excalibur
Diamond Member
- Mar 19, 2015
- 18,618
- 35,494
- 2,290
This is one hack political appointee, a Biden grifter.
Weâve heard a lot about crime in Washington D.C. Both because crime has spiked in the city, and because the D.C. local government is filled with a bunch of prosecution-averse politicians.
Two high-profile crimesâone against a Minnesota Congresswoman named Angie Craig, and another against an aide to Rand Paulâhave upped the visibility of D.C.âs crime problem. After Craigâs assault, Congress vetoed a criminal justice reform measure that the D.C. government was pushing.
All this leaves the impression that the real problem in Washington D.C. is a Leftist local government that coddles criminals.
That impression is wrong, or at least incomplete. It turns out that a big piece of the puzzle is Joe Bidenâs choice for U.S. Attorney in the District.
Washington D.C. is, ultimately, run by the federal government. There is nominal local government, but unlike the several states, the ultimate responsibility lies with the federal government. It was set up that way by the founders to (try to) ensure that the government itself didnât become an overwhelming political actor with its own interests. Technically the states run the District through the federal government, which is of course run by Congress and the President.
This is why there is always talk about DC statehoodâessentially overruling the Constitution and making the federal government itself a state.
This is all background to understanding this: the U.S. Attorney, not a local District Attorney, is the prosecutor for the District. He is a Joe Biden appointee.
And he doesnât prosecute crimes.
Or, should I say, he refuses to prosecute 2/3rds of all crimes charged in the District. Thatâs some âprosecutorial discretion.â
As you might imagine, the Metro Police arenât happy. They catch the bad guys, and Bidenâs appointee lets them go.
Of course, Congress was right to reject the ridiculously woke âreformâ of the cityâs criminal code, but if the prosecutor refuses to prosecute it really doesnât make a bit of difference whether something is illegal or not.
Bidenâs appointee is Matthew Graves, and he insists he is doing his job. Iâm not quite sure that he knows that his job is to prosecute criminals, though.
...
Weâve heard a lot about crime in Washington D.C. Both because crime has spiked in the city, and because the D.C. local government is filled with a bunch of prosecution-averse politicians.
Two high-profile crimesâone against a Minnesota Congresswoman named Angie Craig, and another against an aide to Rand Paulâhave upped the visibility of D.C.âs crime problem. After Craigâs assault, Congress vetoed a criminal justice reform measure that the D.C. government was pushing.
All this leaves the impression that the real problem in Washington D.C. is a Leftist local government that coddles criminals.
That impression is wrong, or at least incomplete. It turns out that a big piece of the puzzle is Joe Bidenâs choice for U.S. Attorney in the District.
Washington D.C. is, ultimately, run by the federal government. There is nominal local government, but unlike the several states, the ultimate responsibility lies with the federal government. It was set up that way by the founders to (try to) ensure that the government itself didnât become an overwhelming political actor with its own interests. Technically the states run the District through the federal government, which is of course run by Congress and the President.
This is why there is always talk about DC statehoodâessentially overruling the Constitution and making the federal government itself a state.
This is all background to understanding this: the U.S. Attorney, not a local District Attorney, is the prosecutor for the District. He is a Joe Biden appointee.
And he doesnât prosecute crimes.
Or, should I say, he refuses to prosecute 2/3rds of all crimes charged in the District. Thatâs some âprosecutorial discretion.â
As you might imagine, the Metro Police arenât happy. They catch the bad guys, and Bidenâs appointee lets them go.
As the District grapples with rising crime and increasing attention from federal lawmakers over public safety issues, a startling statistic emerged in recent weeks.
Last year, federal prosecutors in the Districtâs U.S. attorneyâs office chose not to prosecute 67 percent of those arrested by police officers in cases that would have been tried in D.C. Superior Court.
That figure, first reported earlier this month on the substack DC Crime Facts, nearly doubled from 2015, when prosecutors in the U.S. Attorneyâs office declined to prosecute 35 percent of such cases.
The increased number of declined cases has sparked frustration among city leaders who are already under a national microscope from members of Congress for their crime fighting efforts. The House Committee on Oversight and Accountability is scheduled to hold a hearing Wednesday where Republicans will examine management of D.C., particularly on crime and safety. Earlier this month, the Senate joined the House of Representatives in voting to reject an overhaul of the cityâs criminal code, in part because it called for reducing penalties for certain crimes, including carjacking.
Of course, Congress was right to reject the ridiculously woke âreformâ of the cityâs criminal code, but if the prosecutor refuses to prosecute it really doesnât make a bit of difference whether something is illegal or not.
Bidenâs appointee is Matthew Graves, and he insists he is doing his job. Iâm not quite sure that he knows that his job is to prosecute criminals, though.
...