNo-Really) on Sat Dec 10, 2022, 11:17 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.
mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)some for those of us not versed in arcane legalese
OhNo-Really
(3,996 posts)Not a legal professional, just a concerned citizen that did some paralegal work last century.
Let's see......the intent of the question and the phrase is to open up a dialogue regarding McGahn's possible intentions for his carefully crafted letter.
I read the Memorandum a few times as well.
I was heartened and influenced by McGahn's refusal to fire Mueller as reported recently.
I am open to the possibility that McGahn also found this latest ploy cringeworthy, especially the release of names of people involved and the incompleteness of the FISA justifications.
Not having enough knowledge of the law, I intuited the possibility that McGahn could have left some legal recourse to those opposing, and even potentially harmed by the release of this information.
Perhaps it would take a seasoned constitutional lawyer to answer the question.
I know if I was an employee and my name had been released to the whole world, I would be actively seeking legal recourse. Would I have any?
Sophia4
(3,515 posts)evidence gained from the surveillance of Carter Page from court?
Am I way off on that?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree
OhNo-Really
(3,996 posts)Looking at the long game if/when the Grand Jury is convened which is more lenient then the courts, it is still possible to taint.
This Grand Jury outline from NYU is an interesting perusal.
http://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/upload_documents/gleeson_orenstein_f04.doc