“But for Mr. Trump’s election and imminent return to the presidency, the office assessed that the admissible evidence was sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction at trial,” the report said.

  • takeda@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    78
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    You’re mixing special counsel with the AG. Jack Smith did his job, it was Garland who waited 2 years before starting the case and eventually assigning him.

    • IndustryStandard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      The AG is not an all powerful entity. He was appointed by Biden himself. Similarly the Democrats could have pressured Biden to fire Garland. And Biden could have done it himself.

      Everyone was very happy to wait for years to “make sure the trial was well prepared”.

      • Ferrous@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        The AG is not an all powerful entity.

        Trump sure made it seem so what with Bill Barr.

    • Monstrosity@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      Jack Smith could have chosen to bring charges in a district where there wasn’t a 50/50 chance it would end up in Canon’s courtroom, but he was high on his own farts & wanted the big win.

      Let’s not whitewash the dude’s errors.

      • rowinxavier@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        1 day ago

        To clarify, the charges brought in the Florida district could have been brought in another venue, but the crime was the documents being withheld in Florida, so that is the correct venue. It could have gotten way through the process and been appealed due to incorrect venue and we would have been back at the start.

        That said, I think getting Cannon removed would have been more likely to bear fruit. She had clear evidence of bias and would have been way past the threshold of appearance of impropriety, so getting her removed would have been a fairly likely path to success. Unfortunately the supreme court was so flooded by idealogues that it would have been appealed and they would have either held it up or overturned it and gotten her back on, or just dismissed the case in some other way.

        What was needed was a much more aggressive approach from both Biden and Garland. Biden to change the number of supreme court justices and to direct his justice department to deeply investigate all of the justices on the court. Garland to open said investigations, push for intelligence agency support, and lots of speaking indictments to get information in front of voters.

        • Monstrosity@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 day ago

          Thanks for this amazing comment.

          After reading this, I searched and read this msnbc blog synopsis that gets into a little more detail about possible motives for Smith’s choice of venue that basically reiterates choosing to prosecute in a different district could have thrown a guilty verdict into question.

    • Mister_Feeny@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      And Qannon was certainly amenable to Trump’s request to push back basically every date involved in the case.