Friday, December 06, 2024

The Best And The Brightest

The law says that any presumption of vindictiveness on the part of the government can be rebutted by showing that a legitimate and objective reason supports the charges in the indictment or the basis for the indictment itself. Trump himself made the vindictiveness claim during the recent prosecutions against him. He was unsuccessful (as are most defendants) because there were objectively reasonable grounds for thinking that his prosecutions were grounded on solid factual bases. 
There is, however, a further twist to this general rule: Even if no presumption of vindictiveness arises because the prosecution is objectively reasonable, a defendant may still prevail if he can show that the prosecutor was actually vindictive in his prosecution. In other words, a defendant can still succeed if he or she can present direct evidence showing that the prosecution was intended as retribution, notwithstanding the fact that actual crimes may have occurred. This is the Beria scenario—find the man first and then identify the crime. 
Patel has gone a long way to supporting a claim of vindictiveness and helping defendants who might be charged to make their case. Consider, for example, this interview (most particularly at 1:07:00) where Patel promises the retribution of prosecution and civil suits against political opponents for “borderline treason.” Or, consider this clip (at about 4:58–5:30) where Patel explains that he’s already decided that he will go after members of the “Deep State” and the media, “whether it’s criminally or civilly, we’ll figure that out” because he’s made the judgment (apparently without investigation) that such actions are necessary. 
In his book, Government Gangsters: The Deep State, the Truth, and the Battle for Our Democracy, Patel includes an enemies list of those he wants to target for prosecution. And, in an intemperate interview with Steve Bannon, Patel lists a number of names (including by reference all of the people from his enemies list) and ends his screed by declaring “these people need to go to prison.” 
These are not the words of a neutral investigator. Rather, they are stark evidence of a pre-disposition to prosecution and strong circumstantial evidence of vindictive intent. Patel has already identified who needs to be prosecuted and what their crimes appear to be—all without the benefit of having conducted a criminal investigation. 
The motion to dismiss almost writes itself. From his own mouth, Patel will give evidence of his retributive intent. It seems quite likely that many of those whom Patel wishes to prosecute will be protected from that prosecution by the courts. (Of course, as director of the FBI, it wouldn’t be Patel who would bring the retributive prosecutions, but the U.S. attorneys at the Justice Department, but judges should be able to put two and two together.)
Rosenzweig goes on to point out this doesn’t make these prosecutions a cakewalk. You still have to pay the lawyers to convince the judge, and the investigation alone can be expensive (you don’t want to be investigated without legal counsel), but the very fact this defense could be used, over and over again, raises the question of whether Patel is competent to direct the FBI for 10 years.

“Advice and consent,” contrary to the interpretation of Sen. Tuberville, means the Senate has to consider the good of the country; not just “what the President wants.” (Which, to belabor the obvious, is not the Constitutional standard, nor is even arguably meant to be.)
According to Alemany, that is a growing concern within the former president's inner circle. 
"This has been the one benefit of having other candidates that are more overtly controversial," she told the hosts. "There's –– it's been a little bit of a deflection tactic from some of the other more, some of the other candidates and nominees who also have controversies, controversies that haven't yet spilled out into public view yet." 
"But what you're saying exactly is why Trump aides are telling us behind the scenes that backing Hegseth and continuing to stand by him is so important," she reported. "To show and not allow this narrative to set in that the GOP-led Senate has essentially neutered Trump's power and his mandate to appoint people into his positions, people who are loyalists who are going to carry out his campaign promises and his MAGA mandate."
The Senate has their Constitutional responsibility. But MAGA wants to carry out its agenda. What they don’t see is that government, and the laws which establish it, will get in the way. Which they’ll probably have to find out the hard way.
A trail of documents, corroborated by the accounts of former colleagues, indicates that Hegseth was forced to step down by both of the two nonprofit advocacy groups that he ran—Veterans for Freedom and Concerned Veterans for America—in the face of serious allegations of financial mismanagement, sexual impropriety, and personal misconduct.
Hegseth is an alcoholic who has promised to stop drinking if he’s appointed SecDef. But the real money quote is about his abilities:
Margaret Hoover, a Republican political commentator and political strategist who worked as an adviser to V.F.F. between 2008 and 2010, recently told CNN that she had grave concerns about Hegseth’s ability to run the Pentagon, the largest department in the federal government, given his mismanagement at V.F.F. “I watched him run an organization very poorly, lose the confidence of donors. The organization ultimately folded and was forced to merge with another organization who individuals felt could run and manage funds on behalf of donors more responsibly than he could. That was my experience with him.” Hoover stressed that V.F.F. was an exceedingly small organization, with fewer than ten employees, and a budget of between five million and ten million dollars. She told CNN, “And he couldn’t do that properly—I don’t know how he’s going to run an organization with an eight-hundred-and-fifty-seven-billion-dollar budget and three million individuals.”
Trump wants him because Hegseth looks good on TeeVee. So, of course he should get his choice.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)