politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Just for comparison, the Feds indicted some random person for selling pirated TV shows in 2019 and didn't get a conviction until this month. That's five years, and the SCOTUS wasn't even helping him drag the case out.
Federal cases take a long time when defendants insist on going to trial and dragging things out.
Marric Garland didn't even start the poccess until over 2.5 years after it happened.
for a better comparison, go with Jack Teixera- the Discord Leaks Guy. After they were discovered, it took all of a week to figure out his identity, arrest him, and secure further leaks.
It took over 6 months to get the documents back- when they knew exactly who had the documents. No investigation necessary. but he didn't want to be "political."
And by the way, those documents are literally damning evidence of violating several laws for which most Americans would be hanged.
Also, remember, they didn't actually get them all back. Some of the worst secrets are still missing.
I'm curious where this narrative that the case only began in 2023 came from. Smith was appointed in November 2022 and the investigation doesn't necessarily start when the public finds out or when the prosecutor (special or otherwise) is announced.
The leak occurred in 2022, he was indicted in 2023, and he was sentenced in 2024.
And he pled guilty.
Actually, the important subpoenas started in April of 2021
This is what people don't get. Garland started immediately. They don't make big announcements when they start investigating criminals for obvious reasons. The issue is our legal system as a whole.
The idea that there can be no special cases that demand high priority, even when the case is itself about an attack on the republic, is the failure of blind institutionalism. The public also has a right to know that trials will resolve in a timely manner, especially when the trials are about attacks against the People themselves.
"Justice takes time, let Mueller/Garland/Smith work" was the mantra of failure. There was a fetishization of a higher path, where the machinations of law take as long as they need to, with no deadlines or pressing public questions, but instead of leading to a purer and incontrovertible justice, it led to no justice at all.
Garland (and Biden as the one who appointed him) have a very direct responsibility for the loss of degradation of the American republic. Even should Trump's term just pass as a bad four years, long-term damage has been done through this failure.
Special cases cut both ways. Judge Cannon and the SCOTUS would agree with you that Trump was a special case, thus delaying the case further.
Judge Chutkan insisted on treating Trump like any other defendant. I think she had the right approach.
This is why Trump can say the government is broken and it resonates with people. These things should not take years and years. “Right to a speedy trial” needs to be upheld.
The key word there is "right to." If someone is willing to have a plea deal or move quickly to trial, they can. But if you want, and have the resources to pay for a lawyer, you can delay the process out for a very long time. Just because you have a right to a speedy trial doesn't mean you have to exercise that right.
I suggest that we make everyone use a public defender. Problem solved, at least in criminal cases. Nationalize lawyers.
Why would that change speedy trial? Plenty of defendants with PDs waive speedy trial.