280
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2023
280 points (99.3% liked)
politics
19087 readers
3673 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I'm good with it. The thing is that Powell and Chesebro applied for an early trial, which the other 17 are fine waiting and spending time sifting through the evidence, so the state was accommodating both sets of defendants.
But - all 19 defendants were indicted on the same body of evidence. If the trial next week had gone forward as scheduled, then the second group of defendants would have had a detailed look at the prosecution's strategy for the trial, and could have planned their defensive strategy to try to make the persecution less effective.
With the Chesebro and Powell trials cancelled, they don't get that opportunistic detailed look at the prosecution's strategy and will have to try to counter it in real time. I'm okay with this.
Which honestly is probably why they got an even sweeter deal. At least I really hope that they got a really sweet deal, in that everyone else is going to be hit very hard
Yeah, I also see that. But I think the public interest would have been better served by litigating this case in public next week, rather than waiting for some indeterminate period of time.
I also think that having evidence and arguments presented related to people higher on the chain of responsibility, without their attorneys being able to object to anything, could have served to solidify the case against them when they do go to trial.