https://xkcd.com/703/

I did, in fact, not notice that. Sorry about that.

So you'd replace Garland and the new AG would do what, exactly? Fire Jack Smith?

Would he nice if that attitude persists for a while.

It's because deep frying was not very common in the U.S. Immersion in hot fat was considered a French style of cooking, so they're French style fried potatoes. I think "fries" instead of "frieds" is dialect that caught on nationally in the U.S. in the 70s.

The correct solution for an outlier event is to set up a proper Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The U.S. still thinks it's above that, but it's not. A TRC would have worked after 1/6 because it was an inherently partisan event. You cannot have it be bipartisan for the same reason the Nazis didn't get to be judges at Nuremberg and neither Shining Path nor the former government officials in Peru got to sit on their TRC. The group that perpetrated the violence shouldn't get to adjudicate it.

"I'm crouching as hard as I can!”

Why would that change speedy trial? Plenty of defendants with PDs waive speedy trial.

I'm curious where this narrative that the case only began in 2023 came from. Smith was appointed in November 2022 and the investigation doesn't necessarily start when the public finds out or when the prosecutor (special or otherwise) is announced.

To be clear I'm just talking about federal prosecutors. State and local tend to be political and, as a result, that tends to be where you see way more corruption. Ironically, it's also why state AGs will have policies that are entirely different from the governor's: they're a separate political office.

It's a norm because prosecution is both an executive and judicial function. It straddles both branches and you want it to be neutral in exercising prosecutorial discretion. When the chief executive steps in to direct prosecution, it has a strong tendency to become political and lead away from democracy.

Well when your son-in-law is Rishi Sunak...