Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Hrekires t1_jcz94y5 wrote

Just here to appreciate the irony of Jim Jordan demanding testimony from others while he himself ignored subpoenas when issued for his own testimony on the Jan. 6th hearings.

52

BakedBread65 t1_jczkzcz wrote

Alvin Bragg should just hide in the shower, Jim Jordan will always turn a blind eye to what’s going on there

41

Disused_Yeti t1_jcz9b78 wrote

that letter will go right into the circular file

18

Rottimer t1_jczqt8x wrote

As it should. The ridiculousness of congressmen asking a local prosecutor to testify about a possible indictment on an ongoing case before the grand jury has even handed down a decision is fucking asinine and I expect entirely unprecedented.

Tell me they’re not trying to influence a decision on a criminal matter.

24

EWC_2015 t1_jczr7cs wrote

Even if/when the indictment is voted, it's sealed as a matter of state law until it's actually filed in court at the arraignment. And then it's a matter of prosecutorial ethics to litigate the case in the courts and not out in the open where it could influence potential trial jurors.

So many levels of stupid here by the House GOP.

11

Law-of-Poe t1_jd01xa0 wrote

Republicans are seething that they’ve spent the last six years all-in talking about how Clinton and Hunter are criminals and through all of their exhaustive investigations, no crimes have been found.

And then every time you look under the rug with trump and co, you find new crimes

16

Dont_mute_me_bro t1_jd2v8da wrote

The problem is, that in our system, crimes must be proven in a court of law. They can't seem to get that part down.

4

drpvn t1_jcz92ph wrote

“Nah”

15

Rottimer t1_jczrh93 wrote

By the way, this is exactly why Bragg’s office declined to immediately prosecute Trump when he first got into office and those 2 attorneys resigned in protest. With a case like this, you have to dot your i’s and cross your t’s before any indictment, as the wrath of MAGA world will immediately be on the office if the grand jury says there is enough for a trial.

Clearly he did not feel the case was ready back then.

8

drpvn t1_jd02p9h wrote

It may still be a weak case.

5

mowotlarx t1_jd08o7f wrote

Republicans: "Alvin Bragg, stop protecting criminals!"

Bragg: (Goes after a well documented unapologetic criminal)

Republicans: "NO, NOT LIKE THAT"

8

langenoirx t1_jdo2txl wrote

>Bragg: (Goes after a well documented unapologetic criminal)

Bragg had the opportunity to "Go after a well-documented unapologetic criminal" last year and passed on it. If he moves forward first with an indictment of Trump now, before Georiga than Bragg needs to be removed from office. Moving forward with the Stormy Daniels case is only going to help Trump politically.

0

mowotlarx t1_jdop84t wrote

>passed on it.

He literally just spent more time gathering evidence and making a stronger case. And you're mad at it? K.

1

langenoirx t1_jdowusw wrote

>He literally just spent more time gathering evidence and making a stronger case. And you're mad at it? K.

He had a case before. He passed on it because he wasn't ready, not the case. Now when there is a case of much higher magnitude in Georgia over election results he decides he wants to step in again? And the portion he's has a "stronger case" for is the Stormy Daniels hush money payments that the FED passed on because of Michael Cohen.

He's on tape trying to have election results changed in Georgia. There are three people he tried to coerce, are involved with the Georgia elections, and who don't have felony charges.

And Bragg wants to charge him for paying for sex???

Nah. Bragg needs to sit down & shut up in regard to Trump and worry about the actual crime in NYC.

1

TheNormalAlternative t1_jd0jwwl wrote

Pretty sure the federal government has no right to interfere with a State's investigation and prosecution of a private individual for violations of that State's laws.

6

Medical-Ad-4141 t1_jczwb05 wrote

What is: the deliberative privilege

1

DoctorK16 t1_jd0slov wrote

Doesn’t apply here at all.

0

Medical-Ad-4141 t1_jd284wb wrote

Why

1

DoctorK16 t1_jd464td wrote

Why would it? You’re the one asserting it. Hint are they going to ask for what went in to the decision to prosecute? Or what was going on after the decision was made?

Btw, your username is giving bot vibes and I don’t care if trump gets locked up. Just don’t like misinformation.

1

Medical-Ad-4141 t1_jd48e7h wrote

Thanks for the response. Given that the letter to Bragg makes lengthy allegations concerning the process by which the DA determined to charge Trump, it seems reasonable to think that would become the subject of inquiry from the committee. And, as your “hint” suggests, information concerning internal deliberations about charging decisions would be subject to the privilege.

I don’t think this is “misinformation.” At best, we have a good faith disagreement about whether issues implicating the privilege will arise. I also don’t know what my username has to do with things. It would be the stupidest use of a bot ever to engage in abstract legal debates with random people on Reddit.

1

DoctorK16 t1_jd4ft5w wrote

The deliberations have to come prior to the charging decision, Counsel for a court to properly allow its assertion.

Being that Jordan holds an in real life JD and being chair of the House Judiciary Committee, I’m sure he knows he’s not getting any pre-charging information. That does not mean the privilege can be applied blanketly as your comments seem to suggest.

1

codernyc t1_jd3v45s wrote

Bragg is a lifetime fuck up. He’ll mess this shit up too. But if by some miracle he makes it stick then great.

Either Trump loses or Bragg loses. It’s a win-win for me.

1

xxl_gal t1_jd517ut wrote

Alvin Bragg is now my favorite Soros-funded DA ❤❤

1

Dont_mute_me_bro t1_jd2vtx8 wrote

I respect the fact that an investigation takes time and that a case must be thoroughly investigated, but this is a long time coming. The fact that members of Bragg's staff who were assigned to the case resigned from their jobs during the investigation is like rats leaving a ship- not a good sign that it's a strong case. The star witnesses (a crooked lawyer and a porn star) aren't exactly pillars of the community, which doesn't help. The fact that Tish James didn't do anything either is also a sign that this is no slam dunk.

If it fails, at a certain point, it's going to seem like a witch hunt if they don't get something to stick.

0

Rottimer t1_jd3eyzf wrote

How can you know about the the members of his staff leaving, but not know the details. They quit in protest because Bragg did not feel the case was yet strong enough. They told anyone that would listen that Trump was a criminal and Bragg was wrong to DELAY indicting him.

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2022/03/06/politics/trump-manhattan-district-attorney-investigation/index.html

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/looming-trump-charges-follow-criticism-ny-prosecutor-not-acting-sooner-2023-03-18/

2

Dont_mute_me_bro t1_jd7f6q9 wrote

CNN is becoming akin to Fox- a narrative spinner. That said, those dudes quit right after the disastrous laughingstock Kyle Rittenhouse trial, where the prosecutors became internationally synonymous with ineptness and failed prosecutorial over-reach (because the were pressured to bring a weak case). Anyway, let's see how the case plays out.

−1

Jimmy_kong253 t1_jd0517s wrote

Doesn't he have real crimes to go after? Leave trump to the state and the feds

−12

mowotlarx t1_jd0g5v8 wrote

This is a real crime.

What, are you soft on crime or something?

9

JohnDavidsBooty t1_jd0pi0v wrote

> the state

tell me you don't know how state legal systems work without telling me you don't know how state legal systems work

6

bittoxic00 t1_jd0q940 wrote

It’s definitely going to be tied up in the courts for quite some time and likely stalled hoping he can just pardon himself from the White House

0