Tag Archives: DOJ

legal news

We’re waiting on AG … patiently

A nation’s patience appears to be running a bit thin as it awaits some key decisions by its chief law enforcement officer … the attorney general of the United States.

AG Merrick Garland is a meticulous man and I am glad to have someone as thoughtful and as deliberate as Garland on the job at the Justice Department.

Am I among those who want Garland to act sooner rather than later? Not really. In truth, my mind and my interests are drawn to more personal matters these days, as my wife struggles with a serious medical condition.

However, were I free to think more frequently about Garland’s probe into the activities of Donald J. Trump my belief would be to let the man proceed at his own pace and at his discretion.

He already has appointed two special counsels to probe Trump’s pilfering of classified documents to his glitzy joint in Florida as well as the classified documents found in President Biden’s home in Delaware. I’ve declared already that I do not consider the incidents to be equal; the Trump matter is much more egregious than what I believe the president allowed to occur.

Garland, though, came to the DOJ after serving for many years on the federal bench. President Obama wanted Garland to take a seat on the Supreme Court, but Senate Republicans made sure that wouldn’t happen. His reputation as a jurist was that he was fair, dispassionate and — well — judicious.

He brings those traits to the Justice Department.

Garland also has declared that “no one is above the law” and has affirmed that statement merely by repeating what he has declared that “no one” can escape justice. By “no one,” I am going to presume he means that even former POTUSes are in the crosshairs.

Let us remember, too, that Garland has received a referral from the House 1/6 committee to pursue criminal indictments relating to the insurrection. He’s working on that matter, also with all deliberate speed. And … we have the Fulton County, Ga., district attorney, Fani Willis, who is examining whether to indict Trump on election tampering in the 2020 presidential election.

All of this requires patience, folks. I happen to possess plenty of it. How about you?

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

national news

Get a grip, Mr. POTUS!

My head is likely to explode the next time I hear anyone equate two cases of classified documents showing up in private residences of men who hold high public office.

Still, I am about to pull my hair out over the revelations that keep dripping out over the discovery of such documents in President Biden’s home.

Get a grip, will you, Mr. President?

Meanwhile, we have the document scandal that continues to swirl around Donald J. Trump. The ex-POTUS took those documents with him to Florida as he was leaving office in January 2021. Biden’s stash showed up at his home after he served as vice president, leaving that office in 2017.

Biden continues to insist he is cooperating with Justice Department officials … and I believe him; Trump, meanwhile, continues to stonewall as best he can.

Still, I just wish the current president would pull his sh** together and give us a full, complete and transparent explanation into how the hell those documents got into his garage.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

legal news

Does one ‘scandal’ affect the other?

Donald Trump’s classified document scandal is the real thing; a president leaves office and takes with him hundreds of pages of documents that do not belong to him.

Joe Biden’s classified document matter is different: he served as vice president, left that office, and squirreled away a few pages of classified documents.

Trump has challenged efforts to retrieve them; Biden has cooperated fully with the feds.

Attorney General Merrick Garland has appointed two special counsels to examine these matters. Question of the day: Should one scandal affect the investigation of the other? My answer: No.

More specifically, special counsel Jack Smith’s work on the Trump matter should proceed with all deliberate speed. Robert Hur’s work on the Biden matter also should proceed.

One investigation must not affect the other one. More to the point is that Smith’s probe into the Trump scandal — which differs, in my mind, greatly from what is occurring with the Biden matter — must continue to its conclusion.

In my view, that conclusion should include an indictment of the ex-POTUS on allegations that he has obstructed justice and committed an illegal theft of government property.

But … that call belongs to AG Garland and his team of legal eagles. He vows to proceed with meticulous caution, which is all right with me. Garland has to get it right, understanding as I am sure he does the gravity of indicting a former POTUS and charging with enough criminal behavior to put him behind bars — if he’s convicted — for the rest of his sorry-ass life.

The Biden matter might complicate the probe into Trump’s scandal, but it must not derail it.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

legal news

Let’s see who is ‘weaponizing’ justice

1 Comment

Republicans in Congress have adopted a goofy notion that Democrats — starting with President Biden — are “weaponizing” the Justice Department in an effort to bring down Donald J. Trump.

Well, let’s see how that plays out.

Attorney General Merrick Garland has named Robert Hur as special counsel in a probe into whether Biden broke the law when he held classified documents in a think tank and in his Wilmington, Del., garage. The documents come from his time as vice president.

Hur is a U.S. attorney endorsed by Trump. Hmm. Will the prosecutor follow the law, or will he back the Trump allies’ campaign to subvert and destroy Biden? If it’s the latter, then just who is “weaponizing” the Justice Department?

I believe Garland did the right thing by appointing a special counsel. He had no choice, given that he did the same thing when he appointed a special counsel to examine whether Trump broke the law when he took documents out of the White House and hid them in his Florida home.

One of many key differences in these cases lies in the principals’ response. Biden vows to “cooperate fully” with authorities; Trump has sought to block any effort to return the documents to the National Archives, where they belong, on the specious grounds that they are his property. That is pure crap!

Who is guilty of weaponization? It’s not AG Merrick Garland and President Joe Biden. If Robert Hur does his job dispassionately and without bias, then the whole weaponization mantra will be rendered moot.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

legal news

Not the same, folks

Joe Biden’s critics have begun their “aha!” bellowing over the discovery of classified documents stashed away in a Washington, D.C., think tank.

Why, shoot! This is no different than what Donald Trump did when he spirited classified documents away from the White House and hid them at Mar-a-Lago, the Biden critics are yammering.

Hold on. Yeah, it’s different. It’s not right and Biden’s document kerfuffle needs to be probed thoroughly. Attorney General Merrick Garland has handed the matter to a U.S. attorney — a Trump appointee, by the way — to investigate. Garland may yet decide whether to launch a full Justice Department investigation into the matter.

Why is this different than what Trump did? Because Biden reportedly didn’t know the documents were stored away from the National Archives. He returned them immediately upon learning of their existence. Trump, though, has lied — imagine that! — about what he turned over to the feds after the FBI seized the documents at his Florida mansion.

Biden is cooperating fully with the feds; Trump is stonewalling.

And … Trump has all but acknowledged publicly that he did something illegal.

None of this will stop President Biden’s critics from falling into full “gotcha!” mode.

Ridiculous.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

crime news

The gift just keeps giving

Admission time … I haven’t read the 800-page-long report issued by the House select 1/6 committee on the crimes committed by the former president of the United States and many of his minions.

I’ll get around to reading the executive summary, which I understand is about 150 pages.

But … from what I understand this is the gift that keeps giving for those of us who are repulsed by Donald Trump’s conduct during the 1/6 insurrection and the efforts he undertook to keep The Big Lie alive in the minds of the traitors who stormed the capitol building two weeks before Trump left office.

What’s more, the committee appears to have wrapped its findings up in a tidy — albeit voluminous — bundle of information that it will turn over to the special counsel, Jack Smith, who has been assigned by Attorney General Merrick Garland to pore through the evidence and decide whether to indict the former POTUS.

I believe the AG has enough evidence to proceed. The question for me is whether he has the guts to do what he must, which is indict Donald Trump and put this crooked, corrupt, immoral narcissist on trial for violating the oath of office he took to “protect and defend” the Constitution.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

crime news

Trump makes history!

Donald John Trump pledged — in so many words — to make history if voters elected him president of the United States in 2016.

Well … today the ex-president made good on that promise by making history of a staggering type. He became the first POTUS in U.S. history to ever be referred for criminal prosecution by a duly constituted congressional committee.

The House 1/6 select committee held its final meeting today and referred four charges against Trump to the Justice Department. They all refer directly to his role in inciting the 1/6 insurrection and in refusing to stop the attack on the Capitol that resulted in many injuries and some deaths.

The treasonous mob’s intention was clear: It was acting on Trump’s orders to stop the Electoral College certification of the 2020 presidential election.

Now comes the real hard task awaiting DOJ. It must decide whether to indict Trump on any of these referrals. Therein we have the words of Attorney General Merrick Garland, who has told us repeatedly that “no one is above the law.”

To be absolutely clear, the congressional referrals have zero legal consequence. They are symbolic in nature. However, Justice Department prosecutors have been handed an enormous pile of evidence that ought to persuade them that Trump did obstruct justice, that he did conspire to overturn the 2020 election results and that he most surely did incite the assault on the Capitol Building.

My head is spinning as I ponder the consequences of whatever the Justice Department decides. If it indicts Trump but then whiffs on getting a conviction, then the MAGA crowd will be energized beyond belief. If it chooses to forgo any indictments, it will signal to Congress that the work of the select committee was essentially a waste of time.

Then again, if DOJ indicts Trump and a trial jury convicts him of a felony … I would spend American real money to see this individual hauled away to spend time behind bars.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

national news

History to be made

No matter what transpires after this week, I believe you and I are about to witness a history-smashing event when the House select committee examining the 1/6 insurrection meets for its final public meeting.

All signs — every single one of them — tell us that the panel is going to recommend at least one criminal referral against Donald J. Trump.

Now, to be sure the House panel cannot indict Trump. That task rests with the Justice Department. History will be shattered, though, when the panel votes on the referral. It will be the first time in U.S. history that a congressional committee has made such a recommendation on a former president of the United States of America.

An even more critical question will arise when the committee takes its vote: Will the DOJ follow the recommendation handed it by the House? All the smart money in the land says “yes.” Why? Because Attorney General Merrick Garland hired a career prosecutor, Jack Smith, to serve as special counsel.

Smith hit the ground in a dead-on sprint. He has been working to finalize the evidence gathered by the House committee and by the probe that the DOJ had completed before Garland decided to recuse himself from the insurrection probe and the examination of the pilfering of classified documents from the White House as Trump was leaving office.

To be absolutely clear, the fecal matter is going to hit the fan when the committee casts its vote Monday. We can expect the MAGA cultists in Congress to yammer and yowl about “partisan witch hunts,” and “weaponizing the Justice Department” and, yes, there will be calls to impeach Merrick Garland.

It’s all BS. The committee was constituted correctly at the beginning of this saga right after the insurrection. It has collected damning testimony — most of it coming from Trump loyalists within the administration!

I believe there is sufficient evidence to indict the ex-POTUS on any number of charges. But … first things first. The House committee needs to make history for the rest of it to proceed. I also believe we should prepare for a monumental moment.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

crime news, legal news

Tamping expectations

Try as I have done to tamp down expectations on what will occur Monday when the House select committee makes its criminal referrals on the insurrection and assorted crimes relating to the 1/6 insurrection, I admit to difficulty doing so.

However, I am prepared to acknowledge that the House panel charged finding truth behind that violent chapter in our nation’s history only is going to recommend criminal charges be brought against those who were responsible for the onslaught.

The heavy lifting will occur in the offices of the Department of Justice and the special counsel who is examining the evidence.

I believe the referrals will include Donald Trump. He incited the assault on 1/6. He refused to stop the assault, even as the treasonous assailants were shouting “Hang Mike Pence!”

Let us remember that the House committee has no power to issue indictments. That power rests solely within the executive branch of government, which means the DOJ and the man who is serving as special counsel in this probe.

Still, I am certain that Americans who decide to tune in Monday will be treated to some riveting TV watching. I look forward to watching this drama unfold.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Uncategorized

Now … comes the 1/6 report

Americans with an interest in how the government came under attack on Jan. 6, 2021, and how we might prevent a recurrence of such a travesty have some riveting TV viewing ahead of them.

The House 1/6 select committee is going to meet one final time Monday in front of you and me. It will discuss what it has discovered after interviewing more than 1,000 witnesses and reviewed more than a million documents.

The committee then will take arguably the most monumental congressional votes in U.S. history. It will vote on whether to refer criminal charges against the former president of the United States who, in 1/6, incited the insurrection that tore through the Capitol Building with the aim of overturning a free and fair presidential election.

To be abundantly clear, Congress only can refer criminal charges to the Department of Justice. DOJ must decide whether to indict whoever the congressional committee refers in its report.

And … yes. Donald J. Trump’s name needs to be among those referred for criminal prosecution.

To suggest that the1/6 committee has been anything but meticulous, patient, diligent and courageous in its pursuit of the truth about 1/6 is to be guilty of the most partisan cynicism imaginable.

On the receiving end of those referrals, of course, is Attorney General Merrick Garland, who has insisted repeatedly that “no one is above the law.” By “no one,” he means precisely what we must infer, which is that Donald Trump is vulnerable to a criminal indictment … or two … or three.

Having watched many hours of previous testimony and commentary from committee members, I have no doubt — none, zero! — that Donald Trump committed multiple crimes before, during and after the assault on the Capitol Building.

What remains to be determined if whether the AG is going — after poring through the committee’s findings — to make history by doing something to previous attorney general has done. Will he indict Donald J. Trump?

I believe that moment is coming.

Meanwhile, I am going to listen with the most intense interest possible at committee members’ message as this drama draws to its long-awaited conclusion.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com