Both Sides: Why we don't fuck with the GOP
- Thread starter donwuan
- Start date
MeidasTouch News home
Dangerous Projection: A Call to Weaponize Prosecutors Against Democrats
Many safeguards exist to prevent abuse.
Perhaps the best part of being a District Attorney is that no elected or appointed official is your boss -- not even the Attorney General or President of the United States. We report only to the people of our local communities who elect us. As long as they remain satisfied with our job performance, we get to stay on the job. So as the MAGA world continues to publicly blame President Biden for pulling the strings on DA Alvin Bragg, Jr.’s prosecution of their leader, their attacks are either intentionally deceptive or betray a fundamental misunderstanding of how our criminal justice system works.
As a current State Attorney (which is the same position as District Attorney), I can attest that no one from the White House has ever called my office to discuss a potential or pending case. In fact, I’ve never even been invited to a White House Chanukah party, even though my name must be on someone’s Democratic elected official list. And if the White House ever called a local prosecutor to urge a criminal investigation, it would probably be me, since my jurisdiction includes Mar-a-Lago.
A recent New York Times story shows that Team Trump is once again projecting when they claim that local prosecutors have been weaponized against the former President. The article quotes Stephen Miller asking “Is every Republican D.A. starting every investigation they need to right now?” Steve Bannon told the Times that “there are dozens of ambitious backbencher state attorneys general and district attorneys who need to ‘seize the day’ and own this moment in history” by prosecuting Democrats.
This attempt to pervert the criminal justice system for political gain should fail, however, as there are built-in guardrails to protect against out-of-control prosecutors who violate our ethical requirements and engage in so-called “lawfare.”
Grand juries can refuse to indict when the evidence is unconvincing. The Bill Barr Justice Department investigated former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, a frequent Trump critic, for two years over allegedly inaccurate statements he made to FBI investigators around the time of the 2016 election. Trump repeatedly and publicly demanded that McCabe be arrested, but the DOJ closed the investigation without charges after a Washington, DC grand jury reportedly refused to indict.
Judges are another guardrail against prosecutorial abuse. They can dismiss criminal charges for a variety of reasons, including lack of evidence, mistake of law, or selective prosecution. Then there are juries, who are famously independent and can only find a defendant guilty if the crime is proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and must do so unanimously. Just a single juror can thwart a guilty verdict and create a hung jury.
Special counsel John Durham had a distinguished career as a state and federal prosecutor before Attorney General Bill Barr appointed him to lead a politically motivated investigation into the origins of the Russia probe. After three-and-a-half years, Durham put two individuals on trial for allegedly lying to the FBI. Both cases were built on shaky evidence and resulted in embarrassing acquittals, forever staining Durham’s reputation. No prosecutor wants to share that same fate.
Prosecutors who charge high-profile individuals face intense public scrutiny and verbal attacks, and it is much worse when the evidence is weak and the law is vague. Moreover, office morale would suffer if already overworked employees with large caseloads are told to divert attention to the boss’s political witch hunt.
No prosecutor wants to end up like Michael Nifong, either. He is the infamous North Carolina District Attorney whose malicious prosecution of members of the Duke lacrosse team in 2006 for political benefit disgraced our entire profession. Nifong won his election but was later removed from office, disbarred and jailed for his actions.
Prosecutors are given the rare, immense power to deprive others of their freedom, which is why there are built-in protections against those who go rogue. Miller, Bannon and other Trump loyalists may be searching for a Republican Nifong to exact revenge and help Trump’s electoral prospects, but without the facts and law clearly on their side, it is very unlikely that any prosecutor would succeed. What is more likely is that the weaponized prosecutor loses their reputation, their bar license, and possibly their freedom.
This attempt to pervert the criminal justice system for political gain should fail, however, as there are built-in guardrails to protect against out-of-control prosecutors who violate our ethical requirements and engage in so-called “lawfare.”
Grand juries can refuse to indict when the evidence is unconvincing. The Bill Barr Justice Department investigated former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, a frequent Trump critic, for two years over allegedly inaccurate statements he made to FBI investigators around the time of the 2016 election. Trump repeatedly and publicly demanded that McCabe be arrested, but the DOJ closed the investigation without charges after a Washington, DC grand jury reportedly refused to indict.
Judges are another guardrail against prosecutorial abuse. They can dismiss criminal charges for a variety of reasons, including lack of evidence, mistake of law, or selective prosecution. Then there are juries, who are famously independent and can only find a defendant guilty if the crime is proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and must do so unanimously. Just a single juror can thwart a guilty verdict and create a hung jury.
Special counsel John Durham had a distinguished career as a state and federal prosecutor before Attorney General Bill Barr appointed him to lead a politically motivated investigation into the origins of the Russia probe. After three-and-a-half years, Durham put two individuals on trial for allegedly lying to the FBI. Both cases were built on shaky evidence and resulted in embarrassing acquittals, forever staining Durham’s reputation. No prosecutor wants to share that same fate.
Prosecutors who charge high-profile individuals face intense public scrutiny and verbal attacks, and it is much worse when the evidence is weak and the law is vague. Moreover, office morale would suffer if already overworked employees with large caseloads are told to divert attention to the boss’s political witch hunt.
No prosecutor wants to end up like Michael Nifong, either. He is the infamous North Carolina District Attorney whose malicious prosecution of members of the Duke lacrosse team in 2006 for political benefit disgraced our entire profession. Nifong won his election but was later removed from office, disbarred and jailed for his actions.
Prosecutors are given the rare, immense power to deprive others of their freedom, which is why there are built-in protections against those who go rogue. Miller, Bannon and other Trump loyalists may be searching for a Republican Nifong to exact revenge and help Trump’s electoral prospects, but without the facts and law clearly on their side, it is very unlikely that any prosecutor would succeed. What is more likely is that the weaponized prosecutor loses their reputation, their bar license, and possibly their freedom.
This is how Vivica a Fox sure had look if she didn’t do crazy surgery to herself.
Yeah he tries and I respect it. You can tell he trying to use his voice to get blacks to vote Biden
I was just coming to post this for Elie's comment and all the rest. Click the first tweet and follow down.
I think it was sarcasm.
I used to be amazed at how little people knew about how this works. Now? Not so much.
Damn the caffeine ain’t kicked in yet. I read medical school debt smh. Lol
Naw this is great though.
I got the sarcasm as far as pandering, it just didn't make sense as far as the object of pandering. Maybe I'm overthinking it tho.
See, woodchuck had me second guessing my reading comprehension.
My bad, sis.
I’m not completely throwing Luke on the bus because he don’t get down with Trump but at the same time he don’t need to spread misinformation. I understand what he is saying and he is right but the US president is not a king he needs to support of local government and Congress to do the right things
This is why if a real Civil War ever pop off white people in the south would not fare too well, especially marching through places like South Atlanta, and certain parts of Birmingham, Alabama in an example.
These the same people who were mad at Obama’s Mustard on a hamburger
Guilty unfortunately it’s payback for Don
Yep all 3. I don't think it's payback tho, just the evidence. It will be interesting to watch the GOP spin a convicted son of a president as worse than a convicted president.
On a case nobody gives a fuck about
Agreed. When I said it's not payback I mean as far as the jury. The case should have never been brought. He had a deal.
Hey, at the end of the day, President Biden is like hey my son you fucked up. He have to suffer the consequences. Joseph Biden tried to help his son, but the drugs sometimes could get the best of you. Hunter is not bad person. He just let the drugs take over his life for a brief minute. And Hunter Biden is taking this conviction like a man he’s not going whining like Trump when he got convicted.