“But for Mr. Trump’s election and imminent return to the presidency, the office assessed that the admissible evidence was sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction at trial,” the report said.

  • itsonlygeorge@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 days ago

    You had 4 FUCKING YEARS to do this! This doesn’t even qualify for too little too late. You did nothing for 4 years but stuck your head up your collective asses and now you make claims that he should have been convicted and sentenced? Complicit traitors.

    • takeda@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 days ago

      You’re mixing special counsel with the AG. Jack Smith did his job, it was Garland who waited 2 years before starting the case and eventually assigning him.

      • IndustryStandard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        8 days ago

        The AG is not an all powerful entity. He was appointed by Biden himself. Similarly the Democrats could have pressured Biden to fire Garland. And Biden could have done it himself.

        Everyone was very happy to wait for years to “make sure the trial was well prepared”.

      • Monstrosity@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 days ago

        Jack Smith could have chosen to bring charges in a district where there wasn’t a 50/50 chance it would end up in Canon’s courtroom, but he was high on his own farts & wanted the big win.

        Let’s not whitewash the dude’s errors.

        • rowinxavier@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 days ago

          To clarify, the charges brought in the Florida district could have been brought in another venue, but the crime was the documents being withheld in Florida, so that is the correct venue. It could have gotten way through the process and been appealed due to incorrect venue and we would have been back at the start.

          That said, I think getting Cannon removed would have been more likely to bear fruit. She had clear evidence of bias and would have been way past the threshold of appearance of impropriety, so getting her removed would have been a fairly likely path to success. Unfortunately the supreme court was so flooded by idealogues that it would have been appealed and they would have either held it up or overturned it and gotten her back on, or just dismissed the case in some other way.

          What was needed was a much more aggressive approach from both Biden and Garland. Biden to change the number of supreme court justices and to direct his justice department to deeply investigate all of the justices on the court. Garland to open said investigations, push for intelligence agency support, and lots of speaking indictments to get information in front of voters.

  • IndustryStandard@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    Such a shame they waited so long to start the trial and gave Trump every opportunity to delay. But surely Trump would have gone to prison if Harris won. Despite all the other things Democrats did not do to get him in jail, that would have been the thing. You know, four years is just such a short period of time for a trial. Everyone know you need exactly 4.5 years.

  • loaf@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    8 days ago

    “Oh yeah, he definitely would’ve been convicted.” “Then why wasn’t he?” “We’ll see, what had happened was…”

  • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    8 days ago

    At which point do we call a spade a spade and declare the DOJ and the prosecutors to be accomplishes for their roles in protecting an obviously guilty grifter at the expense of justice and the common good?