General Discussion

dpibel

(3,460 posts)

17. Oh, my

Tue Sep 14, 2021, 09:20 PM

Sep 2021

You honestly don't understand the principle of prosecutorial discretion?

That's not a state/federal issue.

As for the DU poll, what case am I making? I just wanted to know where you stand on your own poll. Seems like a legitimate inquiry to me.

I mean, really. We're not talking polls here in any meaningful sense of the word. DU polls, like any online poll, are editorial.

I just wanted to understand what your editorial was saying.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

53 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Poll: What is the reason Trump hasn't been indicted yet? [View all] brooklynite Sep 2021 OP

I hope it is #1. I honestly don't have a sense but I do think Garland would be strategic. hlthe2b Sep 2021 #1

I'll credit our media for keeping the pressure, off. ShazamIam Sep 2021 #2

You're saying Garland needs to be pressured? brooklynite Sep 2021 #3

No, I mean if the media pressured, the DOJ would have been on a hiring spree; immediately after the ShazamIam Sep 2021 #4

"the DOJ would have been on a hiring spree" brooklynite Sep 2021 #5

I'm only basing it on my near instant recollection of the crimes of the Trump administration. Of ShazamIam Sep 2021 #7

"my near instant recollection of the crimes of the Trump administration" brooklynite Sep 2021 #9

I don't know. What do you think, is it projection? ShazamIam Sep 2021 #13

WTF knows Historic NY Sep 2021 #6

What is your answer? dpibel Sep 2021 #8

As stated before, I'm comfortable that indictments will be forthcoming when there's a case... brooklynite Sep 2021 #10

So safe with all outcomes! dpibel Sep 2021 #11

"And if they don't, there wasn't a case!" brooklynite Sep 2021 #12

Fascinating dpibel Sep 2021 #14

Can I distinguish between the two cases? Yes. brooklynite Sep 2021 #15

Oh, my dpibel Sep 2021 #17

Of course I understand prosecutorial discretion. Provide evidence that it's occurring. brooklynite Sep 2021 #19

"Provide evidence that it's occurring"?? dpibel Sep 2021 #23

The difference is that my assessment doesn't then require an assumption that..... brooklynite Sep 2021 #26

Well, gosh dpibel Sep 2021 #29

"Here in America, we don't ever prosecute former presidents, regardless of the facts." brooklynite Sep 2021 #33

That's one of the oddest things I've ever read dpibel Sep 2021 #37

The POINT is that YOU'RE jumping to: "the AG has chosen not to prosecute" brooklynite Sep 2021 #40

I'm sticking with dpibel Sep 2021 #43

This poll is absolutely biased. And isn't intended to reveal facts... brooklynite Sep 2021 #45

Duly asked dpibel Sep 2021 #46

I didn't vote for Johnson (because I was 5) brooklynite Sep 2021 #47

Well, OK. I accept your concession. dpibel Sep 2021 #48

Of course being a Democrat doesn't equate to being ethical... brooklynite Sep 2021 #49

Prove your unicorns! dpibel Sep 2021 #50

The Georgia state prosecutor isn't even close to being in the same category as Merrick Garland StarfishSaver Sep 2021 #35

I'm sorry that you don't understand dpibel Sep 2021 #44

Michael Cohen served time for campaign finance violations gab13by13 Sep 2021 #16

Okay, let's parse this... brooklynite Sep 2021 #18

Given what Cohen has said dpibel Sep 2021 #20

"What do you figger the prosecutor's doubt is based on?" brooklynite Sep 2021 #21

You're out of your element dpibel Sep 2021 #25

Same reason Jesus hasn't come back yet Effete Snob Sep 2021 #22

"They" might be "you" but it's not "us" questionseverything Sep 2021 #24

So President Obama and his Attorney General wasn't "us" either? This is getting confusing. brooklynite Sep 2021 #27

It really shouldn't be dpibel Sep 2021 #31

You can criticize his POLICIES all you want... brooklynite Sep 2021 #34

The evidence is all over c span this morning questionseverything Sep 2021 #51

If there is a prosecution iemanja Sep 2021 #28

It's going to be hard to make a case against Trump. Calista241 Sep 2021 #30

Exactly LeftInTX Sep 2021 #38

It will be hard to prove a case against him, but testimony about anything he said is not necessarily StarfishSaver Sep 2021 #42

They never went after Bush Co. Johonny Sep 2021 #32

The cases against Bush were much more complex. The shitbeast is more of a blatant criminal. LymphocyteLover Sep 2021 #36

I disagree Johonny Sep 2021 #39

I agree the torture was a clear cut case for an international court but it was never going to be LymphocyteLover Sep 2021 #52

Doubt DOJ has trump high on their list at this time. Hoyt Sep 2021 #41

Trump is rich and powerful AZProgressive Sep 2021 #53