Jack Smith walked into a Senate hearing room this morning with Donald Trump threatening to prosecute him, and he told the country Trump committed serious crimes anyway.ContentsJACK SMITH STANDS UP TO TRUMP DESPITE THREATS OF PROSECUTIONMUSICIAN HITS TRUMP WITH LEGAL THREAT OVER PROPAGANDA ADTRUMP MOCKS “SLEEPY JOE” THEN NODS OFF ON CAMERAMARK CARNEY IS BEATING […]
I agree with most of what you said. However, I find it odd that you called it “one of the most important cases in American history” but also seem to be defending their decision to treat it much like any other case.
Trump is the best example there is that norms and precedent don’t mean much. He loves using the system against his opponents and Smith didn’t fight back against that at all. Again, he should have expected Trump’s deny and delay tactics and took some action.
Fighting an opponent who uses the rules against you requires being creative with the rules. Instead of the bold action we needed we got timid deference to procedure. If Biden and Garland were the hold up then stand in front of the media and say that directly to the world. Force them to either get off their ass or fire you. Anything less is equivalent to letting Trump run out the clock, which is exactly what happened.
He’s proving right now that he knows how to do this, which is why it’s so frustrating that he didn’t do it when it might have mattered.
In reality not treating it with norms would immediately give Trump ammo to torpedo the entire thing and rightfully call it unfair. You can argue for reform but unilaterally imposing changes to how the process works for a single individual, during the investigation, is not a thing.
Your conclusion is that letting Trump walk was the right call so I’ll never agree with that argument. Dress it up how you like but it’s still bullshit.