“Perhaps Comey blocked it because he feared that Assange would reveal that the DNC hack was not a Russian operation”
That’s quite a leap. There could be any number of reasons why a prosecutor would block or withdraw an immunity deal, and many of them are more plausible than some grand conspiracy (that continued on long after Comey left) to pin the blame on Russia.
Simpler explanations would be that either Comey didn’t trust Assange, or Assange didn’t tell them anything they didn’t already know.
@noblepa – The problem with term limits in the judiciary is that people might tailor their rulings to favor those who might give them jobs or other rewards after their terms have ended.
It’s not written in stone that the Supreme Court must have nine justices and lifetime appointments. And one president’s failure to change the number doesn’t mean much, considering it was changed five times before that.
Originally, the high court had six justices. Later, Congress changed its mind and increased it to nine. Congress changed its mind again during the Civil War, increasing it to ten, and then Congress passed another act reducing it to seven justices after the war to prevent Andrew Johnson from nominating anyone. Yet another act of Congress later raised it back to nine.
The point is, Congress can change the number of justices at any time, for any reason. It’s only tradition that’s kept it at nine since 1869. But you know what else was a tradition until recently? The Supreme Court not deciding presidential elections. That was a tradition until 2000. Also a tradition: the Senate voting on presidential appointees to the Supreme Court. That was a tradition until 2016, when Mitch McConnell refused to allow ANY Obama SC nominee to come to a floor vote for the entire last year of his presidency. Not stealing Supreme Court seats was a tradition.
It’s now become a tradition to throw out traditions. So as soon as Democrats retake Congress and the presidency, it’ll be within their power to increase the number of justices to undo this ill-gotten 5-4 majority. It probably won’t be within their will to do it, but it’s certainly within their power.
“First of all they’ve kicked out reservists who were training and were participating in drills. And although you would pretend otherwise, “Recruits” are considered military personnel and members of the armed forces. The Pentagon coming up with an excuse to delay their training, to slow-walk their background checks, or to cause them to fail their background checks, some simply on account of their having relatives overseas (of course they do, they’re immigrants), doesn’t alter the fact they’ve got a signed contract, they took the oath, and expected the armed forces to hold up their end of the deal.
“All had signed enlistment contracts and taken an Army oath, Stock said. Many were reservists who had been attending unit drills, receiving pay and undergoing training, while others had been in a “delayed entry” program, she said.
…Stock said the service members she’s heard from had been told the Defense Department had not managed to put them through extensive background checks, which include CIA, FBI and National Intelligence Agency screenings and counterintelligence interviews. Therefore, by default, they do not meet the background check requirement.
“It’s a vicious cycle,” she said.
The AP interviewed Calixto and recruits from Pakistan and Iran, all of whom said they were devastated by their unexpected discharges.
“Now the great feeling I had when I enlisted is going down the drain,” said Calixto, 28. “I don’t understand why this is happening.”
In hopes of undoing the discharge, he filed a lawsuit in Washington, D.C….. ….In the suit, Calixto said he learned he was being kicked out soon after he was promoted to private second class.””
Your screed about this being “misleading” is awfully misleading. First of all they’ve kicked out reservists who were training and were participating in drills. And although you would pretend otherwise, “Recruits” are considered military personnel and members of the armed forces. The Pentagon coming up with an excuse to delay their training, to slow-walk their background checks, or to cause them to fail their background checks, some simply on account of their having relatives overseas (of course they do, they’re immigrants), doesn’t alter the fact they’ve got a signed contract, they took the oath, and expected the armed forces to hold up their end of the deal.
“All had signed enlistment contracts and taken an Army oath, Stock said. Many were reservists who had been attending unit drills, receiving pay and undergoing training, while others had been in a “delayed entry” program, she said.
…Stock said the service members she’s heard from had been told the Defense Department had not managed to put them through extensive background checks, which include CIA, FBI and National Intelligence Agency screenings and counterintelligence interviews. Therefore, by default, they do not meet the background check requirement.
“It’s a vicious cycle,” she said.
The AP interviewed Calixto and recruits from Pakistan and Iran, all of whom said they were devastated by their unexpected discharges.
“Now the great feeling I had when I enlisted is going down the drain,” said Calixto, 28. “I don’t understand why this is happening.”
In hopes of undoing the discharge, he filed a lawsuit in Washington, D.C….. ….In the suit, Calixto said he learned he was being kicked out soon after he was promoted to private second class.”
“Perhaps Comey blocked it because he feared that Assange would reveal that the DNC hack was not a Russian operation”
That’s quite a leap. There could be any number of reasons why a prosecutor would block or withdraw an immunity deal, and many of them are more plausible than some grand conspiracy (that continued on long after Comey left) to pin the blame on Russia.
Simpler explanations would be that either Comey didn’t trust Assange, or Assange didn’t tell them anything they didn’t already know.