Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
45 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Chris Hayes reporting that Grand Jury has refused to indict Mark Kelly and the (Original Post) allegorical oracle Tuesday OP
Maybe now the monster will stop targeting his enemies? vapor2 Tuesday #1
It's just legal harassment! It usually costs money to defend against most charges--- Jack Valentino Tuesday #14
Never. SergeStorms Wednesday #39
Not really a surprise senseandsensibility Tuesday #2
Huge - KABOOM, malaise Tuesday #3
Illegal orders you mean. pwb Tuesday #4
This UTUSN Tuesday #23
They are not going to stop. johnnyfins Tuesday #5
Correct they will keep trying newdeal2 Tuesday #11
That's a relief MustLoveBeagles Tuesday #6
Trump administration fails to secure indictment in connection with Democrats involved in 'illegal orders' video LetMyPeopleVote Tuesday #7
Pirro: brakester Wednesday #37
Ham sandwiches apparently have more criminal tendencies Ocelot II Tuesday #8
Well Duh! What "crime" were they supposed to have committed according to the DOJ? Wiz Imp Tuesday #9
According to the NYT, "interfering with the loyalty, morale or discipline of the U.S. armed forces" muriel_volestrangler Wednesday #30
That is great news! mysteryowl Tuesday #10
That's illegal orders not legal orders WmChris Tuesday #12
This UTUSN Tuesday #24
So Pirro decided to go ahead and make herself look like a drunk fool again mdbl Tuesday #13
She Was Born to the Role The Roux Comes First Tuesday #26
For a small period of time, it looked like she might try to rehab mdbl Wednesday #32
the J6 king himself, whining about "seditious behavior" Skittles Tuesday #15
Good on them canetoad Tuesday #16
Old "Drinky" Jeanine's batting average keeps dropping. LudwigPastorius Tuesday #17
Here's the video of Chris Hayes' announcement: Rhiannon12866 Tuesday #18
Now sue them for 20 Billion dollars! BidenRocks Tuesday #19
YES!!!!!! calimary Tuesday #20
Hooray! mahina Tuesday #21
OMG, we won ONE LilElf70 Tuesday #22
Can the grand jury transcripts be made public? Tasmanian Devil Tuesday #25
Mark Kelly is worth a thousand tRumps. Dave Bowman Tuesday #27
Bondi will try again Mz Pip Tuesday #28
Dont celebrate yet Smackdown2019 Tuesday #29
At least he should be in a good mood next week............ n/t DFW Wednesday #31
Grand Jury Rebuffs Justice Dept. Attempt to Indict 6 Democrats in Congress (NYT Gift Subscription) LetMyPeopleVote Wednesday #33
Good Botany Wednesday #34
Excellent! Fuck you Pete Hegseth! Initech Wednesday #35
Refuse ILLEGAL Orders, not Legal MineralMan Wednesday #36
Excellent! ShazzieB Wednesday #38
Fix your post Mysterian Wednesday #40
People over power. And ultimately, we the people KPN Wednesday #41
MaddowBlog-Dems enraged after Trump's DOJ targeted veterans with charges of seditious conspiracy LetMyPeopleVote Wednesday #42
I expected this, given the fact that the Uniform Code of Military Justice states this quite clearly. patphil Wednesday #43
No grand jurors found the Trump DOJ met low probable cause threshold in failed indictment of Democratic lawmakers LetMyPeopleVote Wednesday #44
Deadline Legal Blog-Grand jury's refusal to indict Democrats joins a stunning pattern of DOJ rejections LetMyPeopleVote 15 hrs ago #45

Jack Valentino

(4,666 posts)
14. It's just legal harassment! It usually costs money to defend against most charges---
Tue Feb 10, 2026, 10:11 PM
Tuesday

even when they are completely baseless, such as this---

but Trump is using the American people's tax money, so it costs HIM nothing!

SergeStorms

(20,238 posts)
39. Never.
Wed Feb 11, 2026, 02:38 PM
Wednesday

Fear and retribution are two cornerstones of TrumpCo.

To stop now would lead to a total collapse of his "strategy."

newdeal2

(5,074 posts)
11. Correct they will keep trying
Tue Feb 10, 2026, 09:30 PM
Tuesday

Trump demands his enemies be persecuted. Either get with the program or be shoved aside.

LetMyPeopleVote

(177,105 posts)
7. Trump administration fails to secure indictment in connection with Democrats involved in 'illegal orders' video
Tue Feb 10, 2026, 08:47 PM
Tuesday

President Donald Trump had accused six Democratic lawmakers of "seditious behavior" after they urged members of the military and intelligence communities to refuse unlawful orders.


https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-administration/doj-fails-secure-indictment-democrats-involved-illegal-orders-video-rcna258385

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration tried and failed on Tuesday to secure an indictment in connection with a video featuring six Democratic lawmakers urging members of the military and intelligence communities not to comply with unlawful orders, three sources familiar with the matter told NBC News.

It was not clear how many of the lawmakers the Trump administration attempted to indict, or if the failed attempt will be addressed in a future court hearing.

The indictment pursued by the office of U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro is the latest example of the Justice Department targeting the president’s perceived political opponents. The government attorneys assigned to the case are political appointees, not career Justice Department prosecutors, according to a source familiar with the investigation.....

In addition to the First Amendment issues, the “speech or debate" clause of the Constitution gives lawmakers on Capitol Hill immunity from prosecution for acts taken within the legislative sphere, a fundamental check on the constitutional separation of powers.

Several Democrats involved in the video recently said they would not cooperate with the Justice Department's probe into the video.

Under longstanding Justice Department policy, the Public Integrity Section would normally have to sign off on every step of an investigation into a sitting member of Congress, especially a case with free speech and speech and debate considerations. But the Trump administration has dismantled the Public Integrity Section, eliminating checks meant to prevent the Justice Department's powers from being abused for political purposes.

Ocelot II

(129,821 posts)
8. Ham sandwiches apparently have more criminal tendencies
Tue Feb 10, 2026, 08:50 PM
Tuesday

than Trump's targets, since his DoJ hasn't been able to get grand juries to indict.

muriel_volestrangler

(105,871 posts)
30. According to the NYT, "interfering with the loyalty, morale or discipline of the U.S. armed forces"
Wed Feb 11, 2026, 04:40 AM
Wednesday
Federal prosecutors in Washington sought and failed on Tuesday to secure an indictment against six Democratic lawmakers who posted a video this fall that enraged President Trump by reminding active-duty members of the military and intelligence community that they were obligated to refuse illegal orders, four people familiar with the matter said.

It was remarkable that the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington — led by Jeanine Pirro, a longtime ally of Mr. Trump’s — authorized prosecutors to go into a grand jury and ask for an indictment of the six members of Congress, all of whom had served in the military or the nation’s spy agencies.
...
On Tuesday, prosecutors presenting the case sought to persuade the grand jurors that the lawmakers had violated a statute that forbids interfering with the loyalty, morale or discipline of the U.S. armed forces, according to one of the people familiar with the matter.
...
Even though many of these cases have been weak, the department has apparently determined that it may be better to fail in court rather than push back against Mr. Trump’s well-known desire for revenge.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/10/us/politics/trump-democrats-illegal-orders-pirro.html

Good on the grand jury members. They're more fit to run the country than the mad rapist squatting above a department of lickspittles who are too cowardly to explain the constitution to his face.

mdbl

(8,328 posts)
13. So Pirro decided to go ahead and make herself look like a drunk fool again
Tue Feb 10, 2026, 09:51 PM
Tuesday

Someone make her resign. She sucks. She also sucked on fux noooze.

Tasmanian Devil

(83 posts)
25. Can the grand jury transcripts be made public?
Tue Feb 10, 2026, 11:20 PM
Tuesday

I'd love to see Congress investigate just what crimes were alleged to have taken place.

Reminding the military to not obey illegal orders can never be considered a crime. Sheesh.

Mz Pip

(28,395 posts)
28. Bondi will try again
Tue Feb 10, 2026, 11:36 PM
Tuesday

She’s still going after Comey and James.

Hegseth will put the full force of the Pentagon to secure a punishment for Kelly.

This is just a minor setback to the deranged MAGA crowd.

Smackdown2019

(1,345 posts)
29. Dont celebrate yet
Tue Feb 10, 2026, 11:37 PM
Tuesday

Grand Juries can keep saying No, just take one Jury to say yes... Trump can keep shopping around...

It doesn't look good, but its a trump world we are in, so nothing surprises me nowadays....

For now, just another hurdle for trump to get a trial on Kelly....

All is Kelly needs to do, is Run for President... then that old saying we use to hear so often.... its an election year....

Run Kelly Run!!!

LetMyPeopleVote

(177,105 posts)
33. Grand Jury Rebuffs Justice Dept. Attempt to Indict 6 Democrats in Congress (NYT Gift Subscription)
Wed Feb 11, 2026, 10:44 AM
Wednesday

The rejection was a remarkable rebuke, suggesting that ordinary citizens did not believe that the lawmakers had committed any crimes.



https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/10/us/politics/trump-democrats-illegal-orders-pirro.html?unlocked_article_code=1.LVA.6CKn.AKtD2kERP9jk&smid=nytcore-ios-share

Federal prosecutors in Washington sought and failed on Tuesday to secure an indictment against six Democratic lawmakers who posted a video this fall that enraged President Trump by reminding active-duty members of the military and intelligence community that they were obligated to refuse illegal orders, four people familiar with the matter said.

It was remarkable that the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington — led by Jeanine Pirro, a longtime ally of Mr. Trump’s — authorized prosecutors to go into a grand jury and ask for an indictment of the six members of Congress, all of whom had served in the military or the nation’s spy agencies.

But it was even more remarkable that a group of ordinary citizens sitting on the grand jury in Federal District Court in Washington forcefully rejected Mr. Trump’s bid to label their expression of dissent as a criminal act warranting prosecution.

The move to charge the lawmakers — among them, Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona and Senator Elissa Slotkin of Michigan — was, by any measure, an extraordinary attempt by Trump appointees to politicize the criminal justice system even for a Justice Department that has repeatedly shattered norms of independence from the White House and followed Mr. Trump’s directives to prosecute his adversaries......

“President Trump is using the F.B.I. as a tool to intimidate and harass members of Congress,” the four House members who took part in the video said in a joint statement. “No amount of intimidation or harassment will ever stop us from doing our jobs and honoring our Constitution.”

Mr. Kelly is also facing a separate investigation by the Pentagon into what military officials described as “serious allegations of misconduct.”

ShazzieB

(22,363 posts)
38. Excellent!
Wed Feb 11, 2026, 02:14 PM
Wednesday

Of course they'll keep trying, as some have observed, but they'll just keep losing. And we'll just keep pointing and laughing until they're forced to give up.

LetMyPeopleVote

(177,105 posts)
42. MaddowBlog-Dems enraged after Trump's DOJ targeted veterans with charges of seditious conspiracy
Wed Feb 11, 2026, 03:12 PM
Wednesday

“If these f—ers think that they’re going to intimidate us and threaten and bully me into silence … they have another thing coming,” one Democrat said.

Dems enraged after Trump’s DOJ targeted veterans with charges of seditious conspiracy - MS NOW

apple.news/AwXl5tcTUQx2...

(@oc88.bsky.social) 2026-02-11T16:55:16.817Z

https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/dems-enraged-after-trumps-doj-targeted-veterans-with-charges-of-seditious-conspiracy

In legal circles, it’s known as “no bill.” That’s the label used to describe what happens when prosecutors go to a grand jury to secure an indictment and jury members reject the effort.

If it seems as if the phrase has been coming up more frequently in recent months, it’s not your imagination. Donald Trump’s Justice Department has run into “no bill” setbacks repeatedly of late, in cases ranging from former FBI Director James Comey to New York Attorney General Letitia James to Sean Dunn (better known as the “sandwich guy”).

The latest example, however, is arguably the most dramatic: MS NOW reported that a federal grand jury in Washington, D.C., has declined to indict at least two Democratic senators — Arizona’s Mark Kelly and Michigan’s Elissa Slotkin — on charges of seditious conspiracy......

That’s precisely what happened. As The New York Times summarized:

It was remarkable that the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington — led by Jeanine Pirro, a longtime ally of Mr. Trump’s — authorized prosecutors to go into a grand jury and ask for an indictment. … But it was even more remarkable that a group of ordinary citizens sitting on the grand jury in Federal District Court in Washington forcefully rejected Mr. Trump’s bid to label their expression of dissent as a criminal act warranting prosecution.


That’s certainly correct, though I’d add that it’s also remarkable to note the crime that Trump’s DOJ accused the Democratic lawmakers of committing: Seditious conspiracy is a serious felony charge that’s rarely pursued. The idea that members of Congress crossed that line, and effectively conspired to undermine the authority of the government by reminding service members to follow the law and reject illegal orders, is insane......

Democratic Rep. Jason Crow of Colorado, a decorated Army veteran who served in both Iraq and Afghanistan, was even more candid. “If these f–––ers think that they’re going to intimidate us and threaten and bully me into silence, and they’re going to go after political opponents and get us to back down, they have another thing coming,” Crow said. “The tide is turning.”

As for the party’s leadership, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries was also unreserved, declaring in a written statement: “The Grand Jury upheld and honored the Constitution, doing what Donald Trump and his corrupt Republican sycophants lack the character to do. The attempt to indict Members of Congress for exercising their constitutionally-protected First Amendment rights is another shameful example of the cancerous rot that engulfs the Trump administration.”

The New York Democrat concluded, “Donald Trump, Jeanine Pirro and the corrupt political hacks at the Department of Justice will not silence or intimidate us. Every attempt to weaponize the criminal justice system will only strengthen our resolve as we work to end the National nightmare that extreme MAGA Republicans are inflicting on the country. They will all be held accountable for their lawlessness.”

patphil

(8,855 posts)
43. I expected this, given the fact that the Uniform Code of Military Justice states this quite clearly.
Wed Feb 11, 2026, 03:41 PM
Wednesday

Now if someone was able to prosecute Pete Hegseth for issuing illegal orders to destroy all those boats, we'd see the UCMJ in action.
Unfortunately, Trump will probably pardon him as he nears the end of his 2nd term.

LetMyPeopleVote

(177,105 posts)
44. No grand jurors found the Trump DOJ met low probable cause threshold in failed indictment of Democratic lawmakers
Wed Feb 11, 2026, 05:00 PM
Wednesday

The DOJ could not get even one of the 23 grand jurors to agree to indict this "ham sandwich" of a case.

No grand jurors found the Trump DOJ met low probable cause threshold in failed indictment of Democratic lawmakers

www.nbcnews.com/politics/tru...

Ryan J. Reilly “paints a vivid and urgent portrait of… disarray” (@ryanjreilly.com) 2026-02-11T15:46:05.188Z

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-administration/live-blog/trump-bondi-epstein-congress-netanyahu-iran-dhs-ice-poll-live-updates-rcna257992#rcrd99859

None of the D.C. grand jurors who heard the Trump administration’s pitch on why they should indict Democratic lawmakers over a video urging members of the military and intelligence communities to uphold their oaths believed the Justice Department had met the low threshold of probable cause, two sources familiar with the matter told NBC News.

It’s exceedingly rare for a federal grand jury to reject prosecutors’ attempts to secure an indictment, since the process is stacked in the government’s favor. Federal grand juries need a minimum of 16 members to have a quorum, and they max out at 23 members. Just 12 grand jurors need to agree that the government had probable cause to indict, a threshold much lower than the unanimous “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard that a petit jury needs to convict.

In 2016, the Justice Department investigated more than 151,000 suspects, but grand juries returned just six “no bills,” per DOJ statistics. The vast majority of assistant U.S. attorneys will go their entire careers without being rejected by a grand jury like this. As NBC News previously reported, the lawyers who attempted to bring the case are political appointees, not career prosecutors.

It’s unclear if the office of U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro will push forward and try to indict the Democratic members again.

LetMyPeopleVote

(177,105 posts)
45. Deadline Legal Blog-Grand jury's refusal to indict Democrats joins a stunning pattern of DOJ rejections
Thu Feb 12, 2026, 10:18 AM
15 hrs ago

The decision to not approve charges against Democratic lawmakers was remarkable in its own right but is only the latest grand jury rejection in Trump’s second term.



https://www.ms.now/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/grand-jury-rejection-trump-doj-kelly-slotkin-dunn-lemon

The most important story of Donald Trump’s second term just might be one that has been unfolding quietly behind closed doors, as grand jurors have been rejecting some of his Justice Department’s most politicized charges, preventing them from even making it to trial.

So, while the rejection of charges against Democratic lawmakers on Tuesday was remarkable in its own right, it was only the latest data point in a stunning pattern that has emerged over the past year.

The Trump DOJ’s failure to secure an indictment in Washington against Sen. Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich.; Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz.; and others follows its failure to convince grand jurors in Virginia to revive charges against another Democrat, New York Attorney General Letitia James. Slotkin, Kelly and other Democratic lawmakers had released a video urging soldiers not to follow illegal orders, after which the Republican president accused them in a social media post of “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!”

Through their refusal to indict, the grand jurors in D.C. effectively said the senators’ actions shouldn’t be punishable at all.

Just as importantly, the grand jury rebuffs haven’t only come to the aid of prominent figures. Grand jurors also have stood up for everyday people whom the Trump DOJ has sought to charge with assaults on law enforcement officers carrying out his federal occupation in Washington, Chicago and Los Angeles. Think sandwich thrower Sean Dunn — or Sidney Reid, whom grand jurors refused to indict a whopping three times. In both Dunn’s case and Reid’s, prosecutors plowed forward to trial on misdemeanor charges — which didn’t require grand jury approval — and the D.C. trial juries returned not guilty verdicts....

Against that backdrop, it’s unremarkable that federal prosecutors could get an indictment against Lemon or anyone else they set their sights on. Grand jury presentations are typically the start of a case, not the end. Therefore, securing an indictment in a given case doesn’t say a whole lot about the case’s prospects, with trial juries still standing in the way of any prosecution that makes it that far, where the government needs to prove its case to everyday citizens beyond a reasonable doubt.
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Chris Hayes reporting tha...