I know I'm probably a lone voice here, but I take issue with Judge Dale Ho agreeing to dismiss the charges against Eric Adams, even though he did it with prejudice.
Adam’s will face the music with voters. His reputation in shreds. He’s a smutty politician. He broke bread with felon Drumpf to make a deal. Judge Ho’s ruling finalizes this Adam’s saga.
I think the judge did the right thing by dismissing the case without prejudice. This way the Trump Admin has no cards over Adam’s head and if he does what Trump wants then we know it’s because he’s an asshole like Trump.
This middle-ground decision smacks of pragmatism the way so many slippery-slope turns of events have happened in the last 10 years. The Dumpster is not the Gingerbread Boy. It just seems that at so many turns, the idea is to kick the can down the road thinking somewhere along the line the freight train has to be derailed. If we all just look in the rearview mirror, we will see countless opportunities to end the madness. I guess the bottom line must be intimidation. I don’t know.
That’s one way to look at it. The way I see the situation is that the State government will likely remove him before he gets a chance to do anything for Dumpsterface.
NYC resident here. Petulant, whiney, inarticulate, ever-the-victim Adams can’t go soon enough. Since this ruling emphasizes his corruptness, I’m satisfied.
You are not alone. Can't agree more. I wish Judge Ho would have, could have appointed a special counsel to prosecute, or at least demanded that Bove and others sit in his court and perjure themselves about the reasons for not proceeding. Someone needs to stand up and not take this anymore and we need judges to do much more! But thanks for this
If your choices are to make it harder for someone to be an unethical jerk or easier for someone to be an unethical jerk, choose harder. I think you have it right: DOJ chose the unethical path. Make them follow it to the bitter end.
Even more ideally the case would be placed on hold and the decided possibility of a corrupt bargain would be investigated.
This could be investigated by the DOJ under Pam Bondi ...
Oh ... nevermind.
It's a shame that the judge cannot appoint a lawyer from private practice to prosecute.
Does the US never allow prosecutions to be carried out by lawyers in private practice? I know they gave up private prosecutions brought by individuals. This squeamishness shows its problems when the Executive's own prosecutors have been sabotaged.
(Being really European why on earth is political interference allowed in choice of cases to bring? Professional career prosecutors should be independent.)
It seems the flaw is an assumption of good will among principal leaders. I would think there would be a mechanism to invoke “out of bounds” or “beyond the pale”. Immediately I see two problems why judges are so cautiously toeing the line of propriety. The proactive nature of such a ruling could be abused. Also an appeal would likely find the ruling flawed. There needs to be a faster way to get ahead of irreversible damage, but I don’t know what it is.
If he hadn't dismissed the case, DJT would have pardoned Adams within a couple of days, most likely, as he did with Flynn. At least now, if Dems retake everything in 2028 (that is, if we have elections then), investigations can be re-opened (there were additional charges to be brought in a superseding indictment I believe, but weren't).
Judge Gleeson brief which was written for the Flynn case is so applicable to this case too. It is ironic that the outcome turns out to be better for Adams than if the DOJ motion is simply granted. Yes I would rather let the case continue to hang over his head for as long as possible, than "helping" him move this off his shoulders now. If Adams loses the mayoral race, then the rationale to dismiss the charges can no longer apply, because he can no longer help with federal immigration policies. At that point, if DOJ continues to sit on the case, that will prove that the immigration rationale was never the real reason for seeking the dismissal.
I agree. It’s not about what ultimately happens. It’s about if it’s a court dismissal or a DoJ dismissal.
Here, the court agreed that it should be dismissed. If he had rejected it, he would have, well, rejected it. (And presumably DoJ would have dismissed it.)
Big difference.
- In other words, the court agreed with DoJ, which is in the wrong.
Allison, how much of the decision to dismiss the charges was probably from fear of what the trumpers might do? I agree with you in taking issue to dismiss. Adams seems like he's working for putin. I wonder if Mimi or Maya would run for office.
I wholeheartedly agree that as much as possible regarding this dismissal should have been made part of some type of public record for all to see particularly before the next mayoral election.
Adam’s will face the music with voters. His reputation in shreds. He’s a smutty politician. He broke bread with felon Drumpf to make a deal. Judge Ho’s ruling finalizes this Adam’s saga.
One can hope. That didn’t happen with the current multiply adjudicated criminal in the White House
I think the judge did the right thing by dismissing the case without prejudice. This way the Trump Admin has no cards over Adam’s head and if he does what Trump wants then we know it’s because he’s an asshole like Trump.
He dismissed the case with prejudice. Which is better than without prejudice. But he shouldn't have dismissed the case at all, IMO.
I agree he should have dismissed the case but Trumps lawyers would have made it so that the case would be dismissed and then take the sanctions.
This middle-ground decision smacks of pragmatism the way so many slippery-slope turns of events have happened in the last 10 years. The Dumpster is not the Gingerbread Boy. It just seems that at so many turns, the idea is to kick the can down the road thinking somewhere along the line the freight train has to be derailed. If we all just look in the rearview mirror, we will see countless opportunities to end the madness. I guess the bottom line must be intimidation. I don’t know.
That’s one way to look at it. The way I see the situation is that the State government will likely remove him before he gets a chance to do anything for Dumpsterface.
I agree to Allison.
You nailed this issue exactly right, I believe. And your reasoning sounds like you are an attorney. Great job!
NYC resident here. Petulant, whiney, inarticulate, ever-the-victim Adams can’t go soon enough. Since this ruling emphasizes his corruptness, I’m satisfied.
You are not alone. Can't agree more. I wish Judge Ho would have, could have appointed a special counsel to prosecute, or at least demanded that Bove and others sit in his court and perjure themselves about the reasons for not proceeding. Someone needs to stand up and not take this anymore and we need judges to do much more! But thanks for this
Not that attorneys are always right.
If your choices are to make it harder for someone to be an unethical jerk or easier for someone to be an unethical jerk, choose harder. I think you have it right: DOJ chose the unethical path. Make them follow it to the bitter end.
Can AG james not file state corruption charges?
Even more ideally the case would be placed on hold and the decided possibility of a corrupt bargain would be investigated.
This could be investigated by the DOJ under Pam Bondi ...
Oh ... nevermind.
It's a shame that the judge cannot appoint a lawyer from private practice to prosecute.
Does the US never allow prosecutions to be carried out by lawyers in private practice? I know they gave up private prosecutions brought by individuals. This squeamishness shows its problems when the Executive's own prosecutors have been sabotaged.
(Being really European why on earth is political interference allowed in choice of cases to bring? Professional career prosecutors should be independent.)
It seems the flaw is an assumption of good will among principal leaders. I would think there would be a mechanism to invoke “out of bounds” or “beyond the pale”. Immediately I see two problems why judges are so cautiously toeing the line of propriety. The proactive nature of such a ruling could be abused. Also an appeal would likely find the ruling flawed. There needs to be a faster way to get ahead of irreversible damage, but I don’t know what it is.
Rampant Corruption Continues…
If he hadn't dismissed the case, DJT would have pardoned Adams within a couple of days, most likely, as he did with Flynn. At least now, if Dems retake everything in 2028 (that is, if we have elections then), investigations can be re-opened (there were additional charges to be brought in a superseding indictment I believe, but weren't).
Pardon comes after a conviction, right?
No. Look at all the pre-emptive pardons Biden issued prior to leaving office (probably wisely, as it turns out).
Good point.
Judge Gleeson brief which was written for the Flynn case is so applicable to this case too. It is ironic that the outcome turns out to be better for Adams than if the DOJ motion is simply granted. Yes I would rather let the case continue to hang over his head for as long as possible, than "helping" him move this off his shoulders now. If Adams loses the mayoral race, then the rationale to dismiss the charges can no longer apply, because he can no longer help with federal immigration policies. At that point, if DOJ continues to sit on the case, that will prove that the immigration rationale was never the real reason for seeking the dismissal.
I agree. It’s not about what ultimately happens. It’s about if it’s a court dismissal or a DoJ dismissal.
Here, the court agreed that it should be dismissed. If he had rejected it, he would have, well, rejected it. (And presumably DoJ would have dismissed it.)
Big difference.
- In other words, the court agreed with DoJ, which is in the wrong.
Allison, how much of the decision to dismiss the charges was probably from fear of what the trumpers might do? I agree with you in taking issue to dismiss. Adams seems like he's working for putin. I wonder if Mimi or Maya would run for office.
I wholeheartedly agree that as much as possible regarding this dismissal should have been made part of some type of public record for all to see particularly before the next mayoral election.