Because it's the DoJ prosecuting, I think it's uncommon for the government to prosecute administration witnesses, even from previous administrations. Once upon a time Congress would prosecute and impose punishment itself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_Congress#Inherent_...
jkestner 3 days ago [-]
Mostly, they want to be lied to. If we start holding power accountable, it might come around to them!
ramon156 3 days ago [-]
Who's supposed to punish congress, it damn aint the people
3 days ago [-]
actionfromafar 3 days ago [-]
Nowadays, not so much "deceiving" going on but rather "believe me or your lying eyes" vibes coming from the government.
doener 3 days ago [-]
I actually miss the days when the US administration in charge at least tried to appear not to be corrupt and malicious.
freeopinion 3 days ago [-]
Let's say--hypothetically--that the U.S. President walked out into Times Square in broad daylight and shot a person to death unprovoked. Who would prosecute that crime?
If you can't (or won't) be prosecuted, why hide your crime?
unsnap_biceps 3 days ago [-]
New York State, due to the fact that murder is generally a state level charge and not a federal one. However, your broader point still stands.
freeopinion 2 days ago [-]
In the United States, anyone brash enough to prosecute Donald Trump or his allies finds themselves being prosecuted on federal charges.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the President is largely immune from prosecution. The width of that decision can be fleshed out by additional court cases if there is anybody with the authority and courage to risk it. The risks are very high and very real. The rewards are debatable.
A simple statement like, "The deceased was an evil threat to the security of America" is enough to put any prosecution way out on a limb. Look how hard it is to get justice in Minneapolis. Things are very murky. And that didn't involve the President being the gunman.
RalfWausE 3 days ago [-]
Well, in this hypothetical case one may say: Just go out there and shoot the bastard if he is not prosecuted!
Isn't that what you proud Americans have your guns for?
thomastjeffery 2 days ago [-]
Zohran Mamdani (NYC mayor) would, but that's a very recent development somewhat exclusive to NYC.
Unfortunately, the brazen public crimes our president has been committing lately are much more high level. Thousands of innocent lives have been (and will be) ended, usually by much more dramatic and damaging means. The parts of our government that are responsible for prosecuting those crimes have decided to join in instead.
Here's a 2018 article listing some prosecutions: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/5-people-who-lied-...
Because it's the DoJ prosecuting, I think it's uncommon for the government to prosecute administration witnesses, even from previous administrations. Once upon a time Congress would prosecute and impose punishment itself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_Congress#Inherent_...
If you can't (or won't) be prosecuted, why hide your crime?
Meanwhile, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the President is largely immune from prosecution. The width of that decision can be fleshed out by additional court cases if there is anybody with the authority and courage to risk it. The risks are very high and very real. The rewards are debatable.
A simple statement like, "The deceased was an evil threat to the security of America" is enough to put any prosecution way out on a limb. Look how hard it is to get justice in Minneapolis. Things are very murky. And that didn't involve the President being the gunman.
Isn't that what you proud Americans have your guns for?
Unfortunately, the brazen public crimes our president has been committing lately are much more high level. Thousands of innocent lives have been (and will be) ended, usually by much more dramatic and damaging means. The parts of our government that are responsible for prosecuting those crimes have decided to join in instead.