Lawfare posted this article yesterday. There is a lot more to the article than this, so you should read the whole thing. But this speculation at the end was the part that most interested me.
Will the Select Committee’s Filing Change the Department of Justice’s Perspective? (Lawfare)
So will the committee’s brief actually trigger a Justice Department investigation? The answer to that question is not entirely clear. To be sure, the committee’s opinion has unparalleled weight. McQuade has tremendous credibility as an outside observer writing in a serious publication, and as we noted above, the allegations from the committee are similar to the ones she made. But the House Select Committee is the definitive legislative authority on this subject, and unlike McQuade, it is making these allegations after having interviewed more than 500 witnesses and collected 63,000 documents. What’s more, the evidence it is putting forward, it claims, is only a fraction of the relevant material it has collected, and it has already submitted additional exhibits under seal, according to the court record. While the committee has not made a formal criminal referral, one would expect that when a serious, bipartisan congressional investigation represents to a federal court that it has a pile of non-public evidence adequate to overcome a claim of attorney-client privilege because of the crime-fraud exception, the FBI’s ears prick up.
Politically, the filing is already adding urgency to the chorus of voices wondering: Where’s Merrick Garland? That will surely continue.
Of course, the answer to that question—as we’ve dutifully and repeatedly noted–might be that the Justice Department or FBI is already quietly investigating these charges (or similar ones) and never needed any prodding from anyone.
If that’s the case, then the department is certainly showing extraordinary—even admirable—stealth. At a minimum, we can say with confidence that an investigation, if it has been opened, has not taken the kind of overt investigative steps that make news. The press is aware of no witnesses or documents that have been subpoenaed nor of any search warrants that have been executed. If such an investigation exists, it remains at a relatively preliminary stage.
There are, in our view, more likely possibilities. Perhaps the most likely is that the Justice Department and FBI have long been aware of the legal arguments the committee is making and the gist of the factual allegations that the committee martialed in this brief, and has simply decided to hold off commencing a criminal probe for discretionary reasons. Another possibility, more remote, is that the department has studied the legal argument the committee is making and has, for some reason, concluded as a matter of law that it would or could never bring a such a case—and thus that it should not conduct a criminal investigation of a former president based on this theory. Such a posture would, in our view, require an explanation.
Even if the Justice Department has already considered the matter and decided not to open a case, though, the steady drip, drip, drip of incriminating evidence and authoritative voices demanding action could eventually change the bureau’s calculus.
Eventually, it either has to look at this matter or explain why it is not doing so.
Most of us have long believed (feared?) that Trump would never face criminal charges. Have the recent developments with the Jan 6 committee changed your mind? Or at least given you hope?
fancycwabs
The Democratic Party’s general response is “Bringing Trump up on charges will cost us votes in the midterms,” instead of the actual truth which is “bringing Trump up on charges will cost Republicans votes in the midterms, because they don’t have the cover of ‘He’s never been charged with a crime, this is just a witch hunt.'”
Dopey-o
I am of the opinion that there is one elf at the DOJ whose entire job description is “Sit at this desk and review documents that will be couriered over from the Jan 6 Committee, and forward juicy details to our prosecutors.”
MisterForkbeard
@fancycwabs:
That’s going to need some actual backup. The Democratic Party’s line has been that Trump probably committed crimes and we need to investigate (which is LITERALLY what the 1/6 commission is about) and that DOJ needs to be running its own non-political investigation.
If DOJ just isn’t doing that, then the Dems will have a big fucking problem with them. I don’t think anyone is espousing the viewpoint you’re blithely asserting.
trollhattan
I am a pessimist. [Everyone else at meeting: “Hi pessimist.”]
Based on Donny’s wriggling out of any bad consequence for everything bad he’s done his entire life, I have no faith that his string has an impending break.
Perhaps there is someone in the inner circle who will not fall on a sword for him and instead, will hang the rock from Donny’s neck. That would be nice.
MattF
Everyone knows that Trump is ‘Guilty, Guilty, Guilty’. And everyone knows that refining the art of getting away with lies and assorted criminal acts is simply what he does best, and does instinctively. Actually getting Trump into a courtroom, much less marshaling a mountain of evidence, getting through the inevitable appeals and the inevitable political costs is not a terrific prospect, IMO.
WaterGirl
i give it 60-40 that Trump is brought up on criminal charges for at least one thing in 2022. Whether he beats them or not is another thing.
steppy
I have been skeptical about federal charges. I have thought it most likely that trump would face charges from New York state.
I was listening to Marcy Wheeler on Michelangelo Signorile’s show yesterday. She made the point that the Committee has been working from the top down and DOJ has been working from the bottom up. The ratchet tightened in both directions the other day–with the equivalent of a criminal referral accusing trump of participation in a conspiracy, and James’ guilty plea verifying a conspiracy AND securing his cooperation. Nobody is interested in information about people downstream from him in the scheme.
The one conspiracy is now stipulated to have occurred. The big question is, can it be proven that trump participated in a conspiracy? Are they two parts of the same conspiracy?
If the Committee has as much evidence as they say they do, and if federal prosecutors are privy to that evidence, I think we are going to see indictments going to the very top.
narya
I think that everyone knows that they will have exactly one opportunity to bring these particular charges, and it cannot and should not be done without a mountain range of evidence. I also think that rolling up the others–and getting at least one person so far to plead to seditious conspiracy–is part of that mountain-range-building. I also see two distinct tracks here: the J6 committee, which, unless the Dems keep the house, will be done by next January, and the DOJ, which will NOT be done, no matter what happens in Congressional elections. The two timelines are relevant–the DOJ has more time than does the J6 committee, or at least the J6 folks have to assume that’s true. I will also note that I think this can be played to the advantage of truth & justice: the J6 committee can do things and reveal things and have hearings in ways that the DOJ cannot and should not, which then also lengthens the amount of time this is in play in the press. More info can come out, it can be spread out over a longer period of time.
I have to admit that I also relish the thought of these traitorous scum, especially the mango menace, watching it unfold, night after day after night, not knowing exactly who’s said what or what might be coming. And, of course, there’s also Tish and Fani on their cases, so . . .
New Deal democrat
To cut to the chase, I have believed that very early on Biden made a deal with McConnell: the GOP would not filibuster his AG pick, in return for which the AG would not be someone like Adam Schiff, but instead would guarantee that the Department would only “look forward, not backward.”
It’s the only way all this makes sense, including the fact that Biden has been completely silent on the subject for over a year. He is on board with the deal.
The Moar You Know
No and no. We do not prosecute presidents – or for that matter the wealthy and privileged, unless they’ve fucked with other wealthy and privileged – in this country.
We should, but we don’t. If it was ever going to happen, it would have with Nixon. And it didn’t.
steppy
@Dopey-o: While I think you are right, the truth is that most of the work of the Committee and pretty much all of the work of DOJ is going on behind closed doors. It’s their business not to talk about what they are doing.
We all know it’s obvious that the whole crew of swine broke a multitude of laws. However, “It’s obvious” is a fucking poor argument for a prosecutor with a burden of proof to satisfy.
Miss Bianca
@New Deal democrat: I can’t say that I agree with your assessment, here.
Spanky
@New Deal democrat:
Leaving the legal process untainted.
steppy
@The Moar You Know: But the fix was in with Nixon in a way that just is not now. Gerald Ford wiped that slate clean in one of the most monstrously corrupt acts in American history.
Brachiator
@WaterGirl:
Respectable odds. I also would like to see Trump brought up on charges.
Martin
I think there’s a larger thing going on, of which this is a piece.
Congress and the courts have been extremely deferential to the role of the Presidency, which is why the idea of one being indicted is so unthinkable. But clearly this philosophy needs to change after Trump, and Congress is making a deliberate effort to change it. Witness the rehab book tours currently going on from other members of the executive that did jack shit to rein in Trump. Clearly our checks and balances aren’t working. And attacks on voting systems further speak to this. Additionally, the judiciary is accumulating all power to itself, overruling clear regulatory and statutory functions that the executive and Congress possess.
Congress needs to reassert their role here. It’s untenable to allow a President to to adjudicate his own election. And it’s untenable for USSC to determine arbitrarily what laws Congress can and cannot pass and enforce. Trump is both the catalyst for this action to need to happen, and a direct threat should he become the 2024 nominee.
HumboldtBlue
I have no confidence Trump or any other of the top seditionists will face any charges, and that stands until something is actually done to hold him and folks like Ginni Thomas accountable.
scav
@Spanky: Biden hasn’t made the coalition and response to Russia all about him either. Doesn’t please a certain cohort that insists on top billing rather than a tight, solid ensemble effort.
Old School
@New Deal democrat:
What would be Biden’s incentive to make that deal?
Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony
In the past, I thought he would face charges. I don’t think so now. However, I think more of the people around him, quite possibly even his odious children, might end up in jail. The problem with Trump is proving intent. He spews a constant stream of contradictory crap and doesn’t mean half of it. So was ‘X’ really a threat and/or order? How can you tell? I honestly think that is how he’s managed to get away with so much. His underlings can tell when he means it and act, but anyone looking at it from the outside can get lost in the thunderstorm of crap.
Martin
@The Moar You Know: I think that too is changing. The war in Ukraine is basically what happens when you give billionaires control of a nuclear country. (Trump too.) The sanctions aren’t just on Russias command structure, but their wealthy elite, their kids, and so on. And from what I’m reading, the West intends to keep cranking down on them over the next week. The view is that their wealth was not earned, and therefore they are not entitled to it. That alone is a big shift. It doesn’t necessarily portend problems for Bezos and Musk, but unmasking Trumps fraud becomes a part of that narrative change.
steppy
Has the Committee or DOJ gotten their hands on that Danish documentary footage about the twisted freak Stone?
Betty Cracker
@New Deal democrat: Interesting theory. I don’t think Biden was buffaloed into picking Garland though. If Trump ends up skating on all of this, which I think is more likely than not, it’ll be because Garland really is an institutionalist, and Biden knew that when he picked him to “depoliticize” the DoJ. I’m not allowing myself to get angry about that now because there is a chance we’re wrong and Trump is being investigated and will be charged. But I feel like that’s the direction we’re heading, and it sucks if so.
brendancalling
To be honest, I forgot Garland even existed.
Cacti
Merrick Garland thus far has shown no interest in touching anyone in his own class.
Just the peons.
There will be zero fact based rebuttals to this observation. Just some harrumphing about “these things take time”…14 months later.
LongHairedWeirdo
From my point of view, this is what I’ve been kind-of waiting for, but afraid might not happen.
One reason for my hypomania’s obsession with communication is, there’s just so much *already out there*. The Republican Party is obviously wrong and evil, by many fine and objective standards. The insurrection has been praised on TV – there’s no good faith way to consider that anything other than completely barking mad. There’s simply no good faith way to defend any piece of Republican open biological warfare that they called a “pandemic response”.
The bad faith opinions and decisions we’re seeing out there are what scare me the most. I feel like there’s some holy deference to an assumption of good faith, when it’s clear that the Republican controlled courts are in open defiance of common sense, looking for a high falutin way of saying “the law says we get paid, and you get to suck ass!”
The courts are interfering with immigration policy, because they liked how Trump handled it better. The SCOTUS is trying to wipe out the Clean Air Act over a moot regulation that was never put in place, and the arguments seemed to be how, precisely, they intended to eviscerate it without looking blatantly partisan. The courts have openly declared that “Jim Crow was a *good* way to run a country, damn it” because under Jim Crow, common citizens and police-protected lynching parties, the cops didn’t have to be the actual *personal* bad guys. They could just refuse to punish to bad guys, instead. That’s the Texas “heartbeat” law in a nutshell.
(It’s called a “heartbeat” because there is no *heart* yet, by the way – this is why “Abortion stops a beating heart” is a despicable lie.)
Seriously, guys, sometimes I feel like “why does the guy with CFS have to point this out to you? Why isn’t someone already talking about this every night on TV?” The right wing has a built in hate machine that’s dangerously out of control; the courts are obviously broken due to naked partisanship, and people are still all “well, shape of the earth, desirability of piles of corpses, basic civil rights, you know, views *differ*.”
narya
@Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony: Oh I must admit that I absolutely relish the thought of Vanky and Slim either in prison, for solid stretches, or just exiled from every single social situation and institution they want to be part of. No galas, no dinners, none of the RealSociety places, just her father’s tacky, low-rent properties. The other two (I’m exempting the youngest and What’sHerName) in jail as well.
Geminid
@MisterForkbeard: I don’t think putting Trump up on criminal charges would cost Democrats votes in the midterms. I don’t think it will neccesarily gain Democrats votes though.
Trump will not be on the ballot, and most Republican politicians running in purple Congressional districts will sidestep attempts by their Democratic opponents to make Trump an issue. This election will be decided by “kitchen table” issues: health care, education, transportation, maybe crime, but above all, people’s experience and perception of the economy.
But in some Senate races, Republicans are trying so hard to win support from Trumpists and to win Trump’s endorsement that they may be vulnerable on this question in November.
Betty Cracker
@Cacti: We do have some evidence to support your theory: the statute of limitations on the illegal Stormy Daniels payoff expired with no charges lodged against Individual-1.
Ruckus
@trollhattan:
Yes he’s been a shit his entire life but he was a shit to mostly private individuals and they could have sued him (and I believe have). But here he was being a shit to the country, as the supposed leader of same and he has to answer a lot of a lot bigger questions. And all the answers have to/should be known before a word is spoken about it.
Eljai
@steppy: I would love to see Stone go to jail — permanently this time. Pretty please!
Roger Stone tapes: Video shows efforts to overturn 2020 election, seek pardons – Washington Post
delk
At this point I’d be happy just to never have to see his name while waiting at the Washington L stop.
trollhattan
@Ruckus:
Nixon and Reagan both croaked without having to suffer punishment for their many crimes. Hell, today they’re heroes and both should have gone to club fed. If Donny breaks the string, then I will drain the wine cellar all by myself.
Ruckus
@New Deal democrat:
OR.
It’s quite possible that Joe Biden actually knows his job and lets others do their jobs. His job is to run the country. And yes making the country whole after SFB is part of his job, but doing criminal investigations and trying people for those acts found to be against the law is not. Yes the people that work for him do have that job but is it at all possible that Joe Biden actually understands his part in this is to let the people he hired do their actual jobs?
NotMax
@Cacti
One must clear away the lampreys in order to pinpoint the best target on the shark.
The more (as you put it) peons opting to cut a deal to cooperate, the stronger successive cases become.
trollhattan
@Eljai: Obligatory Stringer Bell.
Eljai
@trollhattan: Ah, of course! ;)
steppy
@Eljai: I’m sure that Stone will try to claim that it was all performative or whatever bullshit he’ll roll together. But there’s no evidence like firsthand, straight-from-the-horse’s-ass’s-mouth evidence.
Surprise, surprise! Right now, Stone looks like the nexus between the Oath Keepers’ seditious conspiracy and the Electoral College fraud conspiracy.
Baud
@Cacti:
Is Steve Bannon in Garland’s “class”? He’s currently under criminal indictment.
LongHairedWeirdo
@The Moar You Know: Oh, bullshit. Nixon was given a full and clear pardon. We didn’t do anything because he didn’t have old state crap to investigate. Iran/Contra, North’s immunity pretty much obliterated the investigations as fruit of a poison tree. That, though, that was the time when prosecutions had to have happened, or, the perps’s careers ended.
Instead, criminals were rewarded for criminality, and the US, to no one’s actual surprise, started to go to hell.
Benw
I would’ve tried to throw Trump in jail so fast he’d think he was a black teenager driving in a white neighborhood. But I’m not AG and TFG and Co have broken so many <waves hands at everything> with no consequences that I can’t even guess what the DOJ will do.
horatius
Merrick Garland is the wrong choice for Attorney General. Joe Biden needed a wartime consigliere who understands the unique threat that the Republic Party poses to the US constitution. Merrick Garland will legitimize Donald Trump’s slow motion coup through his inaction.
trollhattan
Boy howdy, I knew Russia was primarily an energy exporter but did not realize it’s about half of the total. Next is gold at 5%, then stuff.
https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/status/1499857351553204228?cxt=HHwWiICy0ZGUyNApAAAA
horatius
@Old School:
@Old School:
Then Biden is doubly stupid for not hiring an Attorney General who would lie to Mitch McConnell and then go after the entire Republican Party the moment he/she gets nominated.
Ancient Atheist
In Aug or Sept 2022 – After the Republican primaries. – Trump will declare he is running for Speaker of the US House of Representatives. From that point forward he will be the campaign for the Mid-term Elections. Unprecedented! Uniquely Trump! Trump lays claim to the most powerful seat in the Congress! Will he impeach Biden? Is Harris in jeopardy? Will Trump reclaim his presidency? Oh, the press will love it! And Trump will win… voted Speaker by a Republican controlled Congress. Then he will be President again.
Ruckus
@trollhattan:
I do not disagree with your comments about Nixon and Regan. Those were bad. SFBtrump is far worse. And I think that President Biden not only knows this but understands this in the same way we do. But. There is a lot of power in the presidency, some/much of which I’m not sure should be as loosely/not at all constricted as it is. Especially in a world like we live in. And there is procedure and a shit ton of shit going on right now. President Biden may be just a bit busy right now.
So I’m more than willing to give him full benefit of the doubt as to ShitForBrains and prosecution by the appropriate entities. One of my reasons for that is the Jan 6 investigations and prosecutions. They do not seem to be fucking around and I’m going to give President Biden’s folks the time and space to do the same for the shit show that was SFB’s reign of stupidity and illegality. Did I want him charged and tried at 12:01pm Jan 20 and convicted at 12:02pm? You bet your ass. Do I think this should be done as thoroughly as possible? Same answer. So it is going to take time.
Sure Lurkalot
Almost the 14 month anniversary of the insurrection. Subpoenas ignored. Contempt charges still outstanding. Public hearings of the 1/6 committee expected to commence at the beginning of the year have not yet been scheduled.
Yes, there have been hundreds of interviews and a small percentage of the low hanging fruit has been charged and jailed. There are many dots and connecting lines.
Maybe Wheeler is correct that the streams will cross and the marshmallow man will be felled. I’m not seeing it right now.
Geminid
@NotMax: Prosecutors are now moving up from peons to middle managers like that Oathkeeper who just pled guilty and is now cooperating. The next step is getting the goods on people a step away from Trump, like Roger Stone.
Working past them could be tough. Trump is a career criminal who long ago learned to work through a few trusted henchmen. The January 6 plot seems to have had an element of improvisation, so Trump might have gotten sloppy.
Stone already had served as Trump’s “cutout” for coordinating Russian assistance in the 2016 election. Mueller’s team couldn’t break him, but back then Stone had the expectation of a pardon. That’s not the case now, and with a $1.5 million federal tax judgement against him, he is now under financial pressure. Stone is a freak though, and might not flip on Trump. There could be others who will, but not many.
NotMax
@horatius
Sprinting headlong through a minefield not the optimum procedure. One advances slowly, cautiously and deliberately.
And make no mistake, no matter who Biden named as AG, this is a political minefield.
bbleh
“He who strikes at the king must kill.” They won’t bring charges unless it’s a slam-dunk (which, just so I’m clear, it may well be, but I am neither a lawyer nor privy to any of the evidence they’ve collected). And of course, being the asshole leader of a bunch of assholes who now dominate what has become the asshole party is not an indictable offense.
Relatedly, I think Garland is being criticized unfairly. For example, note that the sentences for 1/6 rioters recommended by prosecutors have, more often than not, been rejected by judges as too harsh. I think he’s pushing the envelope about as far as it can be reasonably pushed in the court system. I would expect the same with Trump.
Plenty of time yet. And remember that revenge is a dish best served cold.
Booger
@NotMax: Remoras. Remoras are what hitch onto sharks. /pedantry.
Ruckus
@Ancient Atheist:
That’s a great script for a TV show. Wonderful possibilities.
However.
SFB does not see the bigger picture, nor would he settle for speaker when he so clearly sees himself as the number one human. He’s been president and thinks he should be king. He ain’t settling. He’s in his mid 70s, and while he may think he’s the picture of health, he’s anything but. He’s more deranged than ever, and he’s not going to settle for anything less than he thinks he deserves, which is KING of the United States! He’ll settle for the presidency if that’s what you want to call it.
billcinsd
@Ruckus: How sure are you that Garland is doing his job wrt Trump?
Miss Bianca
@Ancient Atheist: I would say, “I’ll have whatever he’s on”, but…I don’t actually want whatever you’re on.
Geminid
@Ancient Atheist: A Trump run for Speaker would hurt Republicans in swing districts. He has a cohort of fierce supporters, but I don’t think Trump has broad popularity now. The air has been slowly but steadily leaking out of the trump balloon since November 2020.
Enhanced Voting Techniques
I suspect it will really hard to convicted Trump just for the simple fact Dimwit Donny is such a crappy ass manager. It’s hard to imagine Trump sitting still long enough for one of his henchmen to brief Mushroom Dick on The Plan for Trump to approve. Likely a lot of “I told you fix it, now I need twitter about Judge Judy and don’t bother me with that boring shit”
And I also think it’s far more important to see to Trump’s underbosses and minions get thrown in jail, or it will be the Trump Org all ready to go for the next guy to take it over. Roger Stone is a Nixon retread after all.
mrmoshpotato
@delk:
Dump Tower Chicago should’ve been torn down years ago.
billcinsd
@Ancient Atheist: The Dems will retain at least 36 seats in the Senate so no one will be convicted and your scenario is moot.
NotMax
@Booger
Thank you. Codger brain burp on my part.
Now resisting an urge to lampoon “How Are Things in Glocca Morra?” from Finian’s Rainbow.
Baud
@bbleh:
That’s the usual rule for federal prosecutors. As I understand it, their conviction rate is sky-high, so much so that mos federal defendants cut plea deals.
New Deal democrat
@Ruckus: Hard disagree.
Bookmark this for next January.
New Deal democrat
@Spanky: “Leaving the legal process untainted.”
I will be forever grateful after the GOP coup in 2024 that the criminal legal process was untainted.
Captain C
@LongHairedWeirdo:
Don’t forget HW Bush pardoning everyone, including Caspar Weinberger, on his way out, right when the trail was starting to get back to Shrub, Sr..
Martin
I think it’s been pretty well broadcast that the 1/6 public hearings are when the show starts. The goal here is to get the kind of drop in public support for Trump that Nixon experienced in the public hearings. Then indictments and so on get a lot easier. Yeah, they’ll never get Trumps more loyal 30%, but they don’t need to.
I don’t consider a lack of action now to be a sign of anything other than everyone being on the same page. We’ll see what happens later this month.
TM
I think this post needs to have a conversation with the one on top of it, about the film showing Roger Stone on Jan 6 being “guarded” by the Oath Keeper who just pled guilty to seditious conspiracy. I would say that’s the biggest news out of DOJ maybe since Jan 6. Some dozen or so other OKs are sitting on their own similar indictments, now knowing one of their party has gone state’s evidence.
I admit to being a regular reader of Emptywheel, but Lawfare’s view of DOJ’s “stealth” feels a bit strange. James’s indictment was in all the major media. Nothing stealthy about it.
New Deal democrat
@Old School: “What would be Biden’s incentive to make that deal?”
If Biden is an institutionalist (pretty sure he is), and McConnell threatened him that the GOP would filibuster his cabinet choices if he didn’t make the deal (sounds like what McConnell would do), then Biden would presumably take the deal.
Especially if he weren’t willing to play Trump’s game of naming temporary appointees (sauce/goose/gander).
Martin
@trollhattan: Yeah, they’re a proper petrostate. I’ve read that they’ve halted exports of fertilizer. Guessing they’re doing the import/export bookkeeping on food and realizing they’re going to need the fertilizer. They can’t get China to buy the coal because they can’t pay China. They’ve been trying to sell oil internally and have no buyers.
Outside investors in Russian securities are starting to write them off as valueless because without a functioning stock market in Russia, they effectively are.
Miss Bianca
@New Deal democrat: Oh, ffs. Stop with the conspiracy theories.
Citizen Alan
@Ruckus: How is it a good thing if the Dems always focus exclusively on depoliticizing the things the GOP politicized and will politicize again the second they’re back in power? How can our polity survive if we’re the only ones who ever play fair?
Calouste
@Martin: A company that manages stock indexes that are used by a lot of funds and investment managers dropped Russian stocks from all its indexes and called the country “uninvestable”. Although it did create a new Russia-only index, but I guess that’s mostly to make people feel good that they pulled out when they see how far it drops
Russian stocks are valueless because there’s no functioning stock market, Russia’s currency is collapsing, and there is no easy or affordable way to move money out of the country (30% commission on converting rubles to foreign currency IIRC) even if either of them wasn’t true. Although of course they’re all causes that influence each other.
Ruckus
Did anyone else read the legal document about the attorney/client privilege case going on that was linked to the other day? It’s page after page after page of what they have to go through to show that all of the crap the lawyer says is privileged was out in public and that most of it had been released as specifically not privileged by the people involved and every court case reference for each point. They had to take the lawyer to court and all of that took a lot of time and all of this crap is going to be just like that. The defense sides don’t have an actual case (IMO) and they are wasting a ton of court time and effort to stall, maybe get lucky, overload the prosecutors or their client could die and make all of this end. This is how this crap works in our modern world. Sure it’s possible that the government could lose anyway but just trying takes huge amounts of time and effort. And it’s what defense lawyers get paid to do, defend in any way legally possible. They may lose but it’s not for a lack of trying to just spend so much time it isn’t in the end worth the effort.
Our tax system seems to work the same. The guys not paying, who have money make it so time consuming to try to get the money they owe that it costs as much if not more to get them to pay. The return just isn’t worth the time. In the end the idiot pays a lot of money to avoid paying a lot of money. It isn’t what they gain it’s what they don’t lose, because they see paying for something they don’t want as bad, even if it makes the country far better. It’s like the people whose kids have graduated, why spend any more money on schools.
Ruckus
@Citizen Alan:
What kind of country do you end up with if we don’t?
Maybe it would be better to attempt to convince others to do better than to attempt to convince me to give up…. Just a thought.
Ken
That could mean they’re directing the ammonium nitrate to munitions.
Captain C
@New Deal democrat:
IIRC, cabinet choices are now filibuster-exempt. Also, I’m pretty sure the Moscow Turtle would have just filibustered any and all cabinet choices of Biden just because he could, if he had that power.
Captain C
@Ken: It’s like Putin hasn’t read enough history to know what happens in Russia when the people are starving during a highly unpopular war.
kindness
Garland needs to state whether they are pursuing this. He doesn’t have to reveal anything but he has to state whether he is investigating this or not.
Otherwise it’s time to replace Garland. I respect they guy but am beginning to have my doubts.
Dan B
A commenter on another blog said that a college friend who was a lawyer got a high level job at DOJ. At a couple get together with friends he relayed, indirectly, that he was investigating the TFG gang and it was the most wonderful thing he’d ever been involved with.
bbleh
@Baud: True. But another reason is, they’re the Feds, and they can lawyer you to bankruptcy if not death. And a guilty plea often involves a deal.
In this case, with wingnut funding and political support, Trump could match them brief for brief. (Yes, I know, my eyes my eyes, aiyeee!) And him being allowed to plead down substantially would lead to a political firestorm from both directions. I think in this case, if they bring charges at all, they’ll be charges that they are effectively certain would stick, and any plea would be minor and only if both sides agreed it would be better than a trial (which is not at all certain).
@NotMax: This.
New Deal democrat
@Miss Bianca: As I told the other commenter, bookmark this and we will revisit at a later date.
Mike S (Now with a Democratic Congressperson!)
@Ken: No, unfortunately it means they’ve stopped potash a vital macronutrient which Russia and Belarus are the major suppliers to the world. I’ve read they source about 50% of the world’s supply.
In a garden center the numbers you see on a bag of fertilizer are N-P-K (Nitrogen-Phosphorus-K(=Potassium=potash)
Miss Bianca
@New Deal democrat: Dude, stick to COVID reporting. You’re bearable when you deal with facts, and insufferable when you start with the “New Deal Democratz rule, Modern Day Centrist Democratz drool” crap.
WaterGirl
@Ken: That was my first thought. And not a happy one.
trnc
@New Deal democrat:
Can you point to a statement on a DOJ investigation by any prez before DT?
Omnes Omnibus
@New Deal democrat: None of that makes any sense. Why would Biden make deal with the Turtle about something the Turtle has no power to do, i.e., filibuster cabinet appointments?
Omnes Omnibus
@Citizen Alan: How can it survive if no one plays fair?
BruceFromOhio
No.
LongHairedWeirdo
@Captain C: You’re right, I had forgotten he was a far dirtier man than the press allowed us to imagine.
James E Powell
@Ruckus:
Blasphemy!
Ruckus
@billcinsd:
How is everyone so sure he’s not? Because SFB hasn’t been hanged from one of the White House trees?
I’m not saying that SFB will suffer, I’m saying that you don’t just snap your fingers, even you are the president and everything is done. Legal shit takes time, some of it takes a hell of a lot longer than reasonable humans thing is right, but the Ts have to be crossed and the Is dotted and that takes fucking time. None of you have ever been in a lawsuit or dealt with lawyers and courts? There has to be a thorough investigation, which the suspect will, for sure at this level, fight on every point, there has to be a trial arranged and run and all of this takes TIME.
Ruckus
@New Deal democrat:
So let me ask the question.
How the fuck do you know he doesn’t know or isn’t doing his job?
Bring facts, because I’m saying that this job is a lot different than what a lot of people think it is and I’ve seen good and I’ve seen absolute fucking crap. And Joe Biden is farther away from absolute fuck crap than most anyone I’ve seen in the job. You may not like his style or think that he can change everything overnight and his style is immaterial and no one can change everything overnight, especially with all the bullshit of the opposition which is worse than it’s ever been in all my decades.