4 ms·

I don't think it matters who appointed him, or which DOJ, or that he asked to. The guy has been working this case for years. Why has it been taking so long? He

I don't think it matters who appointed him, or which DOJ, or that he asked to. The guy has been working this case for years. Why has it been taking so long? He concluded his investigation with a very generous plea deal, which thankfully was rejected in the last minute. Get someone new and more importantly, independent. Merrick Garland already has his biased hands on this, he should recuse himself from any involvement in this case. Can you imagine the outrage if Trumps' AG was appointing special prosecutors to oversee criminal cases of his children?

maxbond 3y ago
> Why has it been taking so long? These things take time. > Get someone new and more importantly, independent. The entire point of being a special prosecutor is to have more independence. It is absolutely impossible for Garland to appoint someone perceived as more independent than someone appointed by Barr. If Garland fired Barr's prosecutor from the case and appointed someone else, people would interpret it as interference (reasonably!). > Merrick Garland already has his biased hands on this, he should recuse himself from any involvement in this case. Appointing a special prosecutor is pretty much equivalent. > Can you imagine the outrage if Trumps' AG was appointing special prosecutors to oversee criminal cases of his children? If Trump were president and his children were under criminal investigation, appointing a special prosecutor would be the correct thing to do. There would be outrage if he didn't.
- Eumenes 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - maxbond 3y ago
    The commentary I've heard from prosecutors in the media, I believe from the Lawfare podcast but I can't swear to it, is that this gun charge is so minor it wouldn't normally be charged unless it was in combination with something worth prosecutor's time. (He lied on a piece of paperwork to get the gun about doing drugs. There's no evidence afaik that the gun was used in a crime. It's a federal crime, sure, but that is just not a huge deal.) Engaging in consensual commercial sex is generally not viewed as being worth the time of a federal prosecutor. Same for using drugs. Hunter Biden's influence pedaling business was sketchy and gross, but as far as anyone can tell - not illegal. (Not an endorsement, he seems like a piece of shit.) If I did those things, I would anticipate being in hot water with my local PD. I don't think the federal government would be impressed enough to even pass it on to the local PD. I wouldn't be surprised if I could take a plea deal and do community service, but I'm not a lawyer, who knows. The tax evasion is probably the most serious crime. Maybe you think someone should go to prison for that, I don't really see the value in punishing them over and above getting the taxes paid and maybe banning him from running a company for 5 years or whatever.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  This is a response to a flagged & dead sibling comment that, while wrong, I think is worth addressing and doesn't deserve flagging: > Special prosecutor's aren't supposed to work for the government No, that’s literally who they work for. > They are generally retired lawyers or judges. Since the expiration of the law providing for independent counsels in 1999, there have been 7 special counsels appointed under DOJ regulations. 0 have been retired lawyers (all have been active lawyers in private or government practice), 0 have been past (retired or otherwise) judges, and 3 of the 7 have been sitting US Attorneys at the time appointed, and 3 of the 7 were former US Attorneys (the one that was never a US Attorney was a former state AG.)
ceejayoz 3y ago
> Can you imagine the outrage if Trumps' AG was appointing special prosecutors to oversee criminal cases of his children? Well, that's a good question. How outraged were you when he messed with those cases? https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/20/nyregion/trump-geoffrey-berman-fired-sdny.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/20/nyregion/trump-geoffrey-b...
- Eumenes 3y ago
  That's bad too. The entire state of NY DOJ has been focused on Trump since 2016 However, its ironic that alot of the stuff is coming out a year before the 2024 elections.
  - mrguyorama 3y ago
    It's not irony, most of the cases NY started were pretty unreasonable and more than a stretch, and have not gone very far, while the current stuff took this long for all the legal machines to get through, because it's really obnoxious to read through mountains of boxes of classified documents to figure out how bad it is, and attempting to claw back some partially destroyed evidence and flip important witnesses. This is how long a trial of an important person takes. Everything you've said has been less accurate than the headlines you've cribbed them from.
    - dragonwriter 3y ago
      > It's not irony, most of the cases NY started were pretty unreasonable and more than a stretch, and have not gone very far You mean, like, the guilty on all counts result in the Trump Org tax fraud case or the abuse of charity funds for personal political interests case against Donald Trump, his children, and the Trunp Foundation that ended with millions in liability, various bans, and the disbanding of the Trump Foundation? Or something else that was a stretch that didn't go far?
      - mrguyorama 3y ago
        Well yes, there were successes, but a financial liability has not proven to be something that actually concerns Trump or his cabal, explicitly because his supporters seem to see zero problem with paying for it. Those findings are only justice for the minor crimes they committed, not the stuff that actually matters. Tax fraud and charity fraud are bad things to do, but not exactly the slam dunk that "Going to prison for attempting to overthrow the government of the USA" would be.
dragonwriter 3y ago
> Can you imagine the outrage if Trumps' AG was appointing special prosecutors to oversee criminal cases of his children? No, because I think Trump’s political opponents understand that legally: (1) that's who, under the law, appoints Special Counsel, and (2) the appointment of Special Counsel is the legal mechanism for minimizing political influence in a particular sensitive criminal investigation, so its good when that happens. And we don't have to speculate much, because the DOJ under Trump did appoint Special Counsel, and I remember mostly positive outcry from Trump's opponents and negative outcry from his supporters when Trump's (acting) AG appointed Special Counsel to investigate Trump himself. (There was negative outcry at the later political interference with the Special Counsel’s report by Trump’s later AG, but that’s a different issue.) The “well, if the roles were reversed” counterfactual style of argument is usually a dumb way of the speaker just injecting unsubstantiated speculation to do whataboutism without facts, but its at its worst when the proposed counterfactual or something very close to it actually happened, and the treatment was exactly the opposite than what the argument presupposes.
mrguyorama 3y ago
>Can you imagine the outrage if Trumps' AG You mean like how at least a few of the judges involved in Trumps many cases were directly appointed by him?
- Eumenes 3y ago
  they should of recused themselves too and refused to oversee the cases ... I think Jeff Sessions did actually.
cardiffspaceman 3y ago
It took 4 years for Hauptmann to lose his life after the Lindbergh baby disappeared. The investigation was massively invested in. I use this as a guideline for how long I expect such things to take. https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/lindbergh-kidnapping https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/lindbergh-kidnappin...

maxbond 3y ago

> Why has it been taking so long? These things take time. > Get someone new and more importantly, independent. The entire point of being a special prosecutor is to have more independence. It is absolutely impossible for Garland to appoint someone perceived as more independent than someone appointed by Barr. If Garland fired Barr's prosecutor from the case and appointed someone else, people would interpret it as interference (reasonably!). > Merrick Garland already has his biased hands on this, he should recuse himself from any involvement in this case. Appointing a special prosecutor is pretty much equivalent. > Can you imagine the outrage if Trumps' AG was appointing special prosecutors to oversee criminal cases of his children? If Trump were president and his children were under criminal investigation, appointing a special prosecutor would be the correct thing to do. There would be outrage if he didn't.

Eumenes 3y ago
[flagged]
- maxbond 3y ago
  The commentary I've heard from prosecutors in the media, I believe from the Lawfare podcast but I can't swear to it, is that this gun charge is so minor it wouldn't normally be charged unless it was in combination with something worth prosecutor's time. (He lied on a piece of paperwork to get the gun about doing drugs. There's no evidence afaik that the gun was used in a crime. It's a federal crime, sure, but that is just not a huge deal.) Engaging in consensual commercial sex is generally not viewed as being worth the time of a federal prosecutor. Same for using drugs. Hunter Biden's influence pedaling business was sketchy and gross, but as far as anyone can tell - not illegal. (Not an endorsement, he seems like a piece of shit.) If I did those things, I would anticipate being in hot water with my local PD. I don't think the federal government would be impressed enough to even pass it on to the local PD. I wouldn't be surprised if I could take a plea deal and do community service, but I'm not a lawyer, who knows. The tax evasion is probably the most serious crime. Maybe you think someone should go to prison for that, I don't really see the value in punishing them over and above getting the taxes paid and maybe banning him from running a company for 5 years or whatever.
dragonwriter 3y ago
This is a response to a flagged & dead sibling comment that, while wrong, I think is worth addressing and doesn't deserve flagging: > Special prosecutor's aren't supposed to work for the government No, that’s literally who they work for. > They are generally retired lawyers or judges. Since the expiration of the law providing for independent counsels in 1999, there have been 7 special counsels appointed under DOJ regulations. 0 have been retired lawyers (all have been active lawyers in private or government practice), 0 have been past (retired or otherwise) judges, and 3 of the 7 have been sitting US Attorneys at the time appointed, and 3 of the 7 were former US Attorneys (the one that was never a US Attorney was a former state AG.)

ceejayoz 3y ago

> Can you imagine the outrage if Trumps' AG was appointing special prosecutors to oversee criminal cases of his children? Well, that's a good question. How outraged were you when he messed with those cases? https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/20/nyregion/trump-geoffrey-berman-fired-sdny.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/20/nyregion/trump-geoffrey-b...

Eumenes 3y ago
That's bad too. The entire state of NY DOJ has been focused on Trump since 2016 However, its ironic that alot of the stuff is coming out a year before the 2024 elections.
- mrguyorama 3y ago
  It's not irony, most of the cases NY started were pretty unreasonable and more than a stretch, and have not gone very far, while the current stuff took this long for all the legal machines to get through, because it's really obnoxious to read through mountains of boxes of classified documents to figure out how bad it is, and attempting to claw back some partially destroyed evidence and flip important witnesses. This is how long a trial of an important person takes. Everything you've said has been less accurate than the headlines you've cribbed them from.
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    > It's not irony, most of the cases NY started were pretty unreasonable and more than a stretch, and have not gone very far You mean, like, the guilty on all counts result in the Trump Org tax fraud case or the abuse of charity funds for personal political interests case against Donald Trump, his children, and the Trunp Foundation that ended with millions in liability, various bans, and the disbanding of the Trump Foundation? Or something else that was a stretch that didn't go far?
    - mrguyorama 3y ago
      Well yes, there were successes, but a financial liability has not proven to be something that actually concerns Trump or his cabal, explicitly because his supporters seem to see zero problem with paying for it. Those findings are only justice for the minor crimes they committed, not the stuff that actually matters. Tax fraud and charity fraud are bad things to do, but not exactly the slam dunk that "Going to prison for attempting to overthrow the government of the USA" would be.

dragonwriter 3y ago

> Can you imagine the outrage if Trumps' AG was appointing special prosecutors to oversee criminal cases of his children? No, because I think Trump’s political opponents understand that legally: (1) that's who, under the law, appoints Special Counsel, and (2) the appointment of Special Counsel is the legal mechanism for minimizing political influence in a particular sensitive criminal investigation, so its good when that happens. And we don't have to speculate much, because the DOJ under Trump did appoint Special Counsel, and I remember mostly positive outcry from Trump's opponents and negative outcry from his supporters when Trump's (acting) AG appointed Special Counsel to investigate Trump himself. (There was negative outcry at the later political interference with the Special Counsel’s report by Trump’s later AG, but that’s a different issue.) The “well, if the roles were reversed” counterfactual style of argument is usually a dumb way of the speaker just injecting unsubstantiated speculation to do whataboutism without facts, but its at its worst when the proposed counterfactual or something very close to it actually happened, and the treatment was exactly the opposite than what the argument presupposes.

mrguyorama 3y ago

>Can you imagine the outrage if Trumps' AG You mean like how at least a few of the judges involved in Trumps many cases were directly appointed by him?

Eumenes 3y ago
they should of recused themselves too and refused to oversee the cases ... I think Jeff Sessions did actually.

cardiffspaceman 3y ago

It took 4 years for Hauptmann to lose his life after the Lindbergh baby disappeared. The investigation was massively invested in. I use this as a guideline for how long I expect such things to take. https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/lindbergh-kidnapping https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/lindbergh-kidnappin...