Why have no higher ups been arrested?

[Marius25]

MSNBC has been covering the John Eastman emails all day. He carefully orchestrated a plan to throw out ballots in enough areas to give Trump the win.

Why hasn't he been arrested yet? Why hasn't Mark Meadows been arrested? Why hasn't Navarro been arrested? Why hasn't Trump been arrested?

If you or I did a fraction of what these people did, we'd already be sitting in jail.


This really feels like the Mueller report all over again. We think something is going to happen, and never does.

What is Garland and the DoJ doing? There is no justification for zero arrest warrants for these people.

[SoonerPride]

1. There is no good answer to your questions.

But I’m sure you will be told it takes time.

😏

[Irish_Dem]

2. You need patience. Lots and lots of patience.

[Trueblue1968]

76. MY PATIENCE IS GONE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am sick and tired of it all. DO SOMETHING NOW.

[Irish_Dem]

77. Yep, me too.

[Stuart G]

78. My patience is NOT GONE..WHY?. i lived through ...WATERGATE...THAT TOOK TIME, IN THE END, NIXON GONE

& HUMILIATED..Many went to prison. If you watched the whole ugly mess, as I did, you wanted it to be over..and
.................it really wasn't over till Nixon resigned. Took a long time then, and now too.
.................You got to have ...SOLID PROOF!!!

We ain't there yet, but we are getting there. The proof is gradually getting out. It will be up
to Joe Biden, if he sends Trump to prison. Yes, Trump is guilty, but the proof must be attained legally.

.....................We are still having hearings, the proof will come, and it will be.. absolute proof. Why? say that.

......................Very Simple Indeed:.....Donald Trump is an absolute crook who thinks he can get away with everything

.......................Yes, it is that simple..but sometimes it takes time to get the ... ABSOLUTE SOLID PROOF

......................AND ONE MORE.....TIME IS ON OUR SIDE, NOT THE SIDE OF DONALD TRUMP!

[Fiendish Thingy]

3. Grand Jury was seated in February, has been calling witnesses

Most of the significant physical evidence/documents have only emerged in the past few months.

Rushed indictments result in acquittals or dismissals.

DOJ won’t seek indictments until their case is ready.

Real life isn’t like “Law & Order” where crimes are investigated prosecuted and convicted within the hour.

Eastman is going to prison.

[SoCalDavidS]

6. You're Right, Real Life Is Not Like "Law & Order"

On Law & Order, the bad guys are held ACCOUNTABLE.

[Fiendish Thingy]

9. Well, in real life, the jury is still out...

Pun intended.

[Scrivener7]

12. 16 months for a coup is a pretty long-ass Law and Order episode.

[Fiendish Thingy]

20. John Mitchell didn't enter prison until almost 3 years after Watergate

And his prosecution was easier for DOJ and charges were simpler.

Your 16 month timetable is way off as well, since most of the significant evidence has emerged since the beginning of the year when SCOTUS ruled against Trump’s privilege claims (Biden ordered another tranche of Trump documents released just today), and when Pence’s staff, some of whom were in the room when the coup was plotted, have testified to the committee.

So, really, it’s been about 5 months since the evidentiary floodgates opened. Not much time to prepare a case that will result in conviction.

[Scrivener7]

21. It was an attempted coup.

[Fiendish Thingy]

26. Yes, all the more reason to take the time to ensure convictions

Seditious conspiracy is a complex, difficult charge to prosecute- the insurrectionists being prosecuted for seditious conspiracy only received those indictments because of intercepted recordings and messages stating their intent to overturn the election/interfere with the electoral count.

The seditious evidence on the coup architects, showing intent and other required criteria for conviction has only been released in the last few months.

By comparison, Mitchell was convicted of obstruction, perjury, and simple (non-seditious) conspiracy- for prosecutors, a much simpler task to get a conviction.

[gab13by13]

28. DOJ knew about the fake electors over a year ago,

if they didn't they are dumber than the Michigan AG because she was told by the National Archives that they received fake electors documents.

The Eastman coup plan was known about 7 months ago.

[Fiendish Thingy]

34. "Known" and having physical evidence are two very different things

The Eastman coup plan was revealed in somebody’s tell all book (Woodward’s?) last fall, but the documents weren’t released until after SCOTUS ruled on Trump’s privilege claims in January, and they are still coming out from different sources (latest batch is from University of Colorado, IIRC).

DOJ wants an overwhelming, incontestable amount of solid physical evidence to present to the grand jury, and then the courtroom jury.

I’m fine waiting until the end of this year/early next year for indictments that are less likely to be dismissed or result in acquittals.

[Scrivener7]

39. It's nice that you're fine, but this will lose us 2022. And THAT will lose us 2024.

[Fiendish Thingy]

47. A thorough investigation and ultimate conviction of the coup architects will costs us 2022?

Don’t know how closely you follow politics, but the president’s party almost always loses seats in the first midterms. Inflation is pushing 9%.

Losing Roe and the January 6 hearings are the only atypical factors that might tip the balance in Dems’ favor this cycle, but a lot of that will depend on the effectiveness of Dems messaging on those issues.

DOJ indictments later this year might help, but I haven’t seen any serious person suggest it will make or break the outcome of the midterms.

[Demsrule86]

48. No it won't. Roe is the isssue right now and anyone who doesn't vote Democrat because oh

(whiny voice) Merrick Garland yada yada was never voting with us anyway and could never be a dependable vote...Oh, Democrats won't do what I want...damn it...time to elect Republicans because that would be so much better Yeah right.

[Marius25]

63. I disagree. Inflation and gas prices are the issue right now.

That's what the majority of Americans care about.

[Grasswire2]

59. truth nt

[BlackSkimmer]

61. Yep.

Smh.

[Ohio Joe]

65. I've heard this right wing meme since President Biden was elected...

The old 'The party not in power wins big in the mid-terms' bundled up with 'Dems are doing nothing about 1/6'. Yet... Here we are, 6 months out and running neck and neck... You would think it would show by now but... The public hearings coming up... The overturning of Roe yet to show it's effect... But hey, lets call running a proper investigation a loser... We should be crying 'lock them up' instead, just like... Who did that? Someone... Let me think...

[former9thward]

36. Mitchell was convicted of perjury for testimony he gave in July 1973.

He was indicted in early 1974. So about 7 months from the time of the crime. And that was when the DOJ was being run by the same party as the people they were indicting.

This DOJ is run by the opposite party of those they would indict so they aren't "indicting the boss". Far, far easier.

[Fiendish Thingy]

46. Are you seriously comparing the timeline for a perjury indictment to seditious conspiracy? Nt

[former9thward]

51. You were the one who brought up John Mitchell.

Not me....

[Fiendish Thingy]

52. Yes, his charges were simpler than what the coup architects would face

It and still took almost 3 years to put him in prison.

[former9thward]

54. Not to indict him.

Is that your example now? In Jan 2024 will you still be saying it takes 3 years?

[msfiddlestix]

57. Eastman is going to prison? really?

Guess I missed the news he's finally been arrested.

took long enough. when is his sentencing to take place, I don't want to miss it.

[SoCalDavidS]

4. Maybe They'll Get Around To Doing Something After TFG's 2nd Term nt

[Demsrule86]

49. There will be no second term...please stop.

[StarryNite]

68. Many believed the orange one wouldn't have a first term.

[Hoyt]

5. Eastman is low level, like Roger Stone. Not sure there is any evidence on Meadows

that would lead to criminal charges. Sucking up to trump is poor taste at best, but not criminal.

[SoCalDavidS]

8. I Suppose The Only Way It Would Have Been "Criminal," Is If They Had Been Successful

Oh well, maybe next time.

[Hoyt]

17. What exactly did he do, "plotting to overturn election" is not evidence. All for locking him up,

but we gotta have evidence unless the core of the DOJ's case is, "we know they are guilty."

[Just_Vote_Dem]

18. But, but.....they know!!!

They saw it on the teevee!!!!!!!!!!

[SoCalDavidS]

23. I Guess They Were Brilliant Then

I really think we should be envious of TFG. He obviously knows what he's doing. Since he's gotten away with stuff his whole life, and there's not enough evidence to even charge him with a crime, he's a master tactician.

I suppose we'll just have to live with the consequences, if he runs again.

[Hoyt]

24. If he runs again, we better be prepared to beat him at the polls. That's part of democracy, rightly

or wrongly.

Trying to keep him off the ballot by looking to the end of earth is not democracy. Either the evidence is there, or it's not.

He's unfit for office, but that's all we really know and that is not a crime.

[SoCalDavidS]

27. Beat Him At The Polls?

Doesn't seem like "beating him at the polls" stood in the way of his attempting to overturn the last election.

[gab13by13]

31. It hasn't stopped any of them,

the insurrection continues.

[Hoyt]

33. Didn't work, Supreme Court held firm, inaguration was not delayed, and Biden is in WH.

trump staff didn't help in transition. But why would Biden's staff even want those fools to help?

Besides, trying to keep someone off a ballot just doesn't seem right in a democracy. I could probably make an exception for trump, but doubt it's even necessary. He'll be dead in a few years and is losing appeal.

[Scrivener7]

14. So low level doesn't get indicted, hight level doesn't get indicted. Where's the

sweet spot?

[gab13by13]

29. We need to beat them at the polls

so we have a majority in Congress, oh wait. Beating them at the polls won't gain accountability.

[Grasswire2]

60. not so easy, now that state legislators are passing laws..

...that allow them to replace electors with their own slate.

[Hoyt]

35. People you have hard evidence against. If you come up with a trump Sharpie map drawn for

Proud Boyz showing them where to enter the Capitol, you have him.

If all we've got is trump said "fight," we are in trouble.

[Scrivener7]

41. You keep saying that too. The experts prosecutors in NYC said they had the proof, which is

easy to believe because it was a paper case. But that disappeared.

The proof in the obstruction of justice case was quite public, but the statute of limitations on that has run out.

This insistence that "ho hum we never bring cases because there is never any proof" doesn't really jive with reality.

[Hoyt]

43. So you too are going to bash a newly elected Democratic DA because a couple of old guys

got mad because the DA overruled them by saying something like, "we don't have enough evidence, not one witness to testify as to trump's involvement."

They aren't the first old guys who quit when a young boss -- with more responsibility and things to worry about they those 2 guys can even imagine -- said, No. I hope that's the extent of their dissatifaction.

It is not a paper case. The DA has to PROVE trump, not his staff, intended to defraud the city, state. Admittedly, we all know that is true, but you have to prove it.

The trump organization will still have to pay back taxes if the tax authority can prove they manipulated things. But that's far from a criminal conviction.

The solution would be for trump to just drop dead eating fried chicken.

[Scrivener7]

62. Oh, honey, it's Trump and it's New York City. Of course I am.

Cases brought against him in NYC ALWAYS mysteriously disappear.

And they always have.

[Carlitos Brigante]

64. This whole "old guys vs young guy" bullshit is completely made up by you. If it's not, I'm

sure you'll have plenty to back it up. Right, Capt. Evidence?

[Hoyt]

66. I'm sure you have evidence the duly elected Democratic DA is a trumpster.

[Carlitos Brigante]

67. Since I've never even remotely claimed that.... NEXT!!! Now your turn to

prove the horseshit you've been repeating ad nauseam.

[Hoyt]

69. So you are not bashing the DA for deciding it best not to indict the POS since evidence is lacking?

[Carlitos Brigante]

70. Well Mr. Strawmam, even you should be able to realize how lame that is. I'm

sure in your head you think you're being clever. But it's just sad. Criticizing someone, when their own colleagues are being critical. Is not not anywhere in the orbit of "this guy is a Donald Trump lackey". That's one. Two, I'm still waiting for you to back up your claims about this being just some "generational thing". You see, I don't need to make up some bullshit to be critical of someone. Maybe you should try it. What all this tells me is that you're not interested in honest discussions. Just some sub-par trolling, at best.

But hey, good luck with all that.

[Hoyt]

71. OK, the old guys quit because they didn't like the new DA, their boss. What makes you think these

two old guys are right about there being sufficient evidence to convict trump, and the DA is shrieking his duty (which apparently to you guys is to indict trump not matter what else is going on in Manhattan)?

[Carlitos Brigante]

79. WTF are you even talking about? Listen, just so we're clear. Your little

lame ass rhetorical games aside. These are not some geriatric patients they pull out so they me retirement home. Your weird obsession with their age as a sort of device to weasel yourself out of these arguments, mean dick to me. Where I come from, it's called experience. If you have any evidence, anything at all that indicates these persecutors are incompetent, unethical, what have you. Put up, or please STFU. You're embarrassing yourself.

Again, I know I'm wasting my time here, but point out where you're getting the whole "they don't like the guy". This ain't high school or the playground. These are grown ass men who stepped away from jobs in the private sector, to build a case against the dumbest fucking high profile criminal I've seen in my life. They put in the work. They believe they had a case. This isn't some "neener, neener, we don't like you." type situation. If you claim that it is. Bring the receipts. This is the third time I've asked to bank up your made up claims. You're still unable to point to anything concrete. What makes you think they're lying?

Do yourself a favor and stay away from the childish strawmen. Regardless of what else is going on in Manhattan, and not a single person has claimed this is the only case they should work on. A prosecutor should be able at a bare minimum, to walk and chew gum.

Lastly, look up the meaning of shrieking.

[Hoyt]

80. Your bashing a good Democrat DA for no reason is unjustified. nt.

[Carlitos Brigante]

82. And you're repeating yourself, like a child who doesn't know any better. Bet you didn't even know

who the fuck this guy was up until a few months ago. And now you're crying like he's your daddy. Pathetic.

[WarGamer]

7. Being charged with a crime comes before arrest, btw...

[Celerity]

10. +1

[gab13by13]

30. Investigation comes first,

without investigations everything else is moot.

[FuzzyRabbit]

11. Remember the book, "Dress for Success" from the 1970s?

There was a section in the book where the author explained why some workers are assigned company uniforms and others aren't. The executives who make these decisions decide that themselves and everyone above them in the hierarchy can wear their own clothes, everyone below them must wear a (usually embarrassing) uniform.

Lawyers are pretty much the same. They will not prosecute government officials who they think outrank them. TFG, Mark Meadows, etc were higher ranking officials than justice department attorneys, therefore they will not be prosecuted for their crimes.

Sorry to be such a gloomy Gus, but he sooner we accept this the sooner we can focus more on things we can do something about.

[onecaliberal]

13. We have to wait, something something. And really how do we know what they meant to do?

They’re making a list and checking it thrice.

Just in case it’s not patently obvious.

[Scrivener7]

15. Also, opinions and those who hold or express them are evil.

They must be harangued and insulted.

[Just_Vote_Dem]

22. I hear you

People who understand how long the system can take get insulted and harangued when they try to explain how long the justice system can take. It took years before the guy who nearly killed my aunt finally came for trial, and he ended up getting away with it anyway.

[gab13by13]

32. It really takes a long time if there is no investigation first.

What takes time are the appeals and scheduling trials then appeals. To get there someone needs to look for evidence, the select committee does not indict.

[Scrivener7]

38. I'm sorry about your aunt.

[Ohio Joe]

25. If that were true, one might expect to see that already...

I've been hearing the 'the party not in power wins big in the mid-terms' meme since President Biden was elected and yet... Here we are six months out and running neck & neck. We still have the televised hearings coming up, plus the effect of repugs overturning Roe is still to be felt... I think I'll pass on the baseless doom and gloom about November.

[Demsrule86]

50. I fully expect it won't...and I take exception to this post which does not support Democrats.

in any way.

[SoCalDavidS]

53. I Support Democrats

Just because I'm pointing out something that I believe will cost them votes, does not mean I don't support them.

If you can't see that Democratic voters will feel demoralized, if there is no accountability, then I don't know what to tell you.

I'm not the only one to express this opinion at DU, and the others who did support Democrats too.

[bucolic_frolic]

19. We are not them, and they are elites

and many would be dragged down with them, and our guys would be persecuted if we set this precedent. So the powers that be are grappling with the ramifications of prosecuting high political crimes.

[choie]

37. it's amazing that other countries

can hold their leaders accountable, but the exceptional U.S.A. can't.

[BlueIdaho]

40. That is an unavoidable fact.

And it removes any claim to the greatness of our “democracy.”

[bucolic_frolic]

42. Perhaps that's a matter of perception

Elite crimes tend to get buried and not travel overseas. Are the Brits or the Canadians or the Australians doing any better? How about the French or Israelis or the Italians? They catch their criminal leaders, years and years later.

[Demsrule86]

55. Suppose 'higher ups' never get arrested? Is that a reason to sit home and pout thereby

electing Republicans who will further destroy the courts and everything else? There may not be enough fucking evidence for a conviction. I don't know for sure. However this I know, it was not voting for the Democratic nominee in 16 General that placed us in this situation and elected Trump. My suggestion is to stop with the Blackmail that is rampant (nice midterm you got there and if you don't XYZ...it might not be so nice) on this thread and vote for Democrats in the midterm...for Fuck sake there was a SCOTUS justice already on hold in 16.

And still, we heard 'but her emails'...now we hear if 'we can't get indictments yadda, yadda. It's the same thing and will cause worse consequences than even 16. There is never any reason to elect Republicans-not ever. So let's all put our differences aside, put on our big girl/ big boy pants, and vote a straight Democratic ticket in the midterm. We need to all show-up. This midterm is a BFD.

[betsuni]

56. +1

[KY_EnviroGuy]

58. Because America has lost its moral footing.

In America and most of the free world, money and asset control means power and little else counts. Lying to, and deceiving our general public seems an admirable quality for many. Throwing shade and projecting are now graduate-level skills. Having white skin provides access to the free and easy lane.

Because there are no statutory penalties for intentionally lying for political or monetary gain ('cause free speech and aww shucks), corporations and the ultra-wealthy can continue to brainwash the public and control more of our lives.

In my experience, our system of justice protects the wealthy and can destroy a good working person's life with one arrest for petty crime.

KY

[Efilroft Sul]

72. As expected, a sensible woodchuck alerted on your post.

[ChazII]

73. I wonder what

the jury will rule.

[Marius25]

74. Why would someone alert this post for asking why we're not seeing arrests?

[Efilroft Sul]

75. You asked a non-woodchucky question.

[Carlitos Brigante]

81. .