It is galling that that man was even allowed to run for president. It’s a mockery of the rule of law that the perp in question was allowed to delay justice as he did.
If these “cannot indict sitting president” are ONLY MEMOS, why are they treated as law? WHAT WAS BARR’S PENALTY FOR REDACTING 99 % of MUELLER’s REPORT.
Barr has been the central figure in dropping Reagan’s criminal investigation of Irangate, HR’s Iran Contra investigation, now Trumps investigations… shouldn’t Bill Barr finally find his tuchas in an oubliette?
Excellent explanation of the days sad situation Nina, I’m afraid the epochs news stories won’t get much better to cover though! Thanks for all you do Nina!!
I wondered the same. My understanding now is that DOJ's policy is based on a constitutional analysis. The bar to indicting a sitting president has to do with separation of powers.
If Chutkan accepts Smith's motion and it stands up on appeal, I am concerned the threat of re-indictment will be additional incentive for Trump to pursue a 3rd term. On the other hand, standing for the principle that no man is above the law is far more important to the country (legally and morally) than smoothing his ruffled feathers in advance.
Shouldn't the summary under the Title say "without" prejudice not "with". In the body it is "without" so I'm assuming the "with" right under the Title was in error.
BFD! We The People, by the time the DOJ gets around to it, will have suffered greatly under the proposed regime. Are there any sane R’s out in the universe right now? I think very few.
Thank you for doing this. I always look forward to what you have to say. You explain things so well. Like most of us,I am beyond frustrated, but I look forward to a report coming out
I'd like to see your commentary about Lawrence Tribe's statement that, "as an adjudicated oath-breaking insurrectionist, Mr.Trump is constitutionally disqualified under Sec. 3 of 14th Am from taking the oath as president on 1/20/25 unless 2/3 of both houses lift"(https://x.com/tribelaw/status/1861014297125544398?t=OG0nPWMu_xO1INitCZxjMQ&s=03)
Except in Colorado (which tried to remove DJT from the ballot, and the S CT said no, you can't), Trump is not an "adjudicated insurrectionist." (Trump was re-elected before Smith could bring his charges to fruition.) Right?
Do you know Jack Smith and his team personaly? Would you please thank them for all their work. I'm sure they are more crushed than we are since they worked full time on these cases.
Is it possible for Garland (a bit late I guess) to go back and release the Mueller report without much of the redacted elements and with a different summary to the Barr one?
I have never understood this idea that a President can engage in criminal activity and he/she cannot be held accountable bcuz of Nixon era / George W. Bush era loopholes created to abet their criminality. This is ridiculous. (Yes - I do understand that there must not be a rush by hostile opponents to throw a president in the clink for political reasons) BUT - Say Rapey McOrange Face decides to have his SS agent grab a young staffer and he rapes her in the limo (Stalin used to do this), or say he has a Senator killed. Are we really saying we don't prosecute such behavior?! Something is seriously wrong with this scenario and it needs to be fixed.
Much as it galls me to admit it, 45 has been teflon with nothing sticking to him. It is my sincere hope that justice finds the man at some point before he passes. In the meantime, I hope Garland avoids the Barr scenario and releases the full report.....neither Smith nor Garland will have a job with the govt as long as repubs are in power, so no real price tag to releasing the report.
I suppose it could, but I guess it boils down to whether you think he will EVER stand a trial for this. By the time that could even happen (potentially), he would be in his mid 80's if he was alive at all. For that matter, I doubt he will be competent to stand trial in 4 years by all indications. Release the details of both cases now and let it percolate
It is galling that that man was even allowed to run for president. It’s a mockery of the rule of law that the perp in question was allowed to delay justice as he did.
If these “cannot indict sitting president” are ONLY MEMOS, why are they treated as law? WHAT WAS BARR’S PENALTY FOR REDACTING 99 % of MUELLER’s REPORT.
Barr has been the central figure in dropping Reagan’s criminal investigation of Irangate, HR’s Iran Contra investigation, now Trumps investigations… shouldn’t Bill Barr finally find his tuchas in an oubliette?
Excellent explanation of the days sad situation Nina, I’m afraid the epochs news stories won’t get much better to cover though! Thanks for all you do Nina!!
I wondered the same. My understanding now is that DOJ's policy is based on a constitutional analysis. The bar to indicting a sitting president has to do with separation of powers.
I hope that the documentation and evidence is backed up to multiple, obscure places to prevent their "loss" in the coming 4 years
And the filing with accompanying documentation won’t get lost in another illegal removal of documents to end up in a bathroom or buried somewhere. 🤔
Headline differs from article. You may want to fix.
It scared and confused me to read “with prejudice. “
I knew because I had seen it earlier. But still I thought did I get it mixed up in my hopeful mind!
Let’s not forget that he plans on running for a 3rd term after this one.
If Chutkan accepts Smith's motion and it stands up on appeal, I am concerned the threat of re-indictment will be additional incentive for Trump to pursue a 3rd term. On the other hand, standing for the principle that no man is above the law is far more important to the country (legally and morally) than smoothing his ruffled feathers in advance.
Can't unless he throws out the Constitution, which we all know he wants to🤨😡✌🏻💙
He will, lots of stooges behind him willing to help with the heave ho
Hopefully the Dems have a solid plan by then and Kamala & Tim are available
Shouldn't the summary under the Title say "without" prejudice not "with". In the body it is "without" so I'm assuming the "with" right under the Title was in error.
BFD! We The People, by the time the DOJ gets around to it, will have suffered greatly under the proposed regime. Are there any sane R’s out in the universe right now? I think very few.
Many thanks, Allison, this is helpful.
Thank you for doing this. I always look forward to what you have to say. You explain things so well. Like most of us,I am beyond frustrated, but I look forward to a report coming out
I'd like to see your commentary about Lawrence Tribe's statement that, "as an adjudicated oath-breaking insurrectionist, Mr.Trump is constitutionally disqualified under Sec. 3 of 14th Am from taking the oath as president on 1/20/25 unless 2/3 of both houses lift"(https://x.com/tribelaw/status/1861014297125544398?t=OG0nPWMu_xO1INitCZxjMQ&s=03)
Except in Colorado (which tried to remove DJT from the ballot, and the S CT said no, you can't), Trump is not an "adjudicated insurrectionist." (Trump was re-elected before Smith could bring his charges to fruition.) Right?
Do you know Jack Smith and his team personaly? Would you please thank them for all their work. I'm sure they are more crushed than we are since they worked full time on these cases.
Thank you 🙏💙 this is all very helpful. Thank you for your great explanations.
AG. You need to correct your headline. You are stating the opposite of what is intended by saying that dismissal is being sought WITH prejudice.
Is it possible for Garland (a bit late I guess) to go back and release the Mueller report without much of the redacted elements and with a different summary to the Barr one?
I have never understood this idea that a President can engage in criminal activity and he/she cannot be held accountable bcuz of Nixon era / George W. Bush era loopholes created to abet their criminality. This is ridiculous. (Yes - I do understand that there must not be a rush by hostile opponents to throw a president in the clink for political reasons) BUT - Say Rapey McOrange Face decides to have his SS agent grab a young staffer and he rapes her in the limo (Stalin used to do this), or say he has a Senator killed. Are we really saying we don't prosecute such behavior?! Something is seriously wrong with this scenario and it needs to be fixed.
And if he is pardoned by Vance?
Much as it galls me to admit it, 45 has been teflon with nothing sticking to him. It is my sincere hope that justice finds the man at some point before he passes. In the meantime, I hope Garland avoids the Barr scenario and releases the full report.....neither Smith nor Garland will have a job with the govt as long as repubs are in power, so no real price tag to releasing the report.
Would releasing a detailed report now potentially be considered prejudicial to a fair trial if/when DJT is ever re-indicted?
I suppose it could, but I guess it boils down to whether you think he will EVER stand a trial for this. By the time that could even happen (potentially), he would be in his mid 80's if he was alive at all. For that matter, I doubt he will be competent to stand trial in 4 years by all indications. Release the details of both cases now and let it percolate