The Jack smith report does more than outline Trump's crimes; it lays bare the delays inherent in the system - and if we don’t address them - no AG will be able to hold future despots accountable.
I've been tired of the people who claim to want democracy, but who then want people immediately locked up. Who claim to hate disinformation, but then spread it themselves. Who are not lawyers and don't bother to learn about how our legal system works. This was a great explanation of how things actually happen and how long it takes for them to happen. I also agree that there needs to be some time spent examining our legal system and making reforms but I don't think that'll happen during the next four years.
Trump is not the cause of our democracy's demise. He is the outcome of the demise that began with Reagan and continued through all subsequent presidents. Corruption killed our democracy a long time ago. We're just now seeing the terminal stage of decay with Trump's victory. What do you think happens when all politicians are corrupt? What do you think happens when politicians become lazy, complacent, and gullible? What do you think happens when the secretary of HHS does not know how Medicare works or how health services are priced? What do you think happens when our high school grads can barely do 4th-grade level math? What do you think happens when corporations are declared as citizens? I am 47 years old, and most of my friends have no idea what the Supreme Court or FTC is. They don't know what criminal immunity means. My 26 yo employee does not understand what democracy means, I swear. All of Trump's wins are a testament to the weakness, incompetence, and corruption of the Democratic party. How did Biden say on national TV that Trump was a threat to Democracy and yet did nothing about it with his newly granted criminal immunity? I'll tell you: Biden is a corrupt coward who is afraid of Trump and MAGA.
Liberal Democracy requires education, civic participation, guardrails against corruption, appreciation, strong, decisive leadership (think FDR and Abe Lincoln), and continued engagement. When you leave your lunch unattended, someone will steal it. If you don't continue advocating for your freedom, someone will take it away. Americans maybe don't deserve Democracy. I come from Iraq. And I remember one day, my mom was criticizing America for toppling Saddam Hussein. I remember her saying, "America is so stupid because they think Iraqis will thrive in Democracy; they don't understand that we need a strong authoritarian man." In my heart of hearts, I strongly believe that many people in America, especially the very wealthy, deep inside, do not believe in Liberal Democracy. They don't believe that everyone is equal or that wealth distribution should be more equitable. It's like the squid games. Some influential, wealthy people in America believe that most Americans are dumb, useless, and ugly and, hence, not deserving of rights or money.
I agree completely. Trump is the culmination of the neoliberal age that began with the Powell memo and was first implemented under Reagan. It gave us unsustainable wealth inequality, the rise of the billionaire class, and deregulation that contributed to financial collapses and global warming. Education budgets were gutted along with the middle class, the result being the ignorant and gullible MAGA base. With Trump we face full-on fascist White Christian nationalist authoritarianism, but it is a continuation of the collapse that has been going on for the last half century or so.
Also, Philip, remember that Trump (like any other uber-wealthy, power-hungry businessman, wanted to enter politics and become president) and so he initially approached Dems. They were like, "Nope." He then approached the GOP, and they said, "Nope." One day, Trump was at some event, and guess who he ran into? He ran into some Heritage Foundation donors or high-ranking members, and that's when the match in heaven was made: EUREKA! The corporate-fascist-Christian-alliance gang found their agent: A Rich, celebrity-status, charismatic outsider who is popular, skillfully deceptive, and fearless. Trump did not choose MAGA. MAGA chose him, and he turned out to be the best pick. And the rest is history. Trump smoked the Dems and the GOP in 5 minutes.
I agree that many believe might makes right—both those with the might and those on the right who borrow might from the shadows cast. Many of those in the US following this path fail to realize the danger in which they place America, and the rest of the world. Trump’s oligarchic path cements a classist /caste approach in which their supporters fail to realize how far down the rungs of influence they fall. the oligarchs fail to consider what occurs under a consumerism model rife with the armed and angry once they can no longer afford to consume.
I also had a patient who is 56 yo who flat out told me that he is voting for Trump because he does not want cowards leading the nation, and he believed that the democrats were cowards. In his mind, a fearless autocrat is more worthy of respect and leadership than a cowardly but righteous democrat. I think a lot of people share that belief. No one likes to have a spineless leader. Biden was spineless, so was Garland, and so was Harris. It's a very bad trait and it turns people off.
And please tell me what Biden accomplished. He killed thousands of Ukrainians and gave the resource-rich part of Ukraine to Russia, and he mass murdered over 40,000 Palestinian women and children. And yet, could not do anything about America's domestic enemies (Trump and Musk). Musk would not even show up at his scheduled meeting with SEC lawyers. They showed up at his house, and he was not there....lol. In fact, if you really want to be realistic, you would see that the years from 2021-2024 were de facto Trump's second term; that's when the SCOTUS incapacitated Fed agencies and reversed Roe, so that's when Trump's rule was in full effect. That's how Trump blocked Biden's student debt plan. It's also how he blocked the ban on non-competes. That's how he communicated with Putin and Netanyahu to give them the green light to invade and make Biden look weak. Trump was running the USA from outside the white house. 2025 is Trump's 3d term. The only good thing about Biden was Lina Khan. That's his one redeeming act, and in all honestly, Warren deserves the credit for it, not Biden.
Oh, Biden is def spineless. It's why he did not reopen Mueller's report to start there. It is also Y he did not fire Garland after the unnecessary Hur investigation. It's also Y he could not control Netanyahu and instead gave him unlimited money and weapons. Biden is a coward. He only has balls when it comes to the genocide of the Palestinians.
For what it's worth, you're not alone in your assessment of the folks who have commented about these cases in social media. If I had a dollar every time I read "Lock him up", "Sanction the lawyers making this stupid argument," "Jim Jordan didn't honor his subpoena," I'd have enough for several mortgage payments. And the same question asked umpteen times in a Twitter thread -- if it wasn't about bail, it was about the number of alternate jurors in the NY criminal trial [the maximum is 6 -- NY Crim Pro L § 270.30(1)], the sentence for criminal contempt....
Trump's attorneys were doing what good criminal defense attorneys should do and the procedures were available to any defendant. Of course he had money to pay his attorneys, and his attorneys were procedurally creative; Henry Homeowner would be unlikely to have similar resources and counsel. If one hadn't noticed, the criminal justice system going back to 16th century England has always favored those with money and influence. If you didn't have influence (and money), you could find yourself being the subject of a bill of attainder in the House of Lords. Trump's cases were at the extreme end of the "money-no money" spectrum. The only difference between Trump's cases and those of the merely rich criminals is that the pernicious effect of money and political influence was made plain to see.
The legal commentariat occasionally was unimpressive. A recent example: a presenter on YouTube said that if Trump received an unconditional discharge as his sentence in the NY criminal case, Alvin Bragg should appeal the sentence. It took me 2 minutes on Google to find the relevant NY statute, 3 minutes to decide that the presenter was flat out wrong, and 4 minutes to type a comment to that effect. As far as I know, that particular video wasn't played again.
How many times did we hear from the "experts" that Jim Jordan should be prosecuted for contempt of Congress, Jordan having ignored the subpoena from the J6 Committee? Apparently no one bothered to look at 2 USC §194; the facts underlying the contempt citation have to be certified by the Speaker to the US Attorney. The likelihood that the Speaker (McCarthy or Johnson) would do so was so close to zero as to be beyond human comprehension. But no one bothered to explain this, leaving the public confused and angry.
I haven't read Jack Smith's report, but I'll do so with AG's analysis at hand. As I watched the two prosecutions over the past 2 years, I had some inkling of some of the issues described by Smith and explained by AG. (I wasn't clairvoyant; I had been a prosecutor for +25 years.) I didn't have "FBI reluctance" on my bingo card though.
Right on. It always amazed me how long judges can squat on a case. I am a Doctor, and if I get labs and imaging results and I squat on them for political purposes, I get sued, and my medical license gets suspended. Why do judges sleep on cases for eons with no standards regarding how long it should take to issue a goddam ruling? One of the few good things Trump did was expose how rotten the justice system is. There should be a new rule for judges: hear the facts, and you have 4 weeks to issue a ruling or get disbarred. Another issue is how judges can disqualify prosecutors based on irrelevant matters to avoid discussing the legal facts. So what if Willis slept with the prosecutor? She's not a judge, so where's the conflict of interest? Why is the court more involved with the prosecutor's sex life as opposed to the case presented to them? The same goes for how Cannon randomly said, "Yeah, you're not legal, and neither is your funding," which she did after squatting on the case for months. The response of the legal scholars was equally baffling; for example, after Cannon's ruling, you'd expect an immediate backlash from the legal community. Nope, it took months for legal experts to slam Cannon. It took forever for Garland to criticize her ruling, and even when they finally criticized her, it was super gentle....like they'd say she was "wrong"....I am thinking WTF? Why is no one pointing out the obvious: SHE'S A TRUMP AGENT AND SHE'S CORRUPT. Not a single legal scholar called her out. I am guessing because people fear Trump. So, not just our laws are bad, but so is the legal profession. Lawyers turned out to be corrupt, apathetic, incompetent, or cowardly. The legal profession gets the privilege of regulating every other profession and ruling us, yet no one seems to be able to regulate the legal profession itself. Trump proved to us that the legal profession does not deserve the privilege it gets, and the people need to reign in and regulate that rotten and overrated profession. They should have the same standards as Doctors. Where is the ENFORCABLE ETHICS CODE? Where is the channel that the public can use to file complaints against federal judges like Cannon formally? There must be channels to file complaints against lawyers and judges committing legal malpractice. Trump taught us a lot of things. He taught us that most Americans are apathetic and clueless. He taught us that both parties are weak and corrupt. He taught us that the justice system is made for rich people and is rotten to the core. He taught us that the Constitution does not bar convicted felons from becoming presidents. He taught us that Democracy is a weak form of governance incapable of defending itself. Seriously though, we need to torch America's legal profession. That profession is killing us and serving crony ubercapitalists. Next time a bomb explodes, I hope it's in Harvard Law School.
"It always amazed me how long judges can squat on a case."
====
I can't speak about the practice in every state or in the federal courts, but I can speak about practice in Delaware. Fresh out of law school, I was a law clerk for a justice on the state supreme court. When a justice was assigned to write an opinion, the case was put on his assignment list, and the opinion had to be done within 90 days. Woe be to any law clerk who happened to be lackadaisical as the justice had to explain to the chief justice why the opinion in X v. Y wasn't ready by day 90. The current policy, part of the Judicial Branch Operating Procedures, is even tougher: a judge who misses the particular deadline (including extensions of time) can be hauled before the state Court on the Judiciary (the disciplinary body for state judges).
When did I see a judge referred to the Court on the Judiciary because of what amounts to neglect of duty? I haven’t; I simply pointed out case decision deadlines existed and there was now a mechanism to enforce those deadlines. One doesn’t have to be driven to Tyburn to know that criminal acts will be punished; awareness of the scaffold at Tyburn is enough to ensure compliance. The same result obtains in the context of case decision deadlines. Knowing that you, a judge, could be facing a bench of five other judges called upon to assess your conduct is sufficient to ensure good behavior.
Lol. I’ve had 1st hand experience with bad judges in two US states and know several people that have had the same or similar experiences in others. This is over the course of (x) 50 years and it just doesn’t happen the way you’ve described. You have a cite for these so called “deadlines” ?
In a light most favorable, the ‘process’ provided in complaints against a Judge via a Judicial Conduct Board is like an administrative proceeding without an APA - if - it ever gets by the screening attorney. There are writs of Prohibition, Mandamus to Compel and Review even Certiorari you can bring a Declarator in some instances an injunction
There are judges that have resigned; a few have been impeached and one of them was actually prosecuted, whom GI Joe recently ‘pardoned’.
There’s dilatory vexation charges that may be brought against lawyers by motion on notice with prior demand to recede but there’s nothing like that with judges.
At the Federal orbit you can complain to the Circuit Court but it’s confidential and that ought to tell you something right there.
Well, we need new rules for the Feds. Oral arguments heard. The clock should start ticking for 4 weeks, then shit or get off the pot and go on probation to receive training on how to consult experts and make a dam ruling timely. Delayed justice is denied justice. Trump proved this beautifully. The standards should be based on the issues at hand: Say the question before the court is: "Is appointment and funding of Smith legal?".....ok, this ruling should take 24 hrs.. the 11th circuit should be able to issue a ruling the next day saying "We r baffled by this question. the fact that the special counsel appeared at the court and we are sure he is paid for his work proves that the answer is yes and yes, and we would like to refer Cannon to the ethics committee to reassess her suitability for the bench and whether she is qualified because we cannot see her ruling as anything but an illegal delay tactic that harms the public interest, which she took an oath to protect".....But nope...., it turns out the 11th circuit is more corrupt than Cannon. And NO ONE in the media, NOT a single legal scholar, mentioned that it is HUGELY suspect that the 11th circuit court is squatting on this, as though it's a question as complicated as analyzing the cosmic black hole. ....obviously, the public is being played, and the Trump fix is in.
People Did file complaints about Cannon to the 11th circuit. So many that the 11th circuit blocked anymore complaints. So the people were shut down because the 11th circuit said they would no longer entertain any complaints so Stop complaining
Also, remember when a professional harms the public, it's a joke to file a complaint with the accused professional; they'll ignore it. I am a Doctor. If I do something wrong with my patient, do you think the patient will file the complaint at my office? OF course not. My office will say, "Thank you, and we are sorry. We will consider your grievance. My assistant will then trash the letter." But the legal profession set up a system called the Medical Board where a patient could, in 5 minutes, file a report online detailing my supposed wrongdoing....and before you know it, the medical board is harassing the crap out of me, most of the time unfairly. I think you misunderstood me: I meant that the American public must have a formal channel to formally complain against Cannon, 5th, and 11th circuits so that the complaint lands in a separate independent legal, ethical/malpractice board. This board would be geographically and legally separate from the courts or the judges and should be able to impose financial and legal penalties to deter unethical behavior. Who is going to fine Cannon? Who is going to disbar her or suspend her license? No one. This is a joke.
😵💫I knew a lot of this via your podcasts, & it is sad that so many people just blame AG Garland without talking any of this into account. Comes down to media eh? If YOU found all this out why wasn't this reported everywhere so people could understand, but then again, would they read/listen and would they believe, and would they let the facts get on the way of what they want to tell as a narrative that suits them ⁉️
Thank you for the educational post. So basically, the DOJ's efforts were stalled at every step because of a set of rules and laws that seem to be benefiting corrupt governance. Whoever wrote the rules and regulations must have been rooting for a corrupt executive, whether Trump or anyone else. Also, it appears Trump had his admirers at every level, including the J6 committee, which perhaps explains why they delayed handing over their info. None of these systematic problems is new, so why has no one attempted to identify and fix them? I guess no one is incentivized to fix anything if they are corrupt themselves. The corrupt system is made for someone like Trump. By the way, does anyone know why the DOJ did not indict Trump for obstruction of justice from day one based on the recommendation of Robert Mueller?
Okay, all I want to know is, is the statute of limitations clock paused while the felon is in office? Can he be arrested at 12:01 pm on January 20, 2029 and tried for the outstanding charges? No, I absolutely don't care that he'd be 82; I don't care if he's in poor health or demented. He broke the laws in way they've never been broken before, and the message has to be sent, loud and clear: Anyone who tries it again, we're coming for you, no matter how long it takes.
I get all the reasoning for delay, and your well written piece chronicles the exasperation well, however - why only criminal proceedings?
Maybe it's 20/20 hindsight, but why didn't they bring a Federal 14sec3 case as a civil case? (perhaps in addition to the criminal cases, but as a first step to protect the office and the constitution from the replay we're all about to see if the criminal cases failed)?
After Congress failed, 14sec3 was the only thing that could have kept him out of office. It seems like hubris to be so reliant on only a political solution for that if he truly is a clear and present danger, I mean, there is no 'if' of course he is. Why risk failure?
In a civil case, you're not depriving someone of their liberty, so in terms of proof, you don't have to adhere to beyond a reasonable doubt, but preponderance of the evidence. You don't have to have first hand witnesses, and can apply inference (common sense) to fact finding.
The plain language of 14sec3 could not be a better fit to what he did. Why has the 14sec3 approach been so discounted from the get go?
It should have never been brought in a State Case, but could have succeeded federally.
The insurrection was the core issue we all wanted answered, and should have been done immediately.
The SC decided it should make law instead of just interpreting law. Shouldn't have ever taken up the cases, ruling against an appellate courts decision and in so doing made themselves judge and jury for those cases.🤨
however, if you read their Anderson opinion with a fine tooth comb, it's not definitive about 14sec3- the main objection to anderson was that it was brought in a state court. So bring it in a federal court and see what they say? no?
in anycase, if you'd like to do a zoom or something, I'd really appreciate your time - my contact info is on the complaints, but my email is joealterinc@gmail.com
I address a lot of that there, however the questions before the court tee up a set of threshold questions/issues for the dissenting opinions to be heard. Remember they did not even opine on that portion because they were outside the subject matter of the case in Anderson. Since there are four of them, that means that 4 of them would want to grant cert, which is enough.
Clarifying law, is a valid reason to put a case in front of the court.
It also lets the plaintiff argue that which has not been argued.
Winning is of course the goal, but is not the only thing I'm trying to accomplish here. We can't let grey area that overreaches persist in these decisions, they will always bite us in the ass. Even if the majority just restates their opinion, it will at least be in the context of a dissent we haven't even heard yet.
For my case to get to scotus, it had to first be rejected on the basis of the Anderson opinion, it was in the district court.
But also in their opinion, they rely entirely on griffin, and the context of a -criminal charge- to require new legislation. Constitutional mandates DO NOT require legislation, they ARE legislation, super legislation, basically (2/3 majority of congress), 14sec3 can be seen as statute by a federal court if it contains a remedy, which it does. (remedy being disqulification)
Thank you for pointing all of this out regarding Garland, and the other issues that delayed the case being prosecuted in a timely manner.
I have defended Garland many times prior to everything falling apart. I wish that we as a people weren't so reactionary and so willing to judge before all the facts are known. I am guilty of that ... allowing my feelings around fairness and what is right get the better of me. It is my goal to be more patient until there is a clear understanding of the situation.
You point out the things we need to address to help fix things, but with Trump in office, I fear the problems will only get worse. 😔
When I think of the hours of detailed work that went into this report- the meticulous combing through testimony, interviews, dealing with the many roadblocks thrown in the way- then listen to Trump using his irritating voice to call Jack Smith childish names and insult his intelligence, I am filled with a sense of hopelessness for our country. I feel that Jack Smith deserves our utmost respect and praise for his work in this matter.
Two words that are prevalent in this report are DELAY and UNPRECEDENTED! I believe one of the key elements of this is that our justice system is too antiquated.
As one who admittedly blames Garland (at least in part) for where we find ourselves today, I appreciate how you have made the case that it is overly simplistic if not ill-informed to do so. Well done!💙🦋
I've been tired of the people who claim to want democracy, but who then want people immediately locked up. Who claim to hate disinformation, but then spread it themselves. Who are not lawyers and don't bother to learn about how our legal system works. This was a great explanation of how things actually happen and how long it takes for them to happen. I also agree that there needs to be some time spent examining our legal system and making reforms but I don't think that'll happen during the next four years.
Our Country is crumbling and make no mistake, it's over as of Jan 20 if Trump sworn in.
They will permanently dismantle democracy. They will not leave.
Garland messed up but it should NOT cost us our Nation!
Inauguration of Donald Trump should NOT proceed. Who's with me?
I will be wearing these kinds of shirts the next four years 👇
https://libtees-2.creator-spring.com
FELON Trump will be recorded in the Annals of History as the BIGGEST and WORST Mistake America EVER made.
Trump is not the cause of our democracy's demise. He is the outcome of the demise that began with Reagan and continued through all subsequent presidents. Corruption killed our democracy a long time ago. We're just now seeing the terminal stage of decay with Trump's victory. What do you think happens when all politicians are corrupt? What do you think happens when politicians become lazy, complacent, and gullible? What do you think happens when the secretary of HHS does not know how Medicare works or how health services are priced? What do you think happens when our high school grads can barely do 4th-grade level math? What do you think happens when corporations are declared as citizens? I am 47 years old, and most of my friends have no idea what the Supreme Court or FTC is. They don't know what criminal immunity means. My 26 yo employee does not understand what democracy means, I swear. All of Trump's wins are a testament to the weakness, incompetence, and corruption of the Democratic party. How did Biden say on national TV that Trump was a threat to Democracy and yet did nothing about it with his newly granted criminal immunity? I'll tell you: Biden is a corrupt coward who is afraid of Trump and MAGA.
Liberal Democracy requires education, civic participation, guardrails against corruption, appreciation, strong, decisive leadership (think FDR and Abe Lincoln), and continued engagement. When you leave your lunch unattended, someone will steal it. If you don't continue advocating for your freedom, someone will take it away. Americans maybe don't deserve Democracy. I come from Iraq. And I remember one day, my mom was criticizing America for toppling Saddam Hussein. I remember her saying, "America is so stupid because they think Iraqis will thrive in Democracy; they don't understand that we need a strong authoritarian man." In my heart of hearts, I strongly believe that many people in America, especially the very wealthy, deep inside, do not believe in Liberal Democracy. They don't believe that everyone is equal or that wealth distribution should be more equitable. It's like the squid games. Some influential, wealthy people in America believe that most Americans are dumb, useless, and ugly and, hence, not deserving of rights or money.
I agree completely. Trump is the culmination of the neoliberal age that began with the Powell memo and was first implemented under Reagan. It gave us unsustainable wealth inequality, the rise of the billionaire class, and deregulation that contributed to financial collapses and global warming. Education budgets were gutted along with the middle class, the result being the ignorant and gullible MAGA base. With Trump we face full-on fascist White Christian nationalist authoritarianism, but it is a continuation of the collapse that has been going on for the last half century or so.
Also, Philip, remember that Trump (like any other uber-wealthy, power-hungry businessman, wanted to enter politics and become president) and so he initially approached Dems. They were like, "Nope." He then approached the GOP, and they said, "Nope." One day, Trump was at some event, and guess who he ran into? He ran into some Heritage Foundation donors or high-ranking members, and that's when the match in heaven was made: EUREKA! The corporate-fascist-Christian-alliance gang found their agent: A Rich, celebrity-status, charismatic outsider who is popular, skillfully deceptive, and fearless. Trump did not choose MAGA. MAGA chose him, and he turned out to be the best pick. And the rest is history. Trump smoked the Dems and the GOP in 5 minutes.
I agree that many believe might makes right—both those with the might and those on the right who borrow might from the shadows cast. Many of those in the US following this path fail to realize the danger in which they place America, and the rest of the world. Trump’s oligarchic path cements a classist /caste approach in which their supporters fail to realize how far down the rungs of influence they fall. the oligarchs fail to consider what occurs under a consumerism model rife with the armed and angry once they can no longer afford to consume.
Yes, it’s been a long time coming. T just brought it into the light.
It's not democracy per se it's Public Policy and Public Peace the following is the best explanation I have ever read :
“Wronged individuals are sometimes timid, sometimes supine, sometimes
lazy, sometimes unable for one cause or another to pursue their remedy;
the suppression of injurious wrong-doing must not be left at the mercy of
such accidents, but must be controlled by some public authority more
powerful and less erratic than the private plaintiff”.
“The Nature of Crime” by Carlton Kemp Allen, Journal of Comparative Legislation
and International Law”, vol. 13, No. 1, (1931)
sorry about the formatting.
I would love to copy and share your statement!!
This would be an honor, and I appreciate you. Thank you.
I also had a patient who is 56 yo who flat out told me that he is voting for Trump because he does not want cowards leading the nation, and he believed that the democrats were cowards. In his mind, a fearless autocrat is more worthy of respect and leadership than a cowardly but righteous democrat. I think a lot of people share that belief. No one likes to have a spineless leader. Biden was spineless, so was Garland, and so was Harris. It's a very bad trait and it turns people off.
They were not spineless. Biden got more done than Trump did. Your 56 patient wants bluster and bullshit.
And please tell me what Biden accomplished. He killed thousands of Ukrainians and gave the resource-rich part of Ukraine to Russia, and he mass murdered over 40,000 Palestinian women and children. And yet, could not do anything about America's domestic enemies (Trump and Musk). Musk would not even show up at his scheduled meeting with SEC lawyers. They showed up at his house, and he was not there....lol. In fact, if you really want to be realistic, you would see that the years from 2021-2024 were de facto Trump's second term; that's when the SCOTUS incapacitated Fed agencies and reversed Roe, so that's when Trump's rule was in full effect. That's how Trump blocked Biden's student debt plan. It's also how he blocked the ban on non-competes. That's how he communicated with Putin and Netanyahu to give them the green light to invade and make Biden look weak. Trump was running the USA from outside the white house. 2025 is Trump's 3d term. The only good thing about Biden was Lina Khan. That's his one redeeming act, and in all honestly, Warren deserves the credit for it, not Biden.
Oh, Biden is def spineless. It's why he did not reopen Mueller's report to start there. It is also Y he did not fire Garland after the unnecessary Hur investigation. It's also Y he could not control Netanyahu and instead gave him unlimited money and weapons. Biden is a coward. He only has balls when it comes to the genocide of the Palestinians.
It's one big happy party.
For what it's worth, you're not alone in your assessment of the folks who have commented about these cases in social media. If I had a dollar every time I read "Lock him up", "Sanction the lawyers making this stupid argument," "Jim Jordan didn't honor his subpoena," I'd have enough for several mortgage payments. And the same question asked umpteen times in a Twitter thread -- if it wasn't about bail, it was about the number of alternate jurors in the NY criminal trial [the maximum is 6 -- NY Crim Pro L § 270.30(1)], the sentence for criminal contempt....
Trump's attorneys were doing what good criminal defense attorneys should do and the procedures were available to any defendant. Of course he had money to pay his attorneys, and his attorneys were procedurally creative; Henry Homeowner would be unlikely to have similar resources and counsel. If one hadn't noticed, the criminal justice system going back to 16th century England has always favored those with money and influence. If you didn't have influence (and money), you could find yourself being the subject of a bill of attainder in the House of Lords. Trump's cases were at the extreme end of the "money-no money" spectrum. The only difference between Trump's cases and those of the merely rich criminals is that the pernicious effect of money and political influence was made plain to see.
The legal commentariat occasionally was unimpressive. A recent example: a presenter on YouTube said that if Trump received an unconditional discharge as his sentence in the NY criminal case, Alvin Bragg should appeal the sentence. It took me 2 minutes on Google to find the relevant NY statute, 3 minutes to decide that the presenter was flat out wrong, and 4 minutes to type a comment to that effect. As far as I know, that particular video wasn't played again.
How many times did we hear from the "experts" that Jim Jordan should be prosecuted for contempt of Congress, Jordan having ignored the subpoena from the J6 Committee? Apparently no one bothered to look at 2 USC §194; the facts underlying the contempt citation have to be certified by the Speaker to the US Attorney. The likelihood that the Speaker (McCarthy or Johnson) would do so was so close to zero as to be beyond human comprehension. But no one bothered to explain this, leaving the public confused and angry.
I haven't read Jack Smith's report, but I'll do so with AG's analysis at hand. As I watched the two prosecutions over the past 2 years, I had some inkling of some of the issues described by Smith and explained by AG. (I wasn't clairvoyant; I had been a prosecutor for +25 years.) I didn't have "FBI reluctance" on my bingo card though.
Right on. It always amazed me how long judges can squat on a case. I am a Doctor, and if I get labs and imaging results and I squat on them for political purposes, I get sued, and my medical license gets suspended. Why do judges sleep on cases for eons with no standards regarding how long it should take to issue a goddam ruling? One of the few good things Trump did was expose how rotten the justice system is. There should be a new rule for judges: hear the facts, and you have 4 weeks to issue a ruling or get disbarred. Another issue is how judges can disqualify prosecutors based on irrelevant matters to avoid discussing the legal facts. So what if Willis slept with the prosecutor? She's not a judge, so where's the conflict of interest? Why is the court more involved with the prosecutor's sex life as opposed to the case presented to them? The same goes for how Cannon randomly said, "Yeah, you're not legal, and neither is your funding," which she did after squatting on the case for months. The response of the legal scholars was equally baffling; for example, after Cannon's ruling, you'd expect an immediate backlash from the legal community. Nope, it took months for legal experts to slam Cannon. It took forever for Garland to criticize her ruling, and even when they finally criticized her, it was super gentle....like they'd say she was "wrong"....I am thinking WTF? Why is no one pointing out the obvious: SHE'S A TRUMP AGENT AND SHE'S CORRUPT. Not a single legal scholar called her out. I am guessing because people fear Trump. So, not just our laws are bad, but so is the legal profession. Lawyers turned out to be corrupt, apathetic, incompetent, or cowardly. The legal profession gets the privilege of regulating every other profession and ruling us, yet no one seems to be able to regulate the legal profession itself. Trump proved to us that the legal profession does not deserve the privilege it gets, and the people need to reign in and regulate that rotten and overrated profession. They should have the same standards as Doctors. Where is the ENFORCABLE ETHICS CODE? Where is the channel that the public can use to file complaints against federal judges like Cannon formally? There must be channels to file complaints against lawyers and judges committing legal malpractice. Trump taught us a lot of things. He taught us that most Americans are apathetic and clueless. He taught us that both parties are weak and corrupt. He taught us that the justice system is made for rich people and is rotten to the core. He taught us that the Constitution does not bar convicted felons from becoming presidents. He taught us that Democracy is a weak form of governance incapable of defending itself. Seriously though, we need to torch America's legal profession. That profession is killing us and serving crony ubercapitalists. Next time a bomb explodes, I hope it's in Harvard Law School.
"It always amazed me how long judges can squat on a case."
====
I can't speak about the practice in every state or in the federal courts, but I can speak about practice in Delaware. Fresh out of law school, I was a law clerk for a justice on the state supreme court. When a justice was assigned to write an opinion, the case was put on his assignment list, and the opinion had to be done within 90 days. Woe be to any law clerk who happened to be lackadaisical as the justice had to explain to the chief justice why the opinion in X v. Y wasn't ready by day 90. The current policy, part of the Judicial Branch Operating Procedures, is even tougher: a judge who misses the particular deadline (including extensions of time) can be hauled before the state Court on the Judiciary (the disciplinary body for state judges).
When did you ever see that happen 🤗
When did I see a judge referred to the Court on the Judiciary because of what amounts to neglect of duty? I haven’t; I simply pointed out case decision deadlines existed and there was now a mechanism to enforce those deadlines. One doesn’t have to be driven to Tyburn to know that criminal acts will be punished; awareness of the scaffold at Tyburn is enough to ensure compliance. The same result obtains in the context of case decision deadlines. Knowing that you, a judge, could be facing a bench of five other judges called upon to assess your conduct is sufficient to ensure good behavior.
Lol. I’ve had 1st hand experience with bad judges in two US states and know several people that have had the same or similar experiences in others. This is over the course of (x) 50 years and it just doesn’t happen the way you’ve described. You have a cite for these so called “deadlines” ?
In a light most favorable, the ‘process’ provided in complaints against a Judge via a Judicial Conduct Board is like an administrative proceeding without an APA - if - it ever gets by the screening attorney. There are writs of Prohibition, Mandamus to Compel and Review even Certiorari you can bring a Declarator in some instances an injunction
There are judges that have resigned; a few have been impeached and one of them was actually prosecuted, whom GI Joe recently ‘pardoned’.
There’s dilatory vexation charges that may be brought against lawyers by motion on notice with prior demand to recede but there’s nothing like that with judges.
At the Federal orbit you can complain to the Circuit Court but it’s confidential and that ought to tell you something right there.
Judicial Branch Operating Procedures, Part VI, Case Management and Litigation, Item 3 (Administration of Litigation), Appx. D-4.
(https://courts.delaware.gov/aoc/operating-procedures/op-casemgmnt.aspx#litigation)
Well, we need new rules for the Feds. Oral arguments heard. The clock should start ticking for 4 weeks, then shit or get off the pot and go on probation to receive training on how to consult experts and make a dam ruling timely. Delayed justice is denied justice. Trump proved this beautifully. The standards should be based on the issues at hand: Say the question before the court is: "Is appointment and funding of Smith legal?".....ok, this ruling should take 24 hrs.. the 11th circuit should be able to issue a ruling the next day saying "We r baffled by this question. the fact that the special counsel appeared at the court and we are sure he is paid for his work proves that the answer is yes and yes, and we would like to refer Cannon to the ethics committee to reassess her suitability for the bench and whether she is qualified because we cannot see her ruling as anything but an illegal delay tactic that harms the public interest, which she took an oath to protect".....But nope...., it turns out the 11th circuit is more corrupt than Cannon. And NO ONE in the media, NOT a single legal scholar, mentioned that it is HUGELY suspect that the 11th circuit court is squatting on this, as though it's a question as complicated as analyzing the cosmic black hole. ....obviously, the public is being played, and the Trump fix is in.
People Did file complaints about Cannon to the 11th circuit. So many that the 11th circuit blocked anymore complaints. So the people were shut down because the 11th circuit said they would no longer entertain any complaints so Stop complaining
Also, remember when a professional harms the public, it's a joke to file a complaint with the accused professional; they'll ignore it. I am a Doctor. If I do something wrong with my patient, do you think the patient will file the complaint at my office? OF course not. My office will say, "Thank you, and we are sorry. We will consider your grievance. My assistant will then trash the letter." But the legal profession set up a system called the Medical Board where a patient could, in 5 minutes, file a report online detailing my supposed wrongdoing....and before you know it, the medical board is harassing the crap out of me, most of the time unfairly. I think you misunderstood me: I meant that the American public must have a formal channel to formally complain against Cannon, 5th, and 11th circuits so that the complaint lands in a separate independent legal, ethical/malpractice board. This board would be geographically and legally separate from the courts or the judges and should be able to impose financial and legal penalties to deter unethical behavior. Who is going to fine Cannon? Who is going to disbar her or suspend her license? No one. This is a joke.
And yet they squatted until November when poor Smith was like "Hey guys, no worries, I am withdrawing my appeal"...like WTF.
The USA has come a long way since Watergate...
Sadly, in the WRONG DIRECTION.
IKR? SMDH
Good read. Thanks for breaking it down. A few surprises.
😵💫I knew a lot of this via your podcasts, & it is sad that so many people just blame AG Garland without talking any of this into account. Comes down to media eh? If YOU found all this out why wasn't this reported everywhere so people could understand, but then again, would they read/listen and would they believe, and would they let the facts get on the way of what they want to tell as a narrative that suits them ⁉️
Why do we Always get the pertinent information After the fact that America elected a Criminal who should be in Prison?
It was by design, Matt.
Thank you for the educational post. So basically, the DOJ's efforts were stalled at every step because of a set of rules and laws that seem to be benefiting corrupt governance. Whoever wrote the rules and regulations must have been rooting for a corrupt executive, whether Trump or anyone else. Also, it appears Trump had his admirers at every level, including the J6 committee, which perhaps explains why they delayed handing over their info. None of these systematic problems is new, so why has no one attempted to identify and fix them? I guess no one is incentivized to fix anything if they are corrupt themselves. The corrupt system is made for someone like Trump. By the way, does anyone know why the DOJ did not indict Trump for obstruction of justice from day one based on the recommendation of Robert Mueller?
Okay, all I want to know is, is the statute of limitations clock paused while the felon is in office? Can he be arrested at 12:01 pm on January 20, 2029 and tried for the outstanding charges? No, I absolutely don't care that he'd be 82; I don't care if he's in poor health or demented. He broke the laws in way they've never been broken before, and the message has to be sent, loud and clear: Anyone who tries it again, we're coming for you, no matter how long it takes.
The missing piece in Smiths report was garlands immediate investigation in to the Willard Hotel, and Trumps relationship with Militia via Stone!
Barr did what he does best, kill investigations into presidents!
Exceptionally informative piece Allison thanks for all you do!!
I get all the reasoning for delay, and your well written piece chronicles the exasperation well, however - why only criminal proceedings?
Maybe it's 20/20 hindsight, but why didn't they bring a Federal 14sec3 case as a civil case? (perhaps in addition to the criminal cases, but as a first step to protect the office and the constitution from the replay we're all about to see if the criminal cases failed)?
After Congress failed, 14sec3 was the only thing that could have kept him out of office. It seems like hubris to be so reliant on only a political solution for that if he truly is a clear and present danger, I mean, there is no 'if' of course he is. Why risk failure?
In a civil case, you're not depriving someone of their liberty, so in terms of proof, you don't have to adhere to beyond a reasonable doubt, but preponderance of the evidence. You don't have to have first hand witnesses, and can apply inference (common sense) to fact finding.
The plain language of 14sec3 could not be a better fit to what he did. Why has the 14sec3 approach been so discounted from the get go?
It should have never been brought in a State Case, but could have succeeded federally.
The insurrection was the core issue we all wanted answered, and should have been done immediately.
The SC decided it should make law instead of just interpreting law. Shouldn't have ever taken up the cases, ruling against an appellate courts decision and in so doing made themselves judge and jury for those cases.🤨
however, if you read their Anderson opinion with a fine tooth comb, it's not definitive about 14sec3- the main objection to anderson was that it was brought in a state court. So bring it in a federal court and see what they say? no?
Have you read Trump v Anderson with a fine tooth comb?
heh - I assume you're not looking for a reply
Actually I am. I note you haven’t replied down thread to my thorough critique of your petition.
In anycase, help me do it better :-)
I'm not here to "spar" with you, here to learn
in anycase, if you'd like to do a zoom or something, I'd really appreciate your time - my contact info is on the complaints, but my email is joealterinc@gmail.com
ok, I see, replied downstream.
Also you can find my appellate arguments on that here :
https://www.whatthehellareyoudoing.org/post/us-court-of-appeals-9th-circuit-opens-case-24-4113-alter-v-gorsuch
I address a lot of that there, however the questions before the court tee up a set of threshold questions/issues for the dissenting opinions to be heard. Remember they did not even opine on that portion because they were outside the subject matter of the case in Anderson. Since there are four of them, that means that 4 of them would want to grant cert, which is enough.
Clarifying law, is a valid reason to put a case in front of the court.
It also lets the plaintiff argue that which has not been argued.
Winning is of course the goal, but is not the only thing I'm trying to accomplish here. We can't let grey area that overreaches persist in these decisions, they will always bite us in the ass. Even if the majority just restates their opinion, it will at least be in the context of a dissent we haven't even heard yet.
For my case to get to scotus, it had to first be rejected on the basis of the Anderson opinion, it was in the district court.
But also in their opinion, they rely entirely on griffin, and the context of a -criminal charge- to require new legislation. Constitutional mandates DO NOT require legislation, they ARE legislation, super legislation, basically (2/3 majority of congress), 14sec3 can be seen as statute by a federal court if it contains a remedy, which it does. (remedy being disqulification)
oh lemme look, wasn't aware of it
Thank you for pointing all of this out regarding Garland, and the other issues that delayed the case being prosecuted in a timely manner.
I have defended Garland many times prior to everything falling apart. I wish that we as a people weren't so reactionary and so willing to judge before all the facts are known. I am guilty of that ... allowing my feelings around fairness and what is right get the better of me. It is my goal to be more patient until there is a clear understanding of the situation.
You point out the things we need to address to help fix things, but with Trump in office, I fear the problems will only get worse. 😔
When I think of the hours of detailed work that went into this report- the meticulous combing through testimony, interviews, dealing with the many roadblocks thrown in the way- then listen to Trump using his irritating voice to call Jack Smith childish names and insult his intelligence, I am filled with a sense of hopelessness for our country. I feel that Jack Smith deserves our utmost respect and praise for his work in this matter.
Thank you for explaining the multitude of delays. I have a better understanding.
Two words that are prevalent in this report are DELAY and UNPRECEDENTED! I believe one of the key elements of this is that our justice system is too antiquated.
I highly recommend reading this article in The Atlantic. The link is a gift so no paywall.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/01/hitler-germany-constitution-authoritarianism/681233/?gift=itEqYa9uyxU01W6-yg14Gk-ljetEjY3E_aqRo8vh4dU&utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share
It concludes with the quote of Joseph Goebbels: “The big joke on democracy is that it gives its mortal enemies the means to its own destruction.”
Stephen Miller is probably using that article as a playbook for action
Spot On, MuellerSheWrote. Great synopsis...
Scotus complicit and blatant about it! Abolish!!!
As one who admittedly blames Garland (at least in part) for where we find ourselves today, I appreciate how you have made the case that it is overly simplistic if not ill-informed to do so. Well done!💙🦋