So, with that, let me pull up the report and start reading.
I know I left off with three stars indicating a change in topic. This is the very end of the Introduction of Volume 2.
This report on our investigation consists of four parts. Section I provides an overview of obstruction-of-justice principles and summarizes certain investigatory and evidentiary considerations. Section II sets forth the factual results of our obstruction investigation and analyzes the evidence. Section III addresses statutory and constitutional defenses. Section IV states our conclusion.
There is a lot of instruction to Volume II. I believe it is to bring clarity of the law to the US Congress. HOWEVER, I am already miffed with the DOJ in the fact they will not indict the president, which I believe causes a constitutional crisis and is simply a horrible policy. So, I have no doubt I will not see the instructions as beneficial, necessarily. I don't believe I am alone in that regard either.
THE DOJ IS SUPPOSED TO PREVENT A CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS.
Then there are footnotes which I will review before going to the Executive Summary of Volume II.
5 For that reason, criticisms have been lodged against the practice of naming unindicted coconspirators in an indictment. See United States v.Briggs,514 F.2d 794,802 (5th Cir. 1975) ("The courts have struck down with strong language efforts by grand juries to accuse persons of crime while affording them no forum in which to vindicate themselves."); see also Justice Manual § 9-11.130.
Appellants were named as "unindicted conspirators" in an indictment by a federal grand jury charging a highly publicized conspiracy. In this case they challenge the power of the grand jury to charge them with criminal conduct in this manner without indicting them. We conclude that the grand jury exceeded its power and authority and that its action was a denial of due process to appellants.
I don't believe there is something else to understand. Any denial of due process automatically ends the case before any judge in the USA. I believe due process is the 4th amendment. Amendment IV (click here)
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
You know what surprises me about US v. Briggs? The fact it took place in 1972. I would expect a young country to stumble over itself to some extent and FORGET that due process ends the abuse of a king/dictator. But, this was 1972. It was focused on Republicans and Nixon was in office.
This is the law the Grand Jury relied on to indict co-conspirators.
I don't know how I feel about the update either.
If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
If, however, the offense, the commission of which is the object of the conspiracy, is a misdemeanor only, the punishment for such conspiracy shall not exceed the maximum punishment provided for such misdemeanor.
The defendants or unnamed conspirators did some very dangerous and illegal acts. That is strange to me. That four people could simply walk away from their illegal acts because a grand jury indicted without due process.
Oh, well. I don't disagree with the citation or the judge. I find it strange a prosecutor would be this remiss. I have to wonder what kind of instructions were provided to the grand jury.
If I hear one more reference to the Justice Manual I will probably emesis.
6 OLC Op. at 259 & n.38 (citation omitted).
This is another opinion (click here) that would back up the actions by the Special Counsel. I am not going sort through this.
There are other online references when trying to discern these citations (click here). I am not saying this particular reference is an authority, but, it is another way of accessing legal references.
I will tell you how annoyed I am about the "Justice Manual." The American people pay taxes so their federal government works. There are excellent men and women, Robert S. Mueller is one of them, that works and worked for the Justice Department. These people invested in education and practices that would bring them to a pinnacle for their career. WHY DO THEY NEED A MANUAL?
I have pure and utter disdain for the Justice Manual. To me, it is nothing more than an ego trip by the Attorney General to intimidate US Attorneys and put them in a situation whereby THEIR METHODS will endanger the job they are doing for the American people.
I am sure I will have more musings about this manual in the future. But, it makes absolutely no sense to me. NONE!
If they can't do the job without a politically oriented manual then they don't belong in the US Attorney's office.
This is completely off topic, but, I have wanted to make an entry for some time now. This is about China.See that pretty lady in the picture. She was known as Ms. Ma. She disappeared at least six months ago. That happens a lot in China. People disappear because they are picked up by the authorities.
"Why China Silenced Clickbait Queen in for Information Control" (click here)
She disappeared before the arrests of a Huawei executive in Canada.
This entire communications issue is a real concern for the USA for many reasons.
continue the Special Counsel report in next entry
