Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

In reply to the discussion: "Specific Intent" [View all]

Cicada

(4,533 posts)
6. Tobin is obviously wrong
Fri May 19, 2017, 06:20 PM
May 2017

Using the logic of Toobin, if the US attorney for the District of Idaho orders a prosecutor in his office to not prosecute a guy who drove his pickup to Canada to buy Canada lumber to avoid the new Canada softwood tariff because the US Attorney thinks it's a trivial crime not worth bothering with, the that US Attorney is guilty of obstruction of Justice. Every prosecutor in the USA constantly decides to not prosecute a bunch of people who are guilty of a crime. The President is the boss of all federal law enforcement workers. He can order them to not prosecute Flynn just like that US Attorney in Idaho can order one of the prosecutors in his office to not prosecute people driving up to Canada to get a load of lumber without paying the tariff. Toobin's logic says that US Attorney is guilty of obstruction of justice. Toobin's logic says that every prosecutor in the USA constantly obstructs justice. Toobin is no Frankfurter.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"Specific Intent"»Reply #6