General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIf you've been enjoying the deposition releases from the Dominion v Fox case, consider this.....
They were of events from 2+ years ago. The timeline for this CIVIL trial has taken as long as the CRIMINAL investigation of Trump and his supporters, but nobody has been complaining that Dominion's lawyers aren't doing an effective job.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
gab13by13
(21,337 posts)Time matters when one waits to start the investigation. Thank you for highlighting the importance of getting investigations started promptly. (not wait for a pyramid investigation)
The E. Jean Carroll defamation lawsuit has been going on for over 3 1/2 years with the trial scheduled for April, I believe.
We need more threads like this.
One other point, the Iowa caucus is Jan. 23rd, 2024, do you think that Garland will allow Jack Smith to indict Trump on Jan. 22nd or 30 days prior to Jan. 23rd? I believe that DOJ has until this November to indict Trump or Garland will appear to be partisan.
Also, it takes longer to subpoena, access a phone, get documents from politicians, attorneys, cabinet members, advisors who are delaying by claiming executive immunity, executive privilege, attorney client privilege, the speech and debate clause. Those criminals should have been at the top of the list for Garland because it takes longer to investigate them.
The FBI seized Scott Perry's phone last August and can't access it and probably won't have access for 4 to 6 more months, meanwhile Perry is investigating, attacking, the FBI.
Jack Smith is trying to get around those delay tactics by going to a judge and forcing people to testify, hope it works. Jack Smith is trying to play catch up.
brooklynite
(94,559 posts)That said, given the current progress, I have no reason to doubt that if an indictment comes it will come this year.
Scrivener7
(50,949 posts)gab13by13
(21,337 posts)I was worried that Garland wouldn't let Smith indict Trump on Jan. 22nd, 1 day before the Iowa caucus. Was worried that Garland may appear to be partisan if he did that. I can rest easy knowing it only applies to the general election, even though that isn't in writing, is it?
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,001 posts)fightforfreedom
(4,913 posts)Many of your accusations about Garland, the investigations, which are one sided, because Garland cannot speak about the investigations, cannot answer your accusations, will be proven to be incorrect.
It is clear you learned nothing from the lesson taught the other day. When we learned it was FBI agents, Not garland who was delaying the secret document investigation.
If I remember correctly, in the past you blamed Garland for moving too slowly in the secret document investigation. This is what happens when you accuse people of doing something without all the facts.
gab13by13
(21,337 posts)OK, just the headline. Why won't time matter when indictments come down? If Trump is indicted today, when would his trial occur?
Do you know that Trump just asked the judge in the Tish James lawsuit for a 6 month delay? I doubt he will get it, but I bet he gets a shorter delay.
It will take time but I hope one day that you understand that it is Trump's strategy, not mine, to delay everything. He knows he has a good chance of losing in court so he needs to delay until the Magats regain the presidency. Democrats need to keep the presidency in 2024 and 2028. In the state cases time doesn't matter as much, hopefully Fani Willis will be reelected in 2024.
fightforfreedom
(4,913 posts)When indictments come down trials will happen and nothing can stop them except guilty pleas. Delays are not a new invention discovered by Trump. People, lawyers, try to delay things. It's always been that way. Do you actually believe the people investigating don't know what Trump is doing? Do actually believe they have never dealt with people and lawyers who try to delay things. Give me a break.
Like I said in my post, a lesson was taught the other day. You are ignoring it and continuing to say things without having all the facts. You bring up some facts, but you need all of them before accusing Garland of wrong doing. You are now making the claim if the Democrats do not win the presidency in 2024, 2028, Trump will get away with everything? That's why he is delaying things. That is a big pile of horse crap.
You stated, In State cases time doesn't matter as much. Who told you that, Nicole, some prosecutor on TV.
When indictments come down everything is going to change. More facts are going to come out that nobody, including yourself , knew about. Elections do not stop trials.
Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)...it will be a long time before a trial.
Because those proceedings are going to have the same sorts of delays from motions to dismiss, motions in limine, etc..
The idea that "depositions took a long time" is pure ignorance.
In a federal civil suit, you can depose any one individual for seven hours absent circumstances not relevant here.
Nobody deposed Murdoch for two years.
But, go ahead, teach me federal civil and criminal procedure.
fightforfreedom
(4,913 posts)Why are we wasting our time. According to all the defeatists here at DU it's hopeless. Garland, Smith., Willis should shut down their investigations immediately.
Scrivener7
(50,949 posts)investigations? Because I haven't seen anyone but you suggesting anything even remotely like that.
Thanks so much.
fightforfreedom
(4,913 posts)Do you have any idea how many posts there are about how nothing will happen. Trump and the coup plotters will not be indicted. Garland started too late, Garland did nothing. It's too late. The countless number of Doom and Gloom posts all suggest the investigations are a waste of time. Nothing is going to happen, It's too late. That's pretty much like saying we should end the investigations.
Scrivener7
(50,949 posts)fightforfreedom
(4,913 posts)You just called me a strawman. You are angry with me because I call out the defeatist, doom and gloom, posts here at DU. Posts that are mostly opinions, not facts.
What are you going to do when indictments come down? Are you going to admit I was right and you were wrong? I highly doubt it.
Scrivener7
(50,949 posts)
Scrivener7
(50,949 posts)And two years later, all the coup plotters are still playing golf, and one of them is running for President.
That's not a good thing.
Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)There is not even a case filed against Trump’s inner circle.
The attempt to compare an existing legal proceeding which is two years old, to hypothetical legal proceedings that have not even been filed, is bizarre.
There was enough evidence to support the Dominion compliant just a few months after the events occurred.
Scrivener7
(50,949 posts)Because they spent so much of their effort getting 3-month sentences for guys who car-pooled to DC with their Elks brothers and then beat up a cop.
Because, according to the vaunted pyramid strategy, those guys are totally going to lead straight to the coup plotters, and that means everything is under control.
fightforfreedom
(4,913 posts)Great job. 
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,001 posts)gab13by13
(21,337 posts)that Mueller had tied up with a bow on top. An unindicted co-conspirator was not prosecuted by Garland and the statute of limitations has expired. Can't lose a case I guess that isn't brought if that's what's important.
No one has ever said that a case should be brought before it was ready. What is said is that Garland waited to investigate Trump and his inner circle, and those are the people who are harder to prosecute, they claim executive privilege, executive immunity, attorney client privilege, the debate clause.
Example: Scott Perry had his phone seized last August and the FBI has not been able to access it because it is in the courts and it may be another 6 months before his phone can be accessed. If Perry were not a member of Congress the FBI could have accessed his phone 2 years ago with a warrant. The pyramid strategy played right into Trump's hands of delaying everything.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,001 posts)
azureblue
(2,146 posts)We would be sitting in jail with no bond awaiting trial. This is the part that is being ignored, and flaunted by those with money and position.
Face it, if one of us committed a crime like that, we would be picked up, charged, and thrown in jail. (Like the guys who attacked the Capitol 1/6). We would get a bond hearing, with a bond set (or not) then back in jail until the bond is paid. Maybe have our passport taken, and an ankle monitor put on, maybe even house arrest. Meanwhile, the prosecutor builds the case and maybe adds on charges if further crimes are discovered.
Does this sound like the way the insurrectionists / traitors are being treated? Of course not. They are being treated with kid gloves, under the guise of "Building a solid case". Remember the Rosenbergs? Any of those who sold secrets to foreign powers (Which Trump has done, but Garland ignores that)?
And refusal to jail the plotters simply encourages them. BTW, note how Garland went after Biden for having state secrets, at the drop of a hat, even though it was Biden that alerted him?
If you have the $$ to have an army of lawyers delay it. Welcome to the American Judicial system. Not what you thought it was huh?
Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)The Dominion suit was FILED in March 2021.
So, what kind of point are you trying to make?
Yes, if charges were filed against Trump’s inner circle, it will be several years before anything happens.
But what you are saying makes zero sense. Indeed the Dominion proceeding has reached this point after two years. Prosecutions of Trump’s inner circle have not even begun.
You are making a ridiculous comparison between a legal proceeding that’s been going on for two years, to legal proceedings that don’t even exist.
Scrivener7
(50,949 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(49,001 posts)gab13by13
(21,337 posts)Who are the Proud Boys and oath keepers going to flip on? Roger Stone, Michael Flynn? They will never flip on Trump, Trump kept his hands clean from the Willard Hotel, from the gangs, he used Mark Meadows as a go between, DOJ needs to either give immunity or indict Meadows to get him to flip on Trump, that could have been done long ago because the J6 committee that was way ahead of DOJ laid out a lot of the evidence.
Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)Last edited Fri Mar 3, 2023, 03:30 PM - Edit history (1)
...you have to have sufficient facts in hand prior to filing your civil suit.
Preliminary fact investigation is not the same as proceeding with a case in either situation.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,001 posts)I do not know enough about the law to quote those two or know of them, so thanks.
The big effort and time is up front in criminal cases before anything is placed in front of the public. This is so that people who end up outside of suspicion do not have their reputations damaged.
In civil cases the bar for launching is lower and the defendant has more tools like counter-suits available.
Without regard to the timing, the investigatory effort is comparable other than the severity of criminal penalties does increase the amount of time for investigation. Absent corrupt police. With corrupt police, it either takes faster ("round up the usual suspects" ) or longer ("nothing to see here, move along now" ). We have seen corrupt police revealed at the FBI in recent days; they took the latter route.
Both civil and criminal cases are subject to large amounts of wrangling and delay, so yes they are comparable that way too.
Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)I'm talking about facts in hand at the time of filing a civil complaint, not after discovery and certainly not at trial.
Both civil and criminal cases are subject to large amounts of wrangling and delay, so yes they are comparable that way too.
Yes, well, the OP makes an apples to oranges comparison of a case that was filed two years ago, and a hypothetical case which has not been filed yet.
But it is pointless to discuss how bad the comparison is with people who don't understand either civil or criminal procedure.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,001 posts)Grand juries considering the highest level people. Jarvanka subpoena'd to appear. Hundreds of hours of grand jury testimony already. Chief of Staff under intense investigation.
Search executed on a former president of the US. Never happened before but you didn't see it or hear about it.
Hundreds of thousands of digital messages scrutinized.
41,000 hours of video tape watched.
Massive investigation involving thousands of charges against a thousand or so defendants. Thousands of convictions.
Climbing the stairs: dozens of defendants in two or more organized groups with association to the inner circle.
That's only what we know about. There is much more, like financial stuff.
But to you it will be "several years before ANYTHING HAPPENS" because to you nothing has happened.
gab13by13
(21,337 posts)not counting the people who stormed the Capitol?
Garland said it himself, he would work from the bottom up.
DOJ was shocked, embarrassed into action because of Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony before the J6 committee.
Why was the J6 committee ahead of DOJ, usually DOJ wants to take the lead?
Fani Willis went after Trump in March of 2021 and it has taken her this long to getting close to an indictment.
Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)...all of which will be appealed.
Where we are in the Dominion suit is the filing of the motion and opposition to summary judgment.
It will take just as long for a criminal case to get to final pre-trial motions to dismiss.
The timelines are not at all comparable, because the Dominion case is well along the path in court. In contrast, no criminal case has been commenced, and it is not as if the last two years of investigation are going to make those cases proceed any faster.
flying_wahini
(6,594 posts)fightforfreedom
(4,913 posts)Is a waste of time and effort.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,001 posts)gab13by13
(21,337 posts)never in our history has a president led an insurrection against our democracy. It is going to take enormous resources and manpower to hold people accountable. Only one political party was complicit in the insurrection and for Garland to say that he will not be partisan is being partisan. Look at what he did to keep from looking partisan; he had Ruby Freeman investigated for Trump's bogus claims that she committed voter fraud, and yet he did nothing when Magats threatened Ruby, banging on her front door forcing her to leave her home. He had the gaul a year ago to say that DOJ would crack down on threats against election workers, he did nothing for Ruby because it would appear to be partisan.
I post about what Garland did or didn't do. He did a fantastic job convicting and getting guilty pleas from unwashed Magats, it was impressive that he got seditious conspiracy convictions.
Let's also face it, Garland hired Jack Smith for one reason, to not appear partisan. I ask you, who is it that Garland doesn't want to appear partisan to because I never believed that he was partisan.
fightforfreedom
(4,913 posts)Look what you just wrote in your post. " He ( Garland) had the gaul to say the DOJ would crack down on threats against election workers, he did nothing for Ruby because it would appear to be partisan." You state that as a fact. Show us the proof this happened. Have you talked to Garland about this? Gotten his response to your accusation? You do this kind of thing all time.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,001 posts)
HariSeldon
(455 posts)But a Democratic administration might. Republicans have, in the not too distant past, bamboozled enough votes into casting votes for a ludicrous presidential candidate. If the case doesn't bring the truth to light in time, there are political ramifications. Dominion, on the other hand, just wants money and can keep slogging through legal process for a long time in order to get it.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,001 posts)usonian
(9,797 posts)the number of people in "Profiles in Courage"
I might ask "Who these days qualifies for a profile in courage"?
Suggestions:
• Volodymyr Zelenskyy
• Speaker Forever Nancy Pelosi (and husband )
• Joe Biden
• Ruby Freeman (and she has to go through civil court )
• Officer Eugene Goodman
• Cassidy Hutchinson? (better late than never)
more?
Silent3
(15,212 posts)...than the matter of a single corporation seeking financial damages in a civil case.
I guess it would be more efficient for banks to sue robbers to get the money back than to go through this whole cops & robbers thing.
