Don't fall for people trying to get you to blame anyone except Trump and the courts which have enabled him
..it was quite the coup in which the people prosecuting Trump were made the scapegoats, improbably, by Trump's opposition, merely on the way the indicted felon was able to delay his trial, ultimately some 15 months after being charged, by advantaging myriad and successive courts packed with republican and Trump appointees, up to the Supreme Court; dismissing one case which languished on appeal until the election due to court scheduling; and one ordered dismissed by Trump after the election.
What's funny sad is that the very person who set the left against the Trump prosecution (Carol Leonnig) - successfully steering each and every progress, including the actual indictments, away from the withering challenges and appeals, diverting our gaze from the courts that obligingly delayed trials for months with frivolous claims dragged up the chain and were ultimately dismissed, nonetheless causing the delays the Trump team and their enablers on the courts deliberately engineered - that very person, is back in the Trump-obliging and enabling media with a book based on her incorrect and incomplete assessment that Merrick Garland had delayed something in the case; an almost solitary assessment, outdone only by the ones who parrot her, which each and every critic of his efforts has used to denigrate him in the most absurd and weirdly projecting manners imaginable.
I mean, the campaign to turn the left against the prosecution was so complete that you still can't get a word of actual fact about the prosecution of Trump off of your keyboard without a barrage of one-liner claims that the man who initiated the investigation and prosecution of a former president; the person who hired Jack Smith on his own volition to take what was described by CNN's Elie Honig at the time as a 'fast-moving investigation" whose 20 Garland prosecutors he inherited had already "gathered more evidence than Mueller at the start of his SC probe" to the finish line; is actually a republican hired by Biden to sabotage the investigation (did I get that right?).
Politico put it succinctly in outlining conclusions in Smith's final report:
But Smith’s report emphasized that the Justice Department was aggressively investigating leads related to Trump long before the special counsel’s tenure began. Litigation tactics by Trump and his allies, Smith argued, were the key factors that slowed the process to a crawl.
...It took Smith more than a year to obtain text messages between Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) and Trump DOJ official Jeffrey Clark. And the department spent months fighting to access communications of John Eastman, a lawyer who helped devise Trump’s last-ditch efforts to remain in power.
The most protracted battles of all stemmed from Trump’s “broad invocation of executive privilege to try to prevent witnesses from providing evidence,” Smith wrote. It took months of secretive legal proceedings to secure testimony from Trump White House aides such as Mark Meadows, Dan Scavino and Pat Cipollone. Former Vice President Mike Pence also resisted testifying until a court ordered him to reveal some — but not all — details about his interactions with Trump. Smith noted that judges broadly rejected Trump’s privilege claims, with one holding that he was engaged in an “obvious” effort to delay the investigation.
Smith also drew attention to what may have been his biggest foil: the Supreme Court. He pointed out that the justices rebuffed his effort to put Trump’s presidential immunity claims on a similar timetable to the one the court adopted five decades earlier in litigation over Watergate and President Richard Nixon’s tapes.
And Smith argued that the Supreme Court’s resolution of Trump’s immunity assertion essentially guaranteed another round of litigation that would have been all but certain to return to the justices if Trump had not won the election and the prosecution had continued.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/01/14/jack-smith-special-counsel-report-takeaways-00198252
It's just weird that you get all of this animus about someone who actually spent the effort prosecuting Trump (and don't waste any time arguing to me that he didn't. As you can see googling the issue and my screename, this isn't my first rodeo), could have dismissed the prosecution at any time, but persisted until all of the evidence HIS prosecutors had gathered from as early as the Fall of 2021 was defended against appeals and claims and made available for the indictment, all eventually approved by the trial judge.
Yet, you can't get even a wit of mention of the dishonest appeals and claims, or the judges and justices who not only allowed them to get a hearing, but delayed those court dates as long into the future as they could obligingly manage.
It would be just a bit more credible, albeit still wrong, to be slinging shit at the prosecutors of Trump (all along the way, as the Trump camp did the same, even today), if it came with a equal or greater effort to hold the courts accountable for their enabling Trump to dodge a trial 15 months after he was indicted.
Weird to me because, they're still fucking there. The guy that stepped up to prosecute Trump and his band of insurrectionists and obtained dual multi-felony indictments is gone, in part because Americans turned away from that prosecution effort. I mean, who fucking encouraged THAT stupidity?
And lookee here!
The very same courts packed with republican and Trump-nominated judges and justices are just humming right along with their enabling bullshit.
In the following weeks, Trump used those same powers to impose tariffs on China, Mexico, and Canada, accusing those countries of failing to stop fentanyl and illegal immigration. He then declared an additional emergency at the northern border, focused on drug trafficking from Canada.
Other emergency orders included one targeting cybersecurity threats to U.S. infrastructure, one authorizing sanctions against the International Criminal Court, and another enabling reciprocal tariffs on trade partners with large surpluses over the U.S. In late July, he signed an order declaring Brazil a national security threat, allowing sanctions against its government.
All of these orders gave federal agencies more power to act without Congress — including access to emergency funds, waivers for environmental laws and expanded law enforcement tools.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/full-list-of-national-emergencies-signed-by-trump-and-in-effect/ar-AA1PitRX
So, even as many lower courts valiantly try to block Trump's autocratic advance, the maga majority on the Supreme Court remains as his primary enabler; still in place and ready and willing to enhance Trump's power and authority.
Truthout:
The report stated that, unlike the Supreme Court, lower courts are “engaged in a bipartisan fight for the rule of law.”
The report from Court Accountability, an organization that “works to combat corrupt abuse of government power and support movements in advancing a thriving democratic future,” examined hundreds of cases dealing with the Trump administration, including executive orders or actions taken by President Donald Trump himself.
Legal challenges to the administration at the district court level won around 60 percent of the 240 orders judges have issued. That includes their winning 55 percent of the time when Trump-appointed judges were rendering the decisions.
At circuit courts of appeals, there was a similar win rate, with challengers to Trump winning around 59 percent of the time in the 90 orders examined by Court Accountability. However, there were more partisan outcomes: Republican-appointed judges sided with the president in 84 percent of the cases, while Democratic-appointed judges sided with the challengers in 85 percent of the cases.
At the Supreme Court, however, the rate was unquestionably pro-Trump — among the 23 rulings and temporary orders made and examined by Court Accountability relating to the administration’s actions, Trump had a 90 percent win rate.
ANYTIME folks are ready to move past this embarrassing abandonment of the Trump prosecution, and are willing to reject the Trump DOJ-enabling attacks on what's essentially the prosecutors who worked successfully to indictments with more than enough time for a trial (the ones getting fired right now for doing the job the left claims never happened), we can all confront the corrupt, interfering and enabling courts together, who, should be noted, unlike the efforts of the Biden DOJ, did not hasten justice in their respective positions in order to protect the American people from the clear and present insurrectionist.
= new reply since forum marked as read
No offense intended, friend 
I am interested in the point though, is there a tl;dr version? A synopsis, if you will?
Especially when eruditely presented, but this particular missive is unreadable for me in it's current format. I rarely do this but I'm just going to feed it to AI to decipher it. Thanks for cluing me in
Edit: Here is the result:
Prosecutors became scapegoats: Instead of blaming Trump for trial delays, some of his opposition oddly blamed the prosecutors—because Trump used courts, especially those with partisan judges, to postpone his trial far past indictment.
Media figures (Carol Leonnig) and some critics on the left steered attention away from court delays and Trump’s legal maneuvering—and focused blame on Merrick Garland or the prosecutors themselves. This narrative distracted from the real cause of delays.
The media’s framing led progressives to attack the prosecution, claiming Garland was intentionally slow or “sabotaging” the investigation—despite evidence that he moved quickly and appointed Jack Smith with a strong team already in place.
The fallout: The left harshly criticized Garland and the prosecution based on narratives started by a handful of influential voices, ignoring facts about Trump’s tactics and the real reason for delays (court scheduling and appeals).
