Trouble for Trump's Plan to "Weaponize" DOJ (long)
A few weeks ago, in response to another post on a thread, I wrote that the court system cannot be used for retribution. The statement was based on my own experiences in court and working with thousands of cases in the nonprofit association I co-founded over a decade ago and which was in operation for 20 years. I always meant to develop that post a bit more, however, now someone has done the work for me, so I'll just post this editorial.
The writer is a former assistant U.S. attorney for D.C., Bruce Yannett. He works in NY now, and last year won Global Investigations Review’s Outstanding Career award. This award is given to an "exceptionally respected and admired individual in the investigations community." As I read up on Mr. Yannett, however, I had a smug smile when I realized he specializes in securities fraud, accounting fraud, foreign bribery, cybersecurity, insider trading and money laundering.
Hmmmm, what lying schmuck election thief would we know who performs those sorts of crimes? 
I suspect Mr. Yannett had a good deal of fun composing this editorial. He must have had an equal amount of fun watching the Eric Adams case dismissal blow into a brouhaha by a Republican attorney who refused to carry out his unethical, disgraceful order. Where that case stands now is that Judge Ho has questioned Bove, the only DOJ attorney they could get to show up. Ho has now indefinitely adjourned the case but has not dismissed it (5 days ago).
Prosecutors seeking ‘retribution’ for Trump can be disbarred
snip
But those willing to do the president’s bidding might have forgotten one important protection built into the justice system: Lawyers are governed by ethical rules regulated by state bar associations and state courts. And those authorities can and do discipline — and even disbar — lawyers who order, assist or engage in unlawful conduct.
Though state authorities have historically been reluctant to police the conduct of federal prosecutors, they now will have no choice but to shed that reluctance and show the kind of courage they did after the 2020 elections. Then, disciplinary authorities in New York, California and the District of Columbia sought to suspend and even disbar not only such high-profile private lawyers as Rudy Giuliani and John Eastman, but also then-Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Clark, for engaging in dishonesty or undermining the administration of justice.
Over the next four years, state authorities nationwide must be prepared to respond aggressively to any ethics complaints that might be filed against Justice Department prosecutors at all levels — from line prosecutors to supervisors to U.S. attorneys to the most senior department officials.
snip
Based on statements by Trump and his supporters, it will not be surprising if at least some of the president’s perceived political foes — including Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer and former special counsel Jack Smith, among others — are targeted in the District of Columbia, where their supposed misdeeds occurred. But Attorney General Pam Bondi and her team should be aware that the District has set uniquely high standards for prosecutors. They will face discipline if they “invidiously discriminate” in their decisions about whom to investigate or prosecute. And they can face a similar fate if they go to trial on charges they know are not supported by sufficient evidence of guilt. The D.C. ethics rules are clear: “A prosecutor has the responsibility of a minister of justice and not simply that of an advocate.”
snip
Archive link