General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsLaurence Tribe Wonders Why A Grand Jury Isn't Mulling Sedition Charges Against Steve Bannon
Harvard constitutional law professor Laurence Tribe is wondering why the Department of Justice isnt convening a grand jury to consider sedition charges against Donald Trump ally and former White House strategist Steve Bannon.
Tribe was referring Thursday to Bannons boast the previous day on his War Room podcast that we told Trump before the Jan. 6 insurrection: You need to kill this administration in the crib.
Bannon also had a war-room-type meeting with Rudy Giuliani, Trumps former personal attorney, and others in Washington on the eve of the insurrection, Washington Post journalists Bob Woodward and Robert Costa reported in their new book, Peril. They also reported on Bannons comment that night about killing the Biden presidency in the crib.
Bannon played a clip on his podcast of an MSNBC interview with Woodward and Costa discussing Bannons role, and he didnt deny it.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/law-expert-wonders-why-grand-011305276.html
malaise
(269,157 posts)RFN!
Response to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
ananda
(28,873 posts)He knows what should happen legally, but never gets
fluffed about it.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)He said that "it's increasingly hard to see how DOJ can sit on this kind of revelation without convening a grand jury." He didn't say he thinks DOJ hasn't convened a grand jury but that he can't imagine why they wouldn't.
I went back and read the tweets the article cites because I thought this headline was odd since Prof. Tribe knows that grand jury proceedings are secret and grand juries are often convened and hear evidence without the public knowing about it. So it would be weird for him to claim a grand jury isn't considering charges because he has no way of knowing whether a grand jury is considering charges, what charges they're considering and who the target(s) of those charges may be. He knows better and that's why he didn't say it - but the headline writer probably doesn't understand it and misstated the point he made.
Professor Tribe is speaking in the conditional, just as he had in an earlier tweet when he suggested that it WOULD be hard for DOJ to justify if they're not doing something. That's very different than saying they AREN'T doing anything.
He DEFINITELY did not say he was "wondering why a grand jury isn't mulling charges," despite what the headline claims.
Elessar Zappa
(14,033 posts)Headlines are often misleading and click-bait. I dont blame the OP but the writer of the article.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)The headline writer (who may not have written the article) is responsible. And I can see how a laypeople who aren't familiar with the grand jury system would have no reason to know that the headline mischaracterized what Prof. Tribe said.
monkeyman1
(5,109 posts)Beetwasher.
(2,981 posts)Sogo
(4,992 posts)How would we know if one had been convened for this?
gab13by13
(21,385 posts)why not just say part 3, we don't know what we don't know?
We had an attempted coup and the discourse here is to not get alarmed, to just wait, because we don't know what DOJ is or isn't doing.
The biggest threat to our democracy is from people who say not to worry, be happy. 9 months ago we had an attempted coup and all we have so far are judges giving bit players slaps on the wrists.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)If you read the article and Tribe's tweets, you'll see that he never claimed to know whether a grand jury is taking evidence. The headline is misleading.
CanonRay
(14,112 posts)Duppers
(28,125 posts)2naSalit
(86,765 posts)bucolic_frolic
(43,257 posts)you don't want to make these guys into lightning rods and martyrs, you don't want to give them the chance to be acquitted, and these guys know everything about everyone so you tread lightly. Timely indictments for 2024 are good enough, and you strike when the appeal of their movement has declined so as not to divide the country more sharply.
BComplex
(8,060 posts)If there has EVER been someone who has openly and brazenly committed treason, it's him.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)and most scholars believe that Trump's actions don't fit within it. It would be difficult, if not impossible to get a conviction on a treason charge.
budkin
(6,713 posts)He just likes to disrupt norms and make America great again!