Like with the piece on the border, this reads like something thrown together to meet a deadline which gets by because there is a byline. "Everybody does it" is a poor excuse for substance.
"Special Procecutors" are supposed to be . . . Special. They are appointed by the Attorney General, and strictly subject to federal Dept of Justice rul…
Like with the piece on the border, this reads like something thrown together to meet a deadline which gets by because there is a byline. "Everybody does it" is a poor excuse for substance.
"Special Procecutors" are supposed to be . . . Special. They are appointed by the Attorney General, and strictly subject to federal Dept of Justice rules. When Weiss's office was willing to make a deal, it was Biden who refused when a judge starting asking legitimate questions about the deal. At that point, Weiss's office was spanked and he was given both the authority and responsibility of a "Special" Prosecutor. Garland's only alternative was to replace Weiss as federal attorney for the District, and perhaps he should have. But the point is that what Weiss is doing now is entirely consistent with DOJ rules.
The Trump case in NYC couldn't be more different. It was rejected by two federal prosecutors. It wasn't even going to be prosecuted by Bragg until he got heat from Democrats. As the former Federal Elections Committee head has said, it wasn't even a campaign violation. The timing could not have had any impact on 2016. It's a misdemeanor outside the statute of limitations made into a federal crime that wasn't a crime It has been a shill case from the start with the obvious intent of hamstring a presidential candidate's campaign in more ways than one. Now, it very well may be that Smith's prosecution regarding Trump interfering with the EC vote may be valid, and if proved, Trump deserves what he gets. But this???
For the record, I have been an Independent for decades and have an intense dislike for both Parties and Candidates.
This piece is a terrible over-generalization and ignorant smear on all prosecutors, and the Justice Dept. The notion that it's "just how the system works" is defamatory and unsupported, unless one case the writer knows and the opinion of a politician magically is dispositive. This kind of shallowness is one reason many have become disgusted with the media. Between this and the also very weak piece re the border, it is starting to look like The FP is trying to become another HuffPost. That would be so sad. C'mon Bari, don't waste our time with shoddy cheap work passing for journalism.
I do concur the tone is a bit flippant...that was my visceral initial reaction as I read it (I concluded the tone was a hook to grab attention and make a point). And, yes, all prosecutors don't behave this way. But it does happen all the time with Federal prosecutors. Just go read Three Felonies a Day. And look at the federal conviction rates (Wikipedia says "In the United States federal court system, the conviction rate rose from approximately 75 percent to approximately 85% between 1972 and 1992. For 2012, the US Department of Justice reported a 93% conviction rate.") I think he's right...that's just what federal prosecutors generally do, and they have the full force of the federal registry and government behind them. I don't like it one bit, but it sure looks factually accurate based on what I've been reading and watching.
Like with the piece on the border, this reads like something thrown together to meet a deadline which gets by because there is a byline. "Everybody does it" is a poor excuse for substance.
"Special Procecutors" are supposed to be . . . Special. They are appointed by the Attorney General, and strictly subject to federal Dept of Justice rules. When Weiss's office was willing to make a deal, it was Biden who refused when a judge starting asking legitimate questions about the deal. At that point, Weiss's office was spanked and he was given both the authority and responsibility of a "Special" Prosecutor. Garland's only alternative was to replace Weiss as federal attorney for the District, and perhaps he should have. But the point is that what Weiss is doing now is entirely consistent with DOJ rules.
The Trump case in NYC couldn't be more different. It was rejected by two federal prosecutors. It wasn't even going to be prosecuted by Bragg until he got heat from Democrats. As the former Federal Elections Committee head has said, it wasn't even a campaign violation. The timing could not have had any impact on 2016. It's a misdemeanor outside the statute of limitations made into a federal crime that wasn't a crime It has been a shill case from the start with the obvious intent of hamstring a presidential candidate's campaign in more ways than one. Now, it very well may be that Smith's prosecution regarding Trump interfering with the EC vote may be valid, and if proved, Trump deserves what he gets. But this???
For the record, I have been an Independent for decades and have an intense dislike for both Parties and Candidates.
This piece is a terrible over-generalization and ignorant smear on all prosecutors, and the Justice Dept. The notion that it's "just how the system works" is defamatory and unsupported, unless one case the writer knows and the opinion of a politician magically is dispositive. This kind of shallowness is one reason many have become disgusted with the media. Between this and the also very weak piece re the border, it is starting to look like The FP is trying to become another HuffPost. That would be so sad. C'mon Bari, don't waste our time with shoddy cheap work passing for journalism.
I do concur the tone is a bit flippant...that was my visceral initial reaction as I read it (I concluded the tone was a hook to grab attention and make a point). And, yes, all prosecutors don't behave this way. But it does happen all the time with Federal prosecutors. Just go read Three Felonies a Day. And look at the federal conviction rates (Wikipedia says "In the United States federal court system, the conviction rate rose from approximately 75 percent to approximately 85% between 1972 and 1992. For 2012, the US Department of Justice reported a 93% conviction rate.") I think he's right...that's just what federal prosecutors generally do, and they have the full force of the federal registry and government behind them. I don't like it one bit, but it sure looks factually accurate based on what I've been reading and watching.