Given the release of Peter Strzok's notes, today, I have to wonder what sort of BULLSHIT and LAME excuse DEEP STATE BARR will come up with to prevent the prosecution of Obama, Biden, Etc.?
He's probably working on it now.
For the record, those notes just released are enough to IMMEDIATELY start prosecutions in earnest.
t. former lawfag.
Not sure why you directed your angst and depression about the situation at me. I agree. The deep state, BARR INCLUDED, will do everything in their power to FUCK TRUMP.
That was my point.
Your analysis is more wishful thinking than anything else.
THEY HAVE EVERYTHING THEY NEED, RIGHT NOW, THIS MOMENT.
They are not acting because they are the DEEP STATE.
Wake up, friend.
He could have done that. I would have to look at the pardon records to see if he pardoned the gang. My guess is that he didn't, but until I look at the records, that is pure speculation.
If not, they would be in deep shit if we had an honest justice department, which we don't.
It does not work that way. While technically true that a president could pardon someone in secret, in order for the pardon to have any validity, it would have to be made public.
The president is banking on the fact that most people have no interest in their pardons or simply don't care.
In short, no pardons are secret. (The pardon has to be certified and mailed, the recipient has to accept the pardon, etc.,)
In short, there is no such thing as a secret pardon.
It does not work that way.
A presidential pardon is a legal process. There is paperwork, notification, acceptance, etc. All of it needs to be RECORDED. In short, there is no such thing as a secret pardon.
This is why we know of all of the horrible pardons from Clinton, etc.
If Clinton could have kept his pardons a secret, he would have.
IN THEORY… Yes. I said that.
IN PRACTICE??? NO.
Ask Clinton about is 2 AM pardons and ask him if they remained secret.
They become public record as part of the process.
You have no idea what you are saying.
The process is a LEGAL PROCESS. That means that there is a PROCEDURE. At some point in the PROCESS, it becomes a MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD.
Point to the law that states a president can pardon someone in complete and total secrecy, with a classification. YOU CAN'T.
That's because IT DOES NOT EXIST and would not follow the LEGAL PROCEDURE.
Again, ask Clinton how his 2 AM pardons worked out for him.
Dude, you still have no idea how the LAW WORKS.
I have explained it to you. Yes, the President can pardon someone in "secret." However, the procedure mandates that it becomes public for various reasons.
Stop, and use your brain for one second.
If there was not a procedure involved concerning pardons:
A: Why aren't all pardons a secret?
B: Why would Clinton have waited until 2 AM to pardon Marc Rich and others?
Many presidential pardons provide for BAD OPTICS, even in the cases where the pardon is completely legitimate.
USE THAT TINY BRAIN GOD GAVE YOU, FOR ONCE.
Clinton's pardons were a disgrace. If he could have classified them into oblivion, he WOULD HAVE.
USE THAT TINY BRAIN of yours, and THINK, THINK, THINK.
Last name: Storch
SDB Popularity ranking: 18595
Recorded in England as Stork, Storke, the patronymics Storks and Storkes, and in Germany Storch, Storcke, Storchen, Storcher, and perhaps Sturch, this unusual and interesting name is medieval. It is one of a large group of names which were originally nicknames, and described somebody who lived at a house with the sign of the stork, or according to his peer group of the time had a fancied resemblance to the famous bird. This could have described a person with long legs, or somebody with a prominent chin or nose, or even a homemaker! Without being present at the time that the name was bestowed in the 12th century, it is only possible to make an intellingent guess. What is certain is that nicknames form a major category in the surnames listing. Indeed there are some researchers who believe that all surnames were originally nicknames of a type. Early examples of the surname recordings include Ulman Storchelein of Strasburg, in 1371, Paul Storch of Stolp in Germany in 1546, and from church registers of Greater London, England, Barsaba Stork who married William Chribe at St Antholins church on March 18th 1618, whilst on September 4th 1681, and Martha Storke, christened at St. Bololphs Bishopsgate. The first recorded spelling of the family name is shown to be that of Osbert Storc. This was dated 1198, in the Pipe Rolls of Kent, during the reign of King Richard 1, known as "The Lionheart 1189 - 1199. Surnames became necessary when governments introduced personal taxation. In England this was sometimes known as Poll Tax. Throughout the centuries, surnames in every country have continued to "develop" often leading to astonishing variants of the original spelling.
https://www.surnamedb.com/Surname/Storch
If you have a Ph.D., then you ain't a real scientist.
What is the name of your degree?
Be specific.
I would bet that if his real family name was Storch, then he would be a non-jew German.
As JEWS STEAL OUR NAMES to fit in, it is hard to tell.
Julius Caesar outlawed the jews from taking non-jew names. We should pass that law, here, too.