Lord Long Rod
Diamond Member
- Jan 17, 2023
- 7,706
- 8,132
- 2,138
- Banned
- #1
With the trial of the ridiculous Trump documents case now scheduled for next spring, one must wonder about the DOJ's rule about not prosecuting political defendants during elections. No, said trial would not fall within the general election technically. But it will occur during the primary season. Thus, while Judge Cannon did not extend the trial indefinitely like Trump wanted, she put it on the calendar at a point in time where it will be clear to all but the most close-minded leftist that the prosecution is merely a political prosecution brought solely to effect the outcome of the 2024 presidential election. This both benefits Trump and exposes the prosecution for what it really is.
Let us not forget that there is a remedy for the document issue in the Presidential Papers act. The remedy is civil. The Archives merely has to bring a civil action to adjudicate which documents it is entitled to have, and then it can be enforced as a civil matter. But that is not what the Biden DOJ did. They did not even really attempt to go that route. Instead, they came out with guns blazing, sending in armed FBI goons and making a grand display of it in the media. Only the most empty headed leftist clowns do not recognize this as a political witch hunt. It is self-evident.
The DOJ has its rule on election season prosecutions, I suspect, to maintain the integrity and credibility of its office as a non-partisan seeker of truth and justice (and to protect Democrat candidates). It is not going to matter than the general election is not, technically, underway next spring when the trial takes place. Most people will see this as over-technical parsing. In a very real way, the general election IS underway, and most certainly will be at the time of the documents trial. But, sure, let the DOJ go ahead and proceed with its frivolous charges. Even if they convict Trump it will not change the fact that they are interfering with the 2024 election outcome, and it will further undermine the DOJ as a legitimate institution.
During the Trump years the scumbag Dems and MSM used to quip that "the DOJ is not Trump's personal attorneys". It is funny how their words then apply so much better now to Biden and his DOJ than they ever did during the Trump years.
www.lawfaremedia.org
Let us not forget that there is a remedy for the document issue in the Presidential Papers act. The remedy is civil. The Archives merely has to bring a civil action to adjudicate which documents it is entitled to have, and then it can be enforced as a civil matter. But that is not what the Biden DOJ did. They did not even really attempt to go that route. Instead, they came out with guns blazing, sending in armed FBI goons and making a grand display of it in the media. Only the most empty headed leftist clowns do not recognize this as a political witch hunt. It is self-evident.
The DOJ has its rule on election season prosecutions, I suspect, to maintain the integrity and credibility of its office as a non-partisan seeker of truth and justice (and to protect Democrat candidates). It is not going to matter than the general election is not, technically, underway next spring when the trial takes place. Most people will see this as over-technical parsing. In a very real way, the general election IS underway, and most certainly will be at the time of the documents trial. But, sure, let the DOJ go ahead and proceed with its frivolous charges. Even if they convict Trump it will not change the fact that they are interfering with the 2024 election outcome, and it will further undermine the DOJ as a legitimate institution.
During the Trump years the scumbag Dems and MSM used to quip that "the DOJ is not Trump's personal attorneys". It is funny how their words then apply so much better now to Biden and his DOJ than they ever did during the Trump years.
The Justice Department's Policy Against Election Interference is Open to Abuse
The ambiguity of the Justice Department’s election policy is particularly concerning in light of hints from Attorney General William Barr about a possible October
www.lawfaremedia.org
