• CmdrShepard42@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      19 days ago

      The head of the DOJ is appointed by the president though and they waited until a little over a year ago in August '23, after he won the RNC nomination, right in the ramp up into the election to charge Trump. Most of the delays are related directly to this and his candidacy for president as no judge wants to directly meddle in the election.

      Why didn’t they charge him in the nearly three years prior to that? They’d been prosecuting plenty of the January 6th participants during that time. Why not prosecute him for refusing to return all those top secret documents during that time? We had pictures, eye witnesses testifying that he had them in his bathroom, and admissions from Trump directly during that time.

      You’re obviously being disingenuous by using Trumps success to spread FUD

      How is that? You just admitted yourself “Trumps success” in avoiding any accountability, yet you call it “FUD” when people point out why he was successful in avoiding prosecution. How is this even FUD to begin with? The fact that you keep linking to the definition of it like it’s some obscure term makes me think you just learned about it or something. There’s no fear, uncertainty, or doubt that Trump will never be held accountable for any of this because we all just witnessed him get away with it.

      • UsernameHere@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        19 days ago

        Trump got his case delayed. The DOJ can’t just hold their own trial. If the trial is delayed by the judge the DOJ can’t have the trial. So it makes no sense for you to blame the DOJ but you still do.

        There are certain accounts on lemmy that try to drum up hate for democrats by blaming them for Trumps actions. It’s been obvious to more than just me.

        • CmdrShepard42@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          18 days ago

          The case was delayed after they waited nearly two and a half years to charge him which put the trial too close to the election. Why are you completely glossing over this while talking about ‘drumming things up?’ You’re clearly trying to obfuscate the facts here.

          Trump didn’t wait until August '23 to bring any indictments against himself. That was the decision of Merrick Garland who was appointed directly by Joe Biden in March of 2021.

          • UsernameHere@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            18 days ago

            Why are you pretending Trump hasn’t gotten away with many other crimes already?

            Each time anyone tries to prosecute Trump he claims it’s a witch hunt.

            Each time he gets away with it the public believes his narrative a little more.

            This means the DOJ can’t just go after him recklessly. They have to build an air tight case against not just your average defendant, but Trump.

            Otherwise they lose another case and Trump is empowered by it.

            This is what has happened time and time again. But people like yourself are acting like you’ve been living under a rock this whole time by pretending it is easy to pin down Trump and being disingenuous by trying to pin the blame on the DOJ and the DNC for Trump getting away.

            Do you really think you know more than the DoJ about this situation?

            • CmdrShepard42@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              18 days ago

              This means the DOJ can’t just go after him recklessly. They have to build an air tight case against not just your average defendant, but Trump.

              Otherwise they lose another case and Trump is empowered by it.

              Like they did here leading to him getting away with a multitude of felonies? A single state government managed to successfully prosecute and convict him, but you’re telling me the DOJ with the full resources of the federal government couldn’t manage to do the same because it’s too hard?

              Do you really think you know more than the DoJ about this situation?

              Do you really feel like an “appeal to authority” argument is valid, especially in this context? You want to act like I’m an idiot because ‘they have a solid, air-tight plan’ as we’re here commenting on an article about how all charges against him have been dismissed. That sounds like the exact opposite of a solid plan. Who ever could have imagined that a defendent would try to delay their case from being heard in court? Obviously, this completely blindsided the DOJ as it’s such an unprecedented tactic, so it’s perfectly understandable why they have to let him walk away.

              • UsernameHere@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                18 days ago

                Like they did here leading to him getting away with a multitude of felonies?

                If they try and fail they can’t try again.

                but you’re telling me the DOJ with the full resources of the federal government couldn’t manage to do the same because it’s too hard

                Nope I’m explaining to you what happened. They had to build a case first, that took time. By the time they were ready, a judge delayed the trial at Trumps request.

                You want to act like I’m an idiot because ‘they have a solid, air-tight plan’ as we’re here commenting on an article about how all charges against him have been dismissed.

                I’m acting like you’re an idiot because the trial was dismissed after Trump delayed it long enough to get re-elected and said he would fire the prosecutor.

                But your armchair internet legal analysis is that it wouldn’t be delayed if they just did it sooner. Which doesn’t make any sense.

                But if you really think you’re smarter than the entire DOJ then why don’t you go stop Trump. Show them how it’s done.

                • CmdrShepard42@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  18 days ago

                  If they try and fail they can’t try again.

                  There’s no “if” about it. They’ve already failed and this trial will never happen.

                  By the time they were ready, a judge delayed the trial at Trumps request.

                  Based on what exactly? Can you provide some sources that actually state that they didn’t have enough to charge him until 2.5 years after his crimes occurred? What are you

                  But your armchair internet legal analysis is that it wouldn’t be delayed if they just did it sooner. Which doesn’t make any sense.

                  Where did I state this exactly? I’m arguing that delays wouldn’t have mattered if they had charged him long before he’d already campaigned and won the Republican nomination. He was able to avoid a trial precisely because they waited until this point in time to do anything. Delaying is a common tactic in cases with people like him. Who couldn’t have seen that coming? Are you arguing that Garland nor anyone else in the DOJ could have predicted this outcome? How do you argue that th

                  But if you really think you’re smarter than the entire DOJ then why don’t you go stop Trump. Show them how it’s done.

                  Well I can surely have a case against Trump dismissed as an armchair legal expert, so I guess that makes me equally competent to the best that the DOJ had to offer under Biden and the DNC’s leadership.

                  • UsernameHere@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    17 days ago

                    From the article:

                    Smith said he was seeking to drop the charges against the president-elect “without prejudice,” which would keep the door open for charges to be brought again in the future.

                    Unless you’re pretending you can see the future.

                    Based on what exactly? Can you provide some sources that actually state that they didn’t have enough to charge him until 2.5 years after his crimes occurred? What are you

                    Based on the order of events. You’re the one claiming they built their case then didn’t do anything until there was just enough time to delay. The burden of proof is on you to support that claim.

                    I’m arguing that delays wouldn’t have mattered if they had charged him long before he’d already campaigned and won the Republican nomination. He was able to avoid a trial precisely because they waited until this point in time to do anything. Delaying is a common tactic in cases with people like him.

                    If they charged him before he would still delay. You said it yourself. It doesn’t matter when they charge him. Either way he delays until after the election.

                    Well I can surely have a case against Trump dismissed as an armchair legal expert, so I guess that makes me equally competent to the best that the DOJ had to offer under Biden and the DNC’s leadership.

                    You couldn’t even read the article or support your claim that the DOJ waited before charging Trump.