Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)Poll: What is the reason Trump hasn't been indicted yet? [View all]
The number of people who claim that "they" won't indict Trump because he's one of "them" seem to ignore the fact they "they" is currently "us".
38 votes, 6 passes | Time left: Unlimited | |
AG Garland is working methodically and the case isn't ready yet | |
19 (50%) |
|
AG Garland is intentionally delaying the progress of the prosecution case | |
0 (0%) |
|
AG Garland never plans to indict Trump for political reasons | |
19 (50%) |
|
AG Garland's prosecutors and US Attorney's aren't doing what he wants | |
0 (0%) |
|
6 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided. | |
Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll |
53 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I hope it is #1. I honestly don't have a sense but I do think Garland would be strategic.
hlthe2b
Sep 2021
#1
No, I mean if the media pressured, the DOJ would have been on a hiring spree; immediately after the
ShazamIam
Sep 2021
#4
I'm only basing it on my near instant recollection of the crimes of the Trump administration. Of
ShazamIam
Sep 2021
#7
As stated before, I'm comfortable that indictments will be forthcoming when there's a case...
brooklynite
Sep 2021
#10
Of course I understand prosecutorial discretion. Provide evidence that it's occurring.
brooklynite
Sep 2021
#19
The difference is that my assessment doesn't then require an assumption that.....
brooklynite
Sep 2021
#26
"Here in America, we don't ever prosecute former presidents, regardless of the facts."
brooklynite
Sep 2021
#33
The Georgia state prosecutor isn't even close to being in the same category as Merrick Garland
StarfishSaver
Sep 2021
#35
So President Obama and his Attorney General wasn't "us" either? This is getting confusing.
brooklynite
Sep 2021
#27
It will be hard to prove a case against him, but testimony about anything he said is not necessarily
StarfishSaver
Sep 2021
#42
The cases against Bush were much more complex. The shitbeast is more of a blatant criminal.
LymphocyteLover
Sep 2021
#36
I agree the torture was a clear cut case for an international court but it was never going to be
LymphocyteLover
Sep 2021
#52