Everything's Coming Up Ignoble. Or Deplorable--Your Choice Of Words

The main topic here is the DoJ's lawless abuse of hundreds of participants in the January 6 Event. In referring to "DoJ's lawless abuse" I don't mean to let the FBI--an agency within the DoJ--off the hook. However, the fact is that none of these lawless abuses would be taking place but for the conscious and deliberate decision of a former federal judge and onetime nominee to the SCOTUS, currently at the head of the Zhou regime's DoJ, Merrick Garland. Garland himself, of course, is simply following orders--a disgrace for a former federal judge sworn to uphold the law and defend the Constitution. The shame and ignominy that Dems have brought upon a once proud institution, and the constitutional order it purports to uphold, would be almost too much to bear--were it not for the shame and ignominy already brought upon it by GOPe luminaries such as Bluto Barr and Bullsh*t Durham.

Commenter PDQuig has brought to our attention a fine article on the current status of the persecution by a former long time federal prosecutor, Shipwreckedcrew:

THE BIDEN JUSTICE DEPARTMENT CAN’T SEEM TO PRODUCE THE EVIDENCE IT SUPPOSEDLY USED TO INDICT THE JANUARY 6TH PROTEST CASES.

Offering pleas to misdemeanors and dismissing felonies violates written DOJ policies.

In point of fact, this article is basically an expansion on points that SWC made in earlier writings--all of which remain true and of great concern. I commented, here, on an earlier version of this article--actually, the day before this article came out. At that time I remarked:

The basic problem with the case SWC discusses--and, count on it, there are many more like it--is that the regime is trying to keep citizens in prison on trumped up charges while they conduct investigation. That's totally backwards--or used to be when America was still a constitutional republic. A lot of judges are unhappy about this.

That's the real point. America retains--to outward appearances--the institutions and forms of a constitutional republic, but the reality in ways almost too numerous to count is that of a Banana Republic in which rule of law is simply discarded at the whim of the regime. Nor can one count on dissent against such abuses by the nominal opposition party.

SWC goes through the Who Struck John of what's going on, and I highly recommend the article for anyone who wants to understand how far we've come from the rule of law and of due process of law for those accused of crimes. SWC's main focus is on the DoJ's blatant disregard for its obligation--clearly set forth in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and DoJ's own regulations. Read it if you need convincing. 

For our purposes, here are some excerpts that present SWC's conclusions. They're presented in what is, for me, remarkable neutral language--drily picking apart and describing the grotesque abuses of justice. However, at the very end he lays it on the line, for anyone who will consider the full import of his words. It's heartbreaking to read this. Keep in mind the basic principles here as you read--under any system of rule of law, investigation takes place and facts are gathered such that they support a finding of "probable cause"--more likely than not--that a specific crime has occurred. Indictments and arrests take place when the government in good faith believes its investigation has arrived at a point at which it can proceed to a trial--if necessary--in a timely fashion. That includes complying with its obligations to share relevant facts with the defendant and his lawyers. That is NOT what we are seeing.

What’s more, how did the prosecutors who sought the indictments against the January 6th defendants know they would have “legally sufficient and admissible evidence at trial” to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt if, after nearly seven months, they are still making excuses to the courts for their inability to provide discovery of such evidence to the defense in these cases? What was the evidentiary basis for the initial felony charge?

What is obvious now in hindsight is that the Biden Justice Department prosecutors sought and obtained felony charges in many cases based on almost no meaningful review of actual evidence about what happened; it used fear and hysteria to justify doing so. Now they are being pressed to provide the evidence that is supposed to support the felony charges they brought, and are unable to do so in the timeframe required by law. So they are abandoning the cases on the best possible outcome available—the least serious of all federal crimes, “petty” misdemeanors.

But the defendants have been abusively detained all this time on trumped up charges that lack real evidentiary bases. 

Now that the DOJ has gone down the path of exchanging guilty pleas to misdemeanors for some defendants charged with felonies, it will become more difficult to not do the same for a much larger number of defendants where the facts are substantially the same.

The complications the government created for itself in its decision-making about what crimes to charge do not excuse it from complying with the rules of discovery and due process. But that is what the government has been telling the Judges and Defendants in the January 6th cases in its “Memo of Woe,” now making its way through various “Capitol Breach Cases.”

Producing discovery in a meaningful manner and balancing complex legal-investigative and technical difficulties takes time. We want to ensure that all defendants obtain meaningful access to voluminous information that may contain exculpatory material, and that we do not overproduce or produce in a disorganized manner. That means we will review thousands of investigative memoranda, even if there is a likelihood they are purely administrative and not discoverable, to ensure that disclosures are appropriate.

The simple reality is that the DOJ has not—even after seven months—complied with its discovery obligations such that the defendants’ statutory and constitutional rights had been met. They offer only excuses and ask for more time. The consequence is that defendants are forced to remain in a state of limbo, subject to detention or court supervision, and unable to move on with their lives. In other words, an arbitrary deprivation of life, liberty, and property without due process of law.

An arbitrary deprivation of life, libetry, and property without due process of law. Think about that. Isn't that pretty much the definition of what goes on in a Banana Republic? A sham.

ADDENDUM: While these simple people, deplorable in the eyes of the power elite, are being viciously persecuted without regard for the basic processes of law, what are our rulers up to. Whooping it up, partly at our expense, in their mansions on Martha's Vineyard.  And then there's this, via TGP:

In January it was reported that [Treasury Secretary] Janet Yellen made more than $1 million in speaking fees from Citidel.  Now we find out Yellen made $7 million in speaking fees in 2020 from Citibank alone. 

Who actually thinks that Citibank--and who knows what other financial institutions--would give that kind of money to the future Treasury Secretary without expecting a return? Please! And why would they give that kind of money unless ... they'd received assurances from the Deep State that Trump would be removed from office, come what may?

What a pass we've come to. We see that all this "Progressivism" stuff is, when all is said and done, simply about money and power. And they don't even hide it any more, which makes you wonder what they think they know about our future.