Weaponization of the DOJ.

Gavin Newsome is lying about Trump weaponizing the DOJ.
Maybe there are some dumb people who will believe his excuses.
 

So, this is interesting to me for a few reasons.

For all our friends on the right who have been crying, "They're prosecuting Trump, that's DOJ weaponization," this is what actual weaponization looks like.

You have a U.S. Attorney speaking to jurors outside the grand jury room. You have prosecutors assuring jurors that they personally wouldn't bring charges without probable cause, which is textbook vouching. And apparently these same prosecutors felt they could dismiss jurors who were skeptical of the case because those jurors had previously heard the same case and returned a no bill.

It doesn't stop there. When ordered by the judge to provide the transcripts, the DOJ reportedly redacted some of the most damning portions.

One would think, and frankly expect, that misconduct this blatant would result not only in termination, but also a review of the attorneys' law licenses by the bar. Not here. Instead, the lead prosecutor was promoted to counsel for the Judiciary Committee.

A lawyer who misstated and misapplied the law will now be responsible for explaining the law to lawmakers.

That's quite something.
We know what weaponization looks like. They've been doing to Trump and his supporters for 10 years.
 
1781628975022.webp
 
The mass firings were done for the purpose of maximizing the DoJ's politicization under trump.
No, it was retribution. The next generation of employees wont gleefully jump onboard with large scale lawfare now. They will hear all the stories about the mass firings and they will want no part of it.
 
If you believe Biden and Obama weaponized the DOJ, wouldn't it be equally horrendous for Trump to do so? Wouldn't you want a neutral DOJ?
Sure, that is the final goal.

But that will never happen if Dems are unable or unwilling to admit how badly the DOJ/FBI was weaponized, ever since Trump started running in 2016. If they do not experience what lawfare is from the perspective of victims, why should they agree that it is a bad thing?

Trump was not the new broom that swept the DOJ clean in his first term, so the Obama holdovers kept the lawfare going without pause. Now he is purging those who are convinced that their vastly superior intellects should be allowed to use the power of the federal government to overturn or obstruct the will of the mass of "uneducated whites" who put Trump in office. Beauty part is that identification of them is easy. The ones who resign because Trump and are lionized on MSNOW, hate democracy and we are well rid of them.

Soften the Democratic Lawmaker resistance up with some prison time for senior officials. Then Vance or Rubio can implement common sense anti-weaponization regulations that will lead the American people to start trusting again.
 
I don't know what you want here. Trump went through the legal system and was not put in jail.

He then was elected by the people after being vindicated.
First you got the timeline backwards. He wasn't "vindicated" and then elected. He was elected,something to you apparently is vindication. That's a big difference.

Second, the way you frame this is telling. It's telling because I'm sure you wouldn't consider someone innocent altough a jury deemed them guilty merely because they avoided jailtime in any other context.
What do you hope to accomplish by this tirade about how terrible Trump is?
I didn't give a tirade, and it's not about Trump. It's about... you, and people like you.

It's about how Trump has made you into someone who doesn't have any standards beyond political affiliation when it comes to electing leaders.

It's about you deciding that laws, when they stand in the way of political goals can be ignored and even broken.

You have decided that everything is corrupted and therefore corruption doesn't matter.

It's an attitude that will linger long after Trump becomes a footnote in history.
More importantly, what do you suggest to fix weaponizing government if anything?
I already told you. I suggest that we all demand the law to be followed and when people but even more importantly the government breaks the law, that we expect their to be repercussions.

The OP started with a detailed account of prosecutors quite simply ignoring the rules governing the Grand Jury process.Thereby trampling on the constitutional rights of it's citizens when their actual freedom is on the line. And your entire argument seems to be. "Well they're all corrupt, so it can't be helped."

At the same time you pretend that supporting the guy that openly calls for that corruption has nothing to do with it.

The system being corrupt is not an inevitability, but it wil be when people don't really care if it is. And that's the choice you are advocating.
 

Trump Administration Shuttered a Criminal Probe Into Fraudster’s Clemency​

Mr. Trump’s unorthodox approach to clemency has spawned a seamy cottage industry in which lawyers, lobbyists and others with ties to the president have collected millions of dollars from pardon seekers who would not necessarily qualify for second chances under the Justice Department’s criteria for identifying and vetting worthy recipients.

One lobbyist was charged in March by Mr. Nocella’s office for attempting to violently extort $500,000 from a client who received a pardon from Mr. Trump last year.

The suppression of the investigation into Mr. Gentile’s commutation is another example of the Trump administration’s politicization of the Justice Department. It has abandoned cases against some of his allies, including former Mayor Eric Adams of New York, while targeting high-profile critics of the president, such as the former F.B.I. director
James B. Comey.

Here's another story that would be dominating the news cycle if it were not for the constant swirl of corruption and incompetence by the regime.
 
Back
Top Bottom