Latest Breaking News

Ocelot II

(130,593 posts)

16. And that's also not within the 1/6 committee's purview.

Reply to Fiendish Thingy (Reply #15)

Tue Apr 12, 2022, 04:08 PM

Apr 2022

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

64 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

DOJ rebuffs Democrats' request for inventory of Trump's boxes [View all] brooklynite Apr 2022 OP

They're busy looking at the unopened boxes and thinking important thoughts about them. They Scrivener7 Apr 2022 #1

The Hammer of Justice will soon clobber Repube Traitor-in-Chief Achilleaze Apr 2022 #2

Totally agree Joinfortmill Apr 2022 #44

&#W&##(&@#%%+__((((%$ Grasswire2 Apr 2022 #3

I think all your questions are the same questions the DOJ is investigating Fiendish Thingy Apr 2022 #7

I don't think "we" assume the same things. Grasswire2 Apr 2022 #14

And yet, the DOJ still puts people in prison. Fiendish Thingy Apr 2022 #17

But, as the "tRump" supporter in Florida once said of their 'leader': MyOwnPeace Apr 2022 #21

"some" people.nt Grasswire2 Apr 2022 #33

Yup Joinfortmill Apr 2022 #45

A few years Rebl2 Apr 2022 #30

If only it was a couple of e-mails DOJ would be right on it. Historic NY Apr 2022 #4

I'm OK with that Fiendish Thingy Apr 2022 #5

"unnecessarily tipping off anyone to the contents" Effete Snob Apr 2022 #6

Do you think he packed the boxes himself? Fiendish Thingy Apr 2022 #8

So, to recap Effete Snob Apr 2022 #9

One of the interesting things about investigations is they don't often ask witnesses questions Fiendish Thingy Apr 2022 #13

i'd rather someone be put in jail for smuggling top secret files out of the white house orleans Apr 2022 #23

Why not both? Fiendish Thingy Apr 2022 #26

b/c of the possibility they only get charged with lying nt orleans Apr 2022 #27

where was it said that the contents were to be made public?? Grasswire2 Apr 2022 #47

Can somebody with the appropriate knowledge answer this? intrepidity Apr 2022 #10

What's the likelihood that those boxes contain evidence relating to 1/6? Ocelot II Apr 2022 #12

Even if the documents contain no evidence of crimes, removing them is a crime Fiendish Thingy Apr 2022 #15

And that's also not within the 1/6 committee's purview. Ocelot II Apr 2022 #16

Precisely. Nt Fiendish Thingy Apr 2022 #19

BUT IT WAS NOT....... MyOwnPeace Apr 2022 #28

Right, the Oversight Committee. BUT Novara Apr 2022 #36

Your metaphor is a bit mangled and doesn't really apply Fiendish Thingy Apr 2022 #43

The House Oversight Committee is run by Dems. former9thward Apr 2022 #55

It may not be run by Dems next year. Fiendish Thingy Apr 2022 #57

It's not the 1/6 committee's request FoxNewsSucks Apr 2022 #35

It's not the J6 committee asking. Grasswire2 Apr 2022 #48

I should've read the op more carefully. Ocelot II Apr 2022 #49

I'm not sure if Oversight isn't just asking for an inventory. Grasswire2 Apr 2022 #51

Good. They'll be more useful to DoJ than to the 1/6 committee. Ocelot II Apr 2022 #11

If it's Top Secret material Zorro Apr 2022 #18

If it's highly classified, then who on Maloney's committee actually has the clearance to be privy to Novara Apr 2022 #22

Probably no one on the committee has the clearances Zorro Apr 2022 #25

Hmmm......... MyOwnPeace Apr 2022 #29

Well, it depends on what you mean by "clearances." summer_in_TX Apr 2022 #58

for all we know, he has copied it and sold the copies. nt Grasswire2 Apr 2022 #34

I don't like this. Not a damned bit. The DOJ is owned by the 6 of the 6/3 USSC. jaxexpat Apr 2022 #20

I would think they could work a little multigraincracker Apr 2022 #24

They would if the House refused to pay them. jaxexpat Apr 2022 #62

very well said Grasswire2 Apr 2022 #37

"Rebuffs"?? BS. DOJ's had a full plate since it was able to constitute itself a year and a month ago ancianita Apr 2022 #31

Once again, for those in the back... Grasswire2 Apr 2022 #50

Thanks for the correction. The same holds true for Oversight in terms of jurisdiction. ancianita Apr 2022 #52

they did not ask for the evidence Grasswire2 Apr 2022 #54

I hear you. ancianita Apr 2022 #64

What would Congress do with this information? Raven123 Apr 2022 #32

Maybe if we had some assurance that action was happening to hold TFG accountable for ANYTHING... Grasswire2 Apr 2022 #38

So they're supposed to compromise classified information Novara Apr 2022 #41

your words Grasswire2 Apr 2022 #42

I still don't get the point. The Oversight Committee can't hold Trump accountable either Raven123 Apr 2022 #46

He won't show up at their hearings, nor will his underlings Captain Zero Apr 2022 #60

Damn right Novara Apr 2022 #39

Maybe there isn't an inventory. Grasswire2 Apr 2022 #40

TFG probably had his minions just toss all the stuff into boxes Ocelot II Apr 2022 #53

That's a clear sign that the boxes contain material that are well above the average Congressperson's Martin68 Apr 2022 #56

The more sensitive the material, the more serious a crime Novara Apr 2022 #61

I don't know the law, but it would be logical for the mishandling of the most sensitive would incur Martin68 Apr 2022 #63

I want them to discover EndlessWire Apr 2022 #59