Weaponization of the DOJ.

[berg80]

I don't know what you want here. Trump went through the legal system and was not put in jail.

Nope. The two trials for the most egregious crimes he committed, the ones for which there was overwhelming evidence of his guilt, never began.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Everyone has a low opinion of lawyers idiot.

Even lawyers.

 

[berg80]

Everyone has a low opinion of lawyers idiot.

That is why lawyer jokes are so damn funny.

Try again.

Now you're just being intentionally obtuse. Or naturally stupid. It's hard to tell which it is but I'm leaning towards the latter.

 

[Rawley]

And ON TOP of crazy notions like the rule of law, the Constitution and Separation of Powers, Trump TOLD US he was going to do this.

"I am your retribution" he said. "This is a witchhunt". "The system is rigged against me". We all KNEW what was coming (even if we didn't expect it to be quite this blatant).

Then the useful idiots pretend this is all just normal stuff. Incredible. Not surprising, but incredible.

So what was the President's personal beef against these scumbag ICE protestors?

 

[Marener]

And how are democrats offering to fix the system?

Let me guess, nothing whatsoever.



Won't it be nice to get back in power so you can abuse a system without any accountability?

Wet dreams boys until then so that you can get even and then some!!!

There need to be repercussions for the prosecutors.

The judge is already weighing sanctions.

Bar associations should also have a chance to revoke their privileges (something which the DoJ is trying to make impossible).

Beyond that, there’s been talk about reforming the grand jury process. Andrew Weissman wrote an OpEd in the NYT suggesting this:

Congress can require that grand juries no longer be instructed that they can find a criminal charge based on mere probable cause. Instead, a higher factual standard, such as “clear and convincing” evidence — a standard sometimes applied in the civil law — should be necessary to vote in favor of a criminal charge. Such a law, modeled on the Justice Department’s internal guideline, would bridge the wide gap between the low-level burden that prosecutors have to meet for bringing an indictment and the highest burden under the law required for a criminal conviction.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Congress can require that grand juries no longer be instructed that they can find a criminal charge based on mere probable cause. Instead, a higher factual standard, such as “clear and convincing” evidence — a standard sometimes applied in the civil law — should be necessary to vote in favor of a criminal charge. Such a law, modeled on the Justice Department’s internal guideline, would bridge the wide gap between the low-level burden that prosecutors have to meet for bringing an indictment and the highest burden under the law required for a criminal conviction.

That would require a procedural law change and might get nuked by SCOTUS. The job of a grand jury is not to find qguit, but as a base step to find sufficient cause to proceed. Its like a group version of the affidavit for a search warrant being approved by a judge.

Another concept would be to make the DOJ truly independent, set up as an independent board like the Fed Reserve, with official terms, etc. But its a problem. After all Kennedy had his brother run it, and criticisms of the CLinton DOJ and ATF are well known.

 

[BlindBoo]

He then was elected by the people after being vindicated.

He was not vindicated.

 

[Marener]

That would require a procedural law change and might get nuked by SCOTUS. The job of a grand jury is not to find qguit, but as a base step to find sufficient cause to proceed. Its like a group version of the affidavit for a search warrant being approved by a judge.

Another concept would be to make the DOJ truly independent, set up as an independent board like the Fed Reserve, with official terms, etc. But it’s a problem. After all Kennedy had his brother run it, and criticisms of the CLinton DOJ and ATF are well known.

I believe that Congress has the authority to determine the rules of federal court so long as they don’t conflict with the constitution.

Currently the courts determine the rules but that is only because Congress delegated that authority to them.

At least that’s what I can figure out for now, definitely not an expert.

 

[cowboy fan]

Goose, meet Gander.

 

[JohnDB]

That's the point, it is not.

Prosecutoral abuse does exists. But it's rare... until now.

There's a quantitive diffrence between prosecutors not securing indictments 10 times or not doing so 500 times for instance.

Pretending they are the same is not a valid argument.

As for your remedy. How do you propose Congress to exercise control over assistent US attorneys. The only way we knoe this happened is because the GJ transcripts were released following real amd credible accusations of miscomduct prompting the judge to read those transcripts and findimg what he found so.troubling the transcripts were released to the defense.

Those transcripts are usually sealed, to judges, let alone Congress. You can't perform oversight over things you don't.know.

Ummmm
There have been SEVERAL, highly public cases of prosecutor abuse in Wisconsin.....
Including a Netflix AND HBO special covering the cases....
Then came the dumb kid with a rifle during the riots....and we got to see this misconduct in 4k.

Never mind the revolving door of criminals by the Prosecutor's office in several "sanctuary cities" all preferring riots to police....

And Kamala's own admitted abuse by prosecutions that were excessive.

So where I understand NOW that you are just now coming to knowledge of this issue....its been a thing for decades as to the Prosecutor's office across America and what has been happening.

We have NEEDED reform. Its NOT the only part of the DOJ needing some reform....
But Congress has been "busy"....NOT

 

[Zincwarrior]

I believe that Congress has the authority to determine the rules of federal court so long as they don’t conflict with the constitution.

Currently the courts determine the rules but that is only because Congress delegated that authority to them.

At least that’s what I can figure out for now, definitely not an expert.

Its originally enshrouded in the Fifth Amendment. HOWEVER, Congress enacted the exact procedural standards, so you are effectively correct.

 

[JohnDB]

That would require a procedural law change and might get nuked by SCOTUS. The job of a grand jury is not to find qguit, but as a base step to find sufficient cause to proceed. Its like a group version of the affidavit for a search warrant being approved by a judge.

Another concept would be to make the DOJ truly independent, set up as an independent board like the Fed Reserve, with official terms, etc. But its a problem. After all Kennedy had his brother run it, and criticisms of the CLinton DOJ and ATF are well known.

Just because you slap a label of "independent " or "non-partisan" on something doesn't make it so.

And those "independent commissions/committees" aka investigators are subjects of the Executive Branch....meaning they answer to the President.
John Bolton was just such a guy....clearance and everything....until he went too far with power running to his head.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Just because you slap a label of "independent " or "non-partisan" on something doesn't make it so.

And those "independent commissions/committees" aka investigators are subjects of the Executive Branch....meaning they answer to the President.

Unless Congress passes legislation circumventing the Executive with board appointments coming from them of course.

John Bolton was just such a guy....clearance and everything....until he went too far with power running to his head.

Not disagreeing.

 

[Votto]

He was not vindicated.

In your mind, no.

In the mind of voters, yes.

No jail sentences handed out for being Hitler I reckon.

 

[berg80]

And those "independent commissions/committees" aka investigators are subjects of the Executive Branch....meaning they answer to the President.

No previous DoJ has come under the complete control of the prez as trump's has. In part because if other prez's had given corrupt directives to the AG as trump has the AG would have refused to comply, resigned, or been fired. Remember the Saturday Night Massacre?

 

[berg80]

John Bolton was just such a guy....clearance and everything....until he went too far with power running to his head.

How so?

 

[JohnDB]

Unless Congress passes legislation circumventing the Executive with board appointments coming from them of course.

Not disagreeing.

Congress has the authority and mandate to hold other branches of the government accountable....

The famous impeachments of presidents doesn't necessarily have to be just presidents.....it holds true for Prosecutors, Judges and all sorts of people doing naughty things....including their own membership.

Any federal judge can be impeached....
Any federal prosecutor can be impeached.
Any federal employee whether hired, appointed, or elected can be impeached by congress.

 

[BlindBoo]

In your mind, no.

In the mind of voters, yes.

No jail sentences handed out for being Hitler I reckon.

He could have been vindicated by the courts or convicted. As it is now he is hiding behind a rule, but both of these federal cases were dismissed "without prejudice," meaning that the charges could technically be filed again at a later date.

 

[Votto]

He could have been vindicated by the courts or convicted. As it is now he is hiding behind a rule, but both of these federal cases were dismissed "without prejudice," meaning that the charges could technically be filed again at a later date.

Whatever

You failed.

Americans are tired of all the poo slinging.

Get results or shut the hell up!!

 

[JohnDB]

No previous DoJ has come under the complete control of the prez as trump's has. In part because if other prez's had given corrupt directives to the AG as trump has the AG would have refused to comply, resigned, or been fired. Remember the Saturday Night Massacre?

Usually, in times recently past, the president keeps his hands off to keep an appearance of propriety.....that hasn't really happened....Trump doesn't stand much on ceremony, tradition, or much of anything except his ego. But he is more honest than many we have had in the past. I'll give him that. Might not agree with everything he has done but he is more transparent and honest than others.

I'll refer you to Janet Reno and Clinton....she claimed to be independent....but the reality was something completely different from that obviously....especially when talking points were repeated verbatim by her on several occasions after following direct orders from Bill as to what to do, when, where, why, and how. Bush Jr. Wasnt any different....Kenneth Starr and John Bolton.....

How so?

Ken Starr was the inspiration for Bolton who went on fishing expeditions....international expeditions....
Then started trading secrets for secrets and became involved with pushing agendas.....

So....he has now been prosecuted and I cant remember what sentence he got. Couple years....not much.