I would say that it would be challenging to prosecute torture committed at a time when the DoJ's opinion was that it was legal.
There was quite a complex lawfare episode on why the Garland DOJ might not be able to change its mind on Barr’s decisions. i believe we discussed it before so I won’t dig it all up again. I’ll simply say that Mueller handed Barr and obstruction case and Barr intentionally wrecked it. great!
we’ve discussed this before. barr is mostly responsible. He ought to have laid the ground work for the upcoming prosecution but instead secured opinions that the president could not be indicted for obstruction in any case.
100%. Barr's opinion 100% made it significantly more difficult to bring charges against Trump for the crimes identified in the Mueller report.
This is some Weimar Republic shit. You think President Boebert won't imprison Adam Schiff for removing a mattress warning tag?
The mere phrase "President Boebert" makes me lose all hope for humanity and makes me want to drink bleach.
Re Vance and what has changed. my theory: he now knows that Nassau county prosecutors are going to nail Santiago to the wall on campaign finance violations. Not prosecuting trump on this open and shut case was a bad look. Not charging Trump when the DA from the next county indicts and convicts santos on campaign finance violations inside 18 months is well…a much badder look.
It was bugging me so I looked up lawfare on the statute of limitations / barr stuff There are way too many possibilities to list but some key ideas were 1. DOJ may think it can't reopen the decision of previous DOJ leadership without new evidence - this is to prevent bad faith political prosecutions - but clearly is problematic where Barr acted in bad faith 2. Barr may be correct that Trump can't be prosecuted for sacking Comey because this is a presidential power he has 3. Probably the best obstruction case is the pardon dangle for Stone - this doesn't expire until 2025
She'd be scary managing a store at the mall. But then again, we had a petty liddle prick for 4 years so absolutely anything is possible.
I talked about this a long while back in another thread, but here's an interesting read: Accidental mix of bleach and acid kills Buffalo Wild Wings employee I guessed that it happened multiple times a day every day in the US. This confirms at least 6x/day, likely much more often.
And another attorney bites the dust.. It doesn’t mention if she gets paid but unless she got paid ahead of time I’m afraid she’s worked pro bono. Donald Trump Loses Yet Another Lawyer as Legal Troubles Worsen Donald Trump has hired a high-profile criminal lawyer to represent him in E. Jean Caroll's battery and defamation lawsuit, replacing attorney Alina Habba. According to court documents filed on Tuesday, veteran New York lawyer Joe Tacopina has been brought in to work with the former president to fight the suit filed against him by the former Elle columnist. Carroll is suing Trump for sexual battery over allegations he raped her in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room in New York in the 1990s. She is also suing the former president for defamation for comments he made while denying the assault, including stating "she's not my type."
I'm not sure where we were discussing the Durham/Barr stuff, so this will do Listened to a Bulwark podcast on this today with Charlie Savage OMFG this is far worse than I understood. Barr should be investigated and indicted for corruption. WTAF? I had never realised that Barr believed, and told everyone, that the Trump-Russia thing was a deep state plot against Trump, so brought in Durham, who was actually just a well regarded prosecutor, to get to the bottom of it. Then when they couldn't find anything, they pivoted to trying to pin it all on HRC. JFC The Bill Barr/John Durham fog of disinformation.You can listen to my whole conversation with the NYT's @charlie_savage here: https://t.co/YxJ6GnEvGe pic.twitter.com/RlftiiDHWj— Charlie Sykes (@SykesCharlie) February 1, 2023
@diablodelsol should probably look away Elie Honig, a former SDNY prosecutor is doing a media tour for his new book that looks at why powerful people like Trump always seem to get away with crimes. He was on Preet's & Bulwark podcast. Very interesting stuff He things trump will get indicted in Georgia but may well get off Garland paralysed by politics - doesn't think he'll indict Trump on anything. Really interesting stuff on "Individual 1" and how that Trump was not indicted there (Cohen/Stormy) Honig argues that it is absurd that Cohen has gone down for Stormy as the bagman, but not Trump.
I don’t know why you think I would be upset about being completely vindicated regarding Garland and the DOJ.
He'll come out and say in his wimpus way "We are now deep into the 2024 election season. It would be imprudent for the DOJ to prosecute now"
Oh…and btw…the prosecutors the resigned in protest when Bragg shut them down were apparently working a 20 year Rico investigation into trump. Which is exactly what should have been prosecuted. this porn star payment shit is just trying to look like he’s doing something for his constituents. And on Barr “torpedoing” the obstruction case. Bullshit. Did it put the DOJ in a tough position? Sure…from Garland’s perspective. Because moving forward after Barr’s bullshit mueller memo would require Garland to say, correctly…that his predecessor was corrupt as ******** and his actions were not at all in the interest of justice. He should have indicted and welcomed the defense to call Barr as a witness….and then had his prosecutors expose bar for the political schill he was. FFS…Barr intervened in the Flynn case AFTER Flynn pleaded guilty. But Garland can’t do that. Calling the previous head of DOJ corrupt is just too damaging to the institution garland has decided his job is to protect.
Honig agrees with you on Stormy that was an SDNY case. They passed on it when Trump left office (having been clear a couple of years before that he should be indicted). It’s really unclear why the state picked it up.
Trump needs to understand the game is over for him. Too many people are ready to take whatever means are necessary to stop him from holding office again. It might be the most Pro-2nd Amendment response in the history of the United States -- assuming you accept that the point of the 2A was to allow citizens to arms themselves to avoid tyranny.