> Boasberg’s straight-talk opinion was a long time coming. The obvious result of a Justice Department co-opted by a corrupt president was always going to be a department that judges cannot trust. Boasberg’s decision rubs the shine off the Justice Department, exposing it for what it has become.
>
> Boasberg, who already has a history with the lies and evasions of the Trump Justice Department, was remarkably frank about why he is not giving prosecutors the benefit of the doubt. He laid out quite clearly that Trump wants to get rid of Powell; that allegations against Powell originated with Bill Pulte, the same official who found bogus evidence for the department to go after several other of Trump’s political targets; and that the DOJ has a history of pursuing these phony prosecutions at Trump’s command.
FreshRest4945 on
I for one am shocked at this development. Trumps cronies in the DOJ will be really put off when they hear this news. They might even stop politically prosecuting people. Oh who am I kidding, they will just keep denying US citizens due process and do what ever the fuck Trump tells them to do.
Impressive_Bat_5763 on
A federal judge putting on record that he no longer trusts the DOJ’s word is not a rebuke, it’s a diagnosis.
markroth69 on
“If a President cannot prosecute his enemies on flimsy charges for entirely political reasons, we won’t have a country,” Sam Alito, next Tuesday
The_color_gold on
That’s great, but what are they doing to **do** about it?
GuthramNaysayer on
It would be American and law abiding if all this “condemnation, slamming, censuring, opposing and ridiculing, would ever amount to some semblance of American accountability.” Oy
Fabriciorodrix on
7
pattyG80 on
Ladies and gentlemen, they have been called out.
Alive_Astronomer3950 on
I watched one of the press briefings, and I’m not a lawyer, but it seems like she has a logical case (she cited cases where she has authority, but I didn’t look into this and am taking her assessment as factual). She requested a grand jury to investigate the disappearance/misuse of a billion dollars but the judge dismissed it because he doesn’t think she should look into it.
Can someone explain why this is a bad thing? Smells like corruption to me, but maybe I’m missing something.
9 Comments
A bit from the piece:
> Boasberg’s straight-talk opinion was a long time coming. The obvious result of a Justice Department co-opted by a corrupt president was always going to be a department that judges cannot trust. Boasberg’s decision rubs the shine off the Justice Department, exposing it for what it has become.
>
> Boasberg, who already has a history with the lies and evasions of the Trump Justice Department, was remarkably frank about why he is not giving prosecutors the benefit of the doubt. He laid out quite clearly that Trump wants to get rid of Powell; that allegations against Powell originated with Bill Pulte, the same official who found bogus evidence for the department to go after several other of Trump’s political targets; and that the DOJ has a history of pursuing these phony prosecutions at Trump’s command.
I for one am shocked at this development. Trumps cronies in the DOJ will be really put off when they hear this news. They might even stop politically prosecuting people. Oh who am I kidding, they will just keep denying US citizens due process and do what ever the fuck Trump tells them to do.
A federal judge putting on record that he no longer trusts the DOJ’s word is not a rebuke, it’s a diagnosis.
“If a President cannot prosecute his enemies on flimsy charges for entirely political reasons, we won’t have a country,” Sam Alito, next Tuesday
That’s great, but what are they doing to **do** about it?
It would be American and law abiding if all this “condemnation, slamming, censuring, opposing and ridiculing, would ever amount to some semblance of American accountability.” Oy
7
Ladies and gentlemen, they have been called out.
I watched one of the press briefings, and I’m not a lawyer, but it seems like she has a logical case (she cited cases where she has authority, but I didn’t look into this and am taking her assessment as factual). She requested a grand jury to investigate the disappearance/misuse of a billion dollars but the judge dismissed it because he doesn’t think she should look into it.
Can someone explain why this is a bad thing? Smells like corruption to me, but maybe I’m missing something.