A grand jury in Washington has rebuffed federal prosecutors’ attempts to indict six Democratic lawmakers, an unprecedented move following a video where the lawmakers urged military and intelligence members to disobey illegal orders. President Trump had publicly declared the lawmakers guilty of sedition, a capital offense, and U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro subsequently sought indictments. This rejection by the grand jury, while not entirely unprecedented in recent times, highlights a pattern of losses for the Trump administration before such bodies, signaling a decline in credibility with judges and citizens alike. The grand jury system, designed as a check on prosecutorial power, is reportedly questioning the integrity of federal prosecutors.
Read More
The Department of Justice appears to be encountering significant challenges in securing indictments against individuals perceived as opponents of the current administration, a situation that is notably unusual within the federal justice system. The recent failure to convince a grand jury to indict six members of Congress marks a stark example of these growing obstacles, highlighting an “uphill battle” for prosecutors seeking to reprimand those aligned against the administration’s agenda.
It’s quite rare for federal prosecutors to present their case to a grand jury and not secure an indictment. For context, in fiscal year 2016, the Department of Justice sought federal charges against nearly 70,000 felony defendants, and in a mere six instances did a grand jury refuse to indict.… Continue reading
A federal grand jury has declined to indict six Democratic lawmakers who appeared in a video reminding military members of their duty to refuse illegal orders. This action was reportedly an effort by the Trump Justice Department, led by US attorney Jeanine Pirro, to charge the lawmakers with interfering with military loyalty and discipline. Lawmakers and legal observers have expressed alarm at the attempt to weaponize the Justice Department against political opponents, calling it an assault on the First Amendment and the rule of law.
Read More
A federal grand jury declined to indict six Democratic lawmakers who posted a video encouraging service members and intelligence officials to disobey illegal orders from the Trump administration. The Justice Department’s investigation into the 90-second video, which warned of “threats to our Constitution” from within the U.S., was seen as an effort to silence dissent. The grand jury’s decision serves as a rebuke to the administration’s attempts to portray the lawmakers, all with military or intelligence backgrounds, as undermining presidential authority. This outcome is an extraordinary rebuke of the Justice Department’s willingness to prosecute individuals speaking out against the administration.
Read More
Kentucky State University released a statement following the grand jury’s decision not to indict Jacob Bard in connection with the fatal shooting. The university expressed continued mourning for the loss of life and a commitment to supporting the campus community. The university stated that it would continue cooperating with law enforcement and reinforcing safety measures. Counseling and support resources remain available to students, faculty, and staff.
Read More
2nd grand jury refuses to indict New York AG Letitia James: Sources, and honestly, the fact that a second grand jury has now declined to indict her feels pretty significant. It’s like, “Whoa, hold on a second. Two juries, on separate occasions, both looked at whatever evidence was presented and said ‘Nope.'” That’s not just a little speed bump; it’s a full-on roadblock. You have to wonder what exactly was presented to them, and how strong the case really was, if at all.
2nd grand jury refuses to indict New York AG Letitia James: Sources, and this repetition of the same outcome in a short timeframe really underscores something important about the legal process.… Continue reading
A US judge has authorized the unsealing of grand jury transcripts from the 2005 and 2007 investigation into Jeffrey Epstein, following a recent congressional bill mandating the release of related files. The court order, granted in Florida, specifically applies to unclassified records pertaining to Epstein and his accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell. This decision overrides a previous rejection based on federal rules concerning grand jury materials. The Justice Department is also seeking to unseal documents from Epstein’s 2019 and Maxwell’s 2021 sex-trafficking cases in New York, further intensifying scrutiny of Epstein’s alleged abuse of underage girls and the controversial non-prosecution agreement he received in 2008.
Read More
A federal grand jury in Virginia has declined to indict New York Attorney General Letitia James, days after a judge dismissed the earlier case against her, which alleged bank fraud and false statements. The cases against James and Comey were dismissed without prejudice, meaning the government could attempt to indict them again. This is a rare occurrence, as grand juries rarely decline a prosecutor’s request to indict. James, who has previously brought charges against Trump, released a statement praising the grand jury’s decision, calling the charges baseless and a weaponization of the justice system.
Read More
Grand jury rejections, particularly when concerning high-profile figures, can say a lot about the legal process and public perception. The recent refusal by a federal grand jury in Norfolk, Virginia, to indict New York Attorney General Letitia James on alleged mortgage fraud charges is a prime example. This outcome, coming shortly after the dismissal of an earlier case based on a technicality, highlights some interesting dynamics. The Department of Justice’s (DOJ) attempts to refile the case, and the subsequent “no true bill” returned by the grand jury, sends a very clear message: the evidence, or the way it was presented, wasn’t strong enough to warrant charges.… Continue reading
After a federal judge dismissed the initial charges, a grand jury declined to indict New York Attorney General Letitia James in a mortgage fraud case for the second time. The Justice Department, however, may seek indictment a third time, indicating the intensity of their efforts. The charges stemmed from accusations of false statements and bank fraud, but were initially thrown out due to the unlawful appointment of the prosecutor. The defense argued the appointment of Trump’s handpicked prosecutor was invalid, and the case has been met with claims of selective and vindictive prosecution.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood