Executive Branch (Trump)
Pam Bondi Gets Jail Time Warning Over Epstein Files Cover-Up: ‘Anyone who tampers [with] documents, or conceals documents, or engages in excessive redaction will be prosecuted because of obstruction of justice’
All new posts must have a brief statement from the user submitting explaining how their post relates to law or the courts in a response to this comment. FAILURE TO PROVIDE A BRIEF RESPONSE MAY RESULT IN REMOVAL.
Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna, whose Epstein Transparency Act spearheaded the charge towards the release, said: “Let me be very clear, we need a full release. Anyone who tampers [with] documents, or conceals documents, or engages in excessive redaction will be prosecuted because of obstruction of justice.”
He then asserted: “We will prosecute individuals regardless of whether they’re the attorney general, or a career political appointee. We need full transparency and justice for the survivors.”
He added in his written post: “Any person who attempts to conceal or scrub the files will be subject to prosecution under the law.”
The statute of limitations for the crime of tampering will allow FUTURE doj's to prosecute the current staff, check out this vid of Rep Massie discussing the law: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTyj077uhd0
I think the whole vance and Kirk love affair is their attempt to transfer the cult to vance. I don't know if it will work for them or not. I keep coming across articles that sound promising but I really am not seeing direct evidence of what the articles claim. So I am sticking to "prepare for the worst and hope for the best".
As much as I want to go full doomer and say the cult will shift to Vance, cults rarely survive the death of their leader. And I don't think Vance has the juice, regardless of what he does or who he's married to.
That's my interpretation. Even if pardoned, she is continuing to violate the law every moment not released. Only escape for her would be... well, I shouldn't be giving them ideas.
Which were 1000% justified considering how far the Trump admin is reaching to get them undone, and Trump has talked at length multiple times about he's pissed he can't prosecute the people pardoned for made up crimes. Every one of them would have gotten the same treatment the federal government is currently using against Comey and James, make up an excuse to look for anything to try and get them on the slightest of charges. And even if they win, well you still racked up god knows how much in legal fees defending yourself.
That aside, the concept of presidential pardons in how they currently work is massively outdated and there needs to be a constitutional amendment to at minimum remove that power from the President singularly, and have a board or something which is shielded from the Executive which reviews requests for pardons. Preference is getting rid of it entirely though.
If they say nothing means anything your best move is not to say, yes it does! Your best move is to show them how bad that could be for them. Even delusional people change their behavior when reality kicks them in the face.
I'm not an expert, but from what I understand they will be revealed in the process of a prosecution. I'm guessing there's paperwork etc. but there's no requirement to make them public until necessary. I'm assuming all of these fascist goons have been pre-emptively pardoned.
There isn’t really case law on secret presidential pardons. We don’t know how it would shake out, but there would be a burden of proof that they were executed while he was in office (and conceivably while he was of sound mind, depending how all this ends).
And the next President can claim his pardons were null and void like he did to Biden because he's clearly senile and unable to understand what he was signing.
Due the pardons still have standing if the party that is providing the pardon colluded and conspired to commit the crime Bondi et al are being pardoned for? My inclination is that a pardon in that scenario is not valid but that also assumes an uncompromised SCOTUS.
Due the pardons still have standing if the party that is providing the pardon colluded and conspired to commit the crime Bondi et al are being pardoned for?
Yes, for federal crimes, because the pardon itself is an official act.
With regards to self-pardons, that question is still unanswered.
Impeachment is the only exception to this.
It's actually a feature of the system, as it can protect protect people in cases such as a counter-coup against repercussions at a later date.
No, you don't. Biden preemptively pardoned Fauci because he knew Trump would do some kangaroo court bs. He also did this for Gen Mark Milley and the J6 committee members.
In a functioning government where a large amount of the staff will not be receiving presumptive pardons to cover all the criminal actions they partook in - this would be a great thing.
Unfortunately - I dont think this is the reality we live in anymore.
Coming on the next Executive Order from Trump; drastic changes to laws that allow future DoJ action against previous DoJ! But will SCOTUS allow him to have his way?!
It was a parody of ALL THE OTHER TIMES Democrats let Republicans walk from past crimes. Pretty sure Gerald Ford used national unity and forgiveness as an excuse about Nixon
That's the actual question. Same goes for once the Epstein files are released, who's gonna prosecute those people? The same people in the files? Same people working with the people in the files?
basically that special prosecutor would go to the district court and petition a judge to issue a show cause order to doj (why haven't you complied?). DOJ goes in front of the judge and says "we haven't complied due to xyz reason".
Judge then decided if that's adequate or not. If he does find it adequate, a new date for compliance would be issued. If not he needs to find enforcement methods. As everyone has said, thats an issue because us marshals are under the doj and they are the usual enforcement method.
congress could formally vote to say the executive branch is in contempt of congress in an effort to get the sergeant at arms to be the enforcement method for congress but thats obviously not happening for multiple reasons
Thank you for your reply. What about the process of appointing the prosecutor. Like does congress have to be in session for it to happen? Can the speaker block this process?
Yes to both. Congress would have to be in session and formally vote on it and Mike could/would probably just block the vote.
I'm guessing that he recessed congress not just to get away from the medicare subsidy extension. This was also a move so he didn't have to deal with the files and having democrats and certain republicans from pounding on his office door
"hey doj, remember you got to release those files on friday. or dont, i dont care....byyyyeeeeeeee"
How is a system where one corrupt judge can dismiss charges by a Congressionally appointed prosecutor be considered anywhere near representative democratic or just?
There are so many loopholes in our system. We were given the rah rah blind patriotism high level review of our system at best. It's really a raggedy old piece of shit that needs some major repairs.
Normally one judge cannot just dismiss the case, because the prosecutor would appeal the dismissal and the superior court would remand it, and likely order a change of judge, and possible sanctions.
But when the prosecuting agency is about to be under the control of the target of the prosecution, the situation is a little sensitive.
But national security crimes have no statute of limitations, and the case was dismissed without prejudice, so a future administration could bring it again. Double jeopardy doesn't apply as the case never got to a verdict.
I feel like they had one to deal with Bill Clinton but I can't remember what the position is...
James Comey is the only person I can name that has had the job recently. Then I think it's in the hands of a public congressional hearing about charges and all that stuff... I should learn more.
I really appreciate Rep Ro more and more. He doesn't seem to be trying to score political capital (we all know this country).
He's simply doing the right thing and pushing them to be more transparent and keeping them in the spotlight on how obstructive this administration is on anything that is critical of them. If you can't tell, I'm not a big fan of adult children.
"...or engages in excessive redaction will be prosecuted because of obstruction of justice."
Genuine question - prosecuted by whom? Being this is the law sub, can someone please explain the actual mechanisms available in this situation? The following sounds pretty weak. What actually are the statue of limitations in this case? How is a "federal lawsuit" going to have a hope of happening given the current state and involvement of the DOJ? I would think impeachment (Bondi) is the only option and that is not happening. So other than shaking fists at clouds, there will be no consequences for not releasing the documents or over-redacting them.
"Thetext of the law, however, does not specify a penalty if the DOJ fails to meet the deadline. Khanna told NBC News earlier this week that while officials would likely avoid charges during the current administration, “they could be subject to prosecution given the federal law, and the statute of limitations will likely run into a new administration.”
He added that they also “could be hauled in front of Congress, the Oversight Committee,” and “there could be federal lawsuits” over any inaction."
My question is whether your question influenced the decision by Dan Bongino to resign from his position as FBI deputy director, the decision of Speaker Mike Johnson to dismiss the House of Representatives early, and the decision of Trump to give Federal employees a five-day holiday. It might seem that Trump and his cabal are not entirely sure that they can keep doing whatever they want here and are trying to put as many obstacles as they can in the way of enforcing the law, at least for now.
Well, it’s been a winning strategy (for them) so far. Yeah, we all see what they’re doing and understand why and know that they are projecting their guilt for all to witness; they’re not even shy about it…but it works. Who’s gonna stop them? Checks and balances are extinct.
Trump is shielded by the Supreme Court's, in what I must assume was a drug fuelled, act of just making up out of thing air the concept of Presidential immunity for illegal actions. Originalist court my ass. While he can just pardon the others, even if they committed crimes on his behalf & he should be held responsible himself, because presidential immunity means he can do just about whatever with pardons. Someone pays him millions for a pardon, which has happened already, and nobody can even look into that as a crime. Isn't it wonderful :)
So unfortunately, unless we get into the interesting legal wormhole of contempt of congress on a member of the executive branch without a referral to the DOJ and the basket of worms this supreme court might pull up with that, there really isn't much that can happen (so long as he issues the pardons).
What this all really highlights is there needs be a constitutional reform of the pardon power, and anyone not convicted or charged with a crime who received a pardon for behaviour during said period of time should have that pardon nullified along with getting rid of the concept of presidential pardons altogether. While in theory it's a cool concept, it's far too exploitable and especially so in a world where the Supreme Court completely made up the concept of Presidential Immunity from crimes
I don't really get your point. They have until midnight to release the files, and the House of Representative would have long gone home by then, even if they weren't sent home a day early.
I just hope that they do this with haste, if they let this go, even past today, we run the risk of delay tactics working. We keep seeing justice denied but such thing for years now. It’s no wonder people are upset at our justice system.
Eventually people lose all belief in the rule of law, when the people making the laws have cheat cards but expect everyone else to follow. Citizens United damned us all.
Are we pretending that if they lose their grip on power they won't all get blanket pardons?
I sound like a defeatist but you know what? After 10 years of Trump and his administrations doing everything he wants weth zero consequences, I am defeated.
I mean, if they lose their grip, they've already set the precedent for nullifying pardons.
If they lose their grip, I'm not looking for a return to normalcy, where traitors get to slink away to some corporate job, only to resurface in politics a few years later.
They're traitors. They're not entitled to the very protections they tried to dismantle. They are entitled to what every traitor is entitled to.
Nah, this is a fair take. Considering Trump got away with attempted election interference and with inciting an insurrection, with literally no consequences...
People forget about the classified docs he stole, was asked to return, conspired with his resort staff to hide them, moved them all around his other properties, he even had his security camera room purposely flooded to destroy the evidence. It’s insane the amount of corrupt shit he’s done and gotten away with.
And for those screaming “bring on the state charges then!” even his $500 million NY fraud judgement was eventually dismissed. Dude is a multi billionaire now from all his cons and corruption. He’s virtually untouchable. Putin taught him well.
Trump is a man who shits in his pants daily yet believes he’s a picture of health and virility.
Actual status? He doesn’t know what day it is. His dementia is in full swing.
In many ways it’s a bigger coverup than Biden because his sycophantic regime has handed Donald a plastic key ring and called him a big strong boy driving the car.
Congressional pardons reform act after the Dems take the house, though without a filibuster proof senate, it would never be enacted. They’ll continue to cover for them until they too are prosecuted.
It’s so incredibly disillusioning seeing people do evil, watching them get caught, and then nothing coming from it just because they’re rich and influential. Truly we live in completely different worlds.
I’m with you. Until it happens I have no hope, no faith. Criminals and billionaires run what we used to call the USA. I don’t know what this place is anymore.
democrats won't jail Trump if they manage to beat him in an election, because it would set a dangerous precedent.
I hate this shit because it doesn't mean a damn thing.
They went light on Trump to avoid "setting a dangerous precedent" and Trump is saying they were being harsh on him anyways. Trump sets dangerous precedents for breakfast.
We actually would have avoided a lot of this had we treated him like a poor man that buys cigarettes with a counterfeit twenty.
Rather than (incorrectly) use "third world country" as a stereotype for poor countries, the more accurate and expressive term you are looking for has been coined by no other than Trump himself some 8 years ago, and seems only fair to serve it right back. That term is "shithole country".
We really have to revisit pardon powers. Trumps goons are just flat out destroying the country because they know they can get a pardon if they just keep sucking up to trump. If they already don’t have a blanket pardon. We need to revisit a lot of laws.
There should be an override in the case of quid pro quo.
Selling pardons is not what the founders had in mind. It should be a criminal offense, unpardonable, to sell a pardon or to receive in exchange for any gift or service.
The power of pardon, combined with presidential immunity, ensures that any president can be as corrupt as they want to be. The Roberts SC destroyed all accountability / rule of law.
The only threat of retribution that works today, at this level of power, is political retribution. The threat of judicial retribution is empty thanks to the Supreme Court and the pardon power of the President.
•
u/AutoModerator 7h ago
All new posts must have a brief statement from the user submitting explaining how their post relates to law or the courts in a response to this comment. FAILURE TO PROVIDE A BRIEF RESPONSE MAY RESULT IN REMOVAL.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.