For those that think the DOJ has been sitting on its hands and not investigating -- review this

[onenote]

Last edited Thu Jun 16, 2022, 06:17 PM - Edit history (1)

This is the docket for the criminal case that DOJ is pursuing against various Proud Boys.

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/59704100/united-states-v-nordean/?page=3

It shows the extraordinary effort that DOJ has been making in just this one case. The first complaint against a Proud Boy leader (Ethan Nordean) was sworn out on February 2, 2021. An indictment against Nordean was returned by a grand jury a month later, on March 3, 2021. Since then there have been two superseding indictments (one in March 2022 and one on June 6, 2022) returned by grand juries that have, based on evidence gathered by DOJ subsequent to the initial indictment, added more defendants and charges against Proud Boys alleged to have engaged in a criminal seditious conspiracy. For example, the DOJ has cited information gleaned from a cell phone seized from one of the defendants that was not cracked until January 2022.

One thing you will note if you take the time to review the docket and inspect some of the documents is that even as it was continuing to investigate and add to its case, DOJ has had to respond to dozens of motions and other fillings made by the defendants. That takes time. And this is just one case. Moreover, there has been considerable attention paid to pretrial discovery and the obligation of the government to provide evidence, particularly potentially exculpatory evidence, to the defendants. The volume of information the DOJ has collected and has had to turn over to the defendants is extraordinarily large -- millions of pages.

The trial in this case was originally set for May 2022, but it was continued until August over the objections of the defendants (who object because they are being held in jail pending trial).In May, not long after the continuance, DOJ wrote to the Committee asking for access to the Committee's interview transcripts -- information that would be important both in terms of potentially uncovering additional information useful to the prosecution but also in ensuring that the very litigious defendants don't have a leg to stand on with respect to their being denied access to exculpatory evidence. Had the Committee (which interviewed the Proud Boys subsequent to subpoenas issued in late November -- well after these defendants had been indicted) turned over those transcripts, it is likely that the trial would have gone forward as DOJ had proposed -- in August.

This one docket list -- and this is hardly the only prosecution brought or being pursued by DOJ arising out of the January 6 insurrection--is a telling rebuttal to anyone who thinks the DOJ hasn't been conducting its own investigations and pursuing the events of January 6.

[Silent3]

1. Very few people here have thought the DoJ was "sitting on its hands" re Proud Boys and the like

What many are rightly suspicious of is the much, much different question of how vigorously the DoJ will pursue Trump's inner circle, Trump himself, and conspirators in the House and the Senate.

[onenote]

4. The decision by DOJ to agree to the delay in the Proud Boys trial

has been criticized by quite a few people who claim that DOJ wouldn't need the transcripts of the Committee's interview of the Proud Boys if DOJ had done its own investigation.

As the docket shows -- DOJ has done an incredibly detailed and extensive investigation that has repeatedly produced more evidence, led to more defendants and charges being added to the conspiracy case.

[empedocles]

5. TY

[uponit7771]

6. DOJ says its delaying because of "potential prejudice" caused by J6C timing of hearing

Link to tweet

[onenote]

8. A reasonable concern for DOJ to have under the circumstances.

This is a conspiracy trial. The transcripts may have information that any one or all of the defendants might want to have before trial. Giving defendants opportunity to prepare for trial -- and to get access to information that could be useful in that preparation -- is an important part of due process. Given the fights over discovery -- and the court's clear sensitivity to the issue -- it would be foolish for DOJ to risk the case by proceeding without giving the defendants (and themselves) access to those transcripts.

[Ohio Joe]

9. Correct...

Having something unexpected pop up during the trial could be disastrous to the case.

[onenote]

12. Particularly given the presumed timing

The trial was going to start in August. It likely will be a long trial (given that it involves multiple defendants and multiple counts). If the transcripts come out in September (as DOJ postulates), it could be in the middle of the trial and create a mess.

[Novara]

11. absolutely

[TwilightZone]

2. The incessant whining around here about the DOJ is pretty remarkable.

Those people sure are dedicated. Every day, thread after thread after thread.

Multiple the effort noted for an average case by 800+ and that's basically where we are at the moment. 865 people charged as of earlier this week.

Of course, that doesn't include everything going on behind the scenes that the DOJ won't comment on, per policy. Too many people take that to mean nothing's happening. Everyone's an expert.

[dwayneb]

10. The DOJ's intent may be fine

But their ability to execute in an timely manner is another story altogether. This is the strength, and the weakness of our system of justice. Because, if DOJ delays long enough to allow Congress to go under the control of the Fascists in 2022, we may be in deep trouble.

[onenote]

14. The "delays" are not really in DOJ's control

First, they could have sped things up by sticking with the initial indictment against Nordean, which merely charged him with obstruction of an official proceeding, destruction of government property, entering a restricted building, and disorderly conduct. Shortly thereafter, DOJ obtained the first of three superseding indictments that allowed them to add several additional defendants and a conspiracy charge. I suppose DOJ could've stopped there, but they kept investigating and as a result (and after cracking encrypted cell phone messages), they were able to obtain two more superseding indictments -- the first, in March 2022, added two more defendants and additional criminal charges. And the second, issued by the grand jury on June 6 -- less than two weeks ago -- added the big one: a charge of seditious conspiracy.

So yes, it took time. But would you rather they moved to trial without the further investigation that was required to build the more significant and broader case? And that effort was only one source of delay. The defendants were particularly litigious, filing literally dozens of motions that DOJ had to respond to in writing and that the court had to dispose of. And then there is the duty, imposed by law and insisted on by the court, that DOJ turn over documents to the defendants -- and the number of such documents was extraordinary. Hundreds of thousands of pages.

In short, blaming DOJ for not moving fast enough ignores the scope of the investigation and the extent to which the defendants can drag out matters in ways DOJ can't control The docket in this case is here -- it demonstrates how complex and time consuming pursuing a criminal case such as this is. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/59704100/united-states-v-nordean/?page=3

[herding cats]

3. Marking to read later.

Thanks!

[malaise]

7. K & R

For truth

[Captain Zero]

13. Maybe PB will use discovery for PLEA DEALS??

That would require them to testify about their back channels to the white house, I would hope.

More truth.
Plea Deals,
More truth.

After today I think everybody between Trump and PBs has to be thinking plea deal.