Latest Breaking News

JonLeibowitz

(6,282 posts)

4. Did I fault her in my post? I specifically said to leave the question of donations alone, ffs.

Reply to napi21 (Reply #3)

Mon Feb 8, 2016, 11:24 PM

Feb 2016

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

45 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Citing donations, critics say Lynch shouldn�t decide on Clinton probe [View all] hoosierlib Feb 2016 OP

I would leave the donations aside -- as a political appointee alone she seems unsuited JonLeibowitz Feb 2016 #1

First of all, it's the AG's JOB to prosecute ANY person, including top Government officials. napi21 Feb 2016 #3

Did I fault her in my post? I specifically said to leave the question of donations alone, ffs. JonLeibowitz Feb 2016 #4

It seems to fall under the circumstances 28 CFR 600 addresses. Yo_Mama Feb 2016 #10

I am reminded of the West Wing when Bartlet allowed his opposition to pick the special counsel. JonLeibowitz Feb 2016 #11

Yes, I am sure the Republicans can be trusted to pick someone who is impartial cstanleytech Feb 2016 #18

The point is to show that you are trying to be impartial JonLeibowitz Feb 2016 #19

If she had been given money ya or if she gave to Clintons campaign? Maybe but she did not do cstanleytech Feb 2016 #22

I suggest you read what I have said in this very thread. I specifically ignored money. JonLeibowitz Feb 2016 #23

Either way it doesnt matter. There has to justification that supports her removal and cstanleytech Feb 2016 #27

The justification is clear -- a political appointee can be leaned on (or thought to be so) JonLeibowitz Feb 2016 #28

that would not happen 6chars Feb 2016 #32

Exactly. n/t JTFrog Feb 2016 #40

It's not her removal - under the reg, she picks someone to deal with the matter. Yo_Mama Feb 2016 #45

Hillery is NOT presently a top government official. mikehiggins Feb 2016 #21

Others differ, on substance and in view. I respect your position though. n/t JonLeibowitz Feb 2016 #24

It would make sense to recuse herself and delegate the decision to a DOJ career employee. n/t 24601 Feb 2016 #2

yes 840high Feb 2016 #6

I would agree that she should step down on this Kelvin Mace Feb 2016 #5

She should step aside. onecaliberal Feb 2016 #7

She absolutely should not. There is nothing the Rethugs can do except blow hot air. pnwmom Feb 2016 #34

Sure, she should step aside . . FairWinds Feb 2016 #8

An actual conflict of interest H2O Man Feb 2016 #9

In which case most of the House and Senate should immediately step down. n/t pnwmom Feb 2016 #35

Definitely. H2O Man Feb 2016 #38

The opinions of David Bossie, a right wing hit man, do not interest me. Kingofalldems Feb 2016 #12

Keep digging, but it won't change anything. All that posts like this do is damage our (presumed)... George II Feb 2016 #13

I would tend to stay away from any hint of censorship in this case. totodeinhere Feb 2016 #26

I think the fairest way to settle it is to ask one of the folks here at DU to preside still_one Feb 2016 #14

Oh and the article mentioned the oh-so-ethical David Bossie: Kingofalldems Feb 2016 #15

Here is another article on David Bossie: Kingofalldems Feb 2016 #16

Are david brock hit pieces now disallowed as well? Just curious. n/t JonLeibowitz Feb 2016 #17

I certainly don't post them. Kingofalldems Feb 2016 #37

Let me guess...they want Ken Starr jmowreader Feb 2016 #20

Nonsense, they are clearly only pushing because they want a impartial investigation. cstanleytech Feb 2016 #25

Okay, let's go at it this way... jmowreader Feb 2016 #29

This message was self-deleted by its author Midnight Writer Feb 2016 #30

LOL! Now find a Federal Prosecutor who has never made a donation to either party. Midnight Writer Feb 2016 #31

Oh I am sure there are some but imo what this is really about is cstanleytech Feb 2016 #39

He's not going to offer them Hillary's head on a silver platter, pnwmom Feb 2016 #33

Doesn't the AG pick the special prosecutor? OnyxCollie Feb 2016 #36

Jury's in Goblinmonger Feb 2016 #41

Huh, "the curious incident of the dog in the night-time" Babel_17 Feb 2016 #42

Absolutely a conflict of interest... but it won't go anywhere... TipTok Feb 2016 #43

No Republican donor / supporter should lead the investigation - that would be biased! n/t vkkv Feb 2016 #44