Anonymous wrote:NP here:
Instead of 30 threads about Charles Allen, why are there not at least 30 threads about Matthew M Graves and the piss poor job he’s doing?

Y’a know, the guy who actual has near total control of criminal prosecutions in DC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Wow, some of you are either simple trolls who have no interest in a serious discussion or are woefully uninformed about politics. The idea that the Trump administration was pursing progressive ideas about justice is so laughable that only an anonymous poster would bother typing such a thing. Similarly, those who think Charles Allen is either pulling the Federal government's strings or failing to convince it to change its behavior may want to research how successful any DC politician has been at wielding influence over the Feds. FYI, we have no voting representation on Capital Hill that might except a bit of influence and Federal employees have no fear or respect for a DC Council Member.

I have no idea why the percentage of prosecutions declined. I suspect those suggesting underfunding and unprepared staff are likely correct. But, the main point that I think should be understood is that crime and justice are DC is complex and not as simple as the "It's Charles Allen's fault" posters would have us believe. What should be a funnel from arrests to jail has become a sieve that is leaking at every stage.

Come on Jeff. Yes, I expect my elected officials to try to use their power to change policy in DC, including federal policy. You are creating a giant straw man. Nobody said Charles Allen has direct and independent control over this stuff. But obviously he has influence. If your argument is “Charles Allen can’t do anything about public safety!!!” that does not seem to be a ringing endorsement.

And also - we KNOW he approves of the decrease in prosecutions.

Charles Allen has no more power over Federal policy than any other DC resident, which is none. So, yes, Charles Allen can't do anything about Federal public safety policy. Are you just now learning this?

This is truly absurd. So your belief is that Charles Allen has no accountability for crime in DC because there is a federal role? When you know *full well* that he likely thinks the declines in prosecution is a good thing.

No serious person could interpret my post in this manner. When you are prepared to have a serious discussion, let me know. Until then, I won't waste my time.

What are you trying to say? As far as I can tell, you’re trying to use the fact that the feds have power over prosecuting felonies as some sort of gotcha to prove that Charles Allen has no responsibility for addressing crime in DC. Or you’re using it because you’re making up a strawman that Charles Allen’s opponents are completely wrong because they claim he is solely responsible for criminal justice policies in DC. Both of those are absurd.

And you’re wrong on this particular example anyway. US atty prosecution policy *is* susceptible to political pressure, including by the DC Council. To believe otherwise is just a frankly ignorant take on politics. And there is one person in W6 who has engaged in pushing those pressure points - Denise Krepp - and she is a pariah to progressives including CA.

I said what I am trying to say pretty clearly in an earlier post:

the main point that I think should be understood is that crime and justice in DC are complex and not as simple as the "It's Charles Allen's fault" posters would have us believe. What should be a funnel from arrests to jail has become a sieve that is leaking at every stage.

If or when you are prepared to address the substance of what I actually post rather than straw men that you create, I'll respond further.

Do you actually believe that those of us criticizing Charles Allen don’t realize the issues are complex, or that we don’t know the AUSA prosecuted felonies here? Maybe you’re not really ready for this discussion.

Based on your posts, there is no evidence that you blame anyone other than Charles Allen. My original post pointed out the dropping percentage of prosecutions by the USAO. Your initial post was to blame this entirely on Charles Allen. My follow-up post contained the quote that I posted above saying that this was a complex problem. Your follow-up to that was to again blame only Charles Allen. If you agree that the issues are complex and go beyond Charles Allen, I would expect that at some point you would actually agree with my posts saying exactly that. Instead, you have only blamed Charles Allen.

To be clear, I am more than ready for a serious discussion. I am not prepared to waste time talking to someone who is a broken record blaming Charles Allen and who either misrepresents or ignores my posts.

Jeff, clearly you can tell no one is squarely laying all the blame at CA’s feet, but that he is an emblematic figure who helps foster a climate of violence going unchecked through progressive criminal justice leniency.

Obviously, other council members are to blame as well. Trayon White and Naudeau are others who don’t seem to grasp that certain types of violence is rising, car jackings for example, and that people want actual measures taken to address crimes. Violence interruptors aren’t cutting it. Lowering sentences also seems to be letting out more violent criminals earlier. Yes, AUSA is lenient too.

What’s weird on the whole is that people have asked for criminal justice reform because of the shock of the last few years and police brutality. But when they get what they want, progressive criminal justice reform, crime only gets worse. It’s very nuanced. I get it. Places like Sweden approach crime, violence and recidivism in drastically different way. We are sort of piecemealing our approach in America now.

You seem to be mistaking correlation with causation. The causes of crime are extremely complex. Asserting that "progressive criminal justice reform" - to the extent that it has even happened - is driving the increase in crime (or, conversely, has reduced crime relative to what it would have been otherwise) is more than a bit silly. If you have a serious interest in reducing crime, you would be better to listen and learn from those who put serious effort into understanding the proximate and ultimate causes of crime rather than politicians that seize on simple correlations and fear to advance their own ends.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Wow, some of you are either simple trolls who have no interest in a serious discussion or are woefully uninformed about politics. The idea that the Trump administration was pursing progressive ideas about justice is so laughable that only an anonymous poster would bother typing such a thing. Similarly, those who think Charles Allen is either pulling the Federal government's strings or failing to convince it to change its behavior may want to research how successful any DC politician has been at wielding influence over the Feds. FYI, we have no voting representation on Capital Hill that might except a bit of influence and Federal employees have no fear or respect for a DC Council Member.

I have no idea why the percentage of prosecutions declined. I suspect those suggesting underfunding and unprepared staff are likely correct. But, the main point that I think should be understood is that crime and justice are DC is complex and not as simple as the "It's Charles Allen's fault" posters would have us believe. What should be a funnel from arrests to jail has become a sieve that is leaking at every stage.

Come on Jeff. Yes, I expect my elected officials to try to use their power to change policy in DC, including federal policy. You are creating a giant straw man. Nobody said Charles Allen has direct and independent control over this stuff. But obviously he has influence. If your argument is “Charles Allen can’t do anything about public safety!!!” that does not seem to be a ringing endorsement.

And also - we KNOW he approves of the decrease in prosecutions.

Charles Allen has no more power over Federal policy than any other DC resident, which is none. So, yes, Charles Allen can't do anything about Federal public safety policy. Are you just now learning this?

This is truly absurd. So your belief is that Charles Allen has no accountability for crime in DC because there is a federal role? When you know *full well* that he likely thinks the declines in prosecution is a good thing.

No serious person could interpret my post in this manner. When you are prepared to have a serious discussion, let me know. Until then, I won't waste my time.

What are you trying to say? As far as I can tell, you’re trying to use the fact that the feds have power over prosecuting felonies as some sort of gotcha to prove that Charles Allen has no responsibility for addressing crime in DC. Or you’re using it because you’re making up a strawman that Charles Allen’s opponents are completely wrong because they claim he is solely responsible for criminal justice policies in DC. Both of those are absurd.

And you’re wrong on this particular example anyway. US atty prosecution policy *is* susceptible to political pressure, including by the DC Council. To believe otherwise is just a frankly ignorant take on politics. And there is one person in W6 who has engaged in pushing those pressure points - Denise Krepp - and she is a pariah to progressives including CA.

I said what I am trying to say pretty clearly in an earlier post:

the main point that I think should be understood is that crime and justice in DC are complex and not as simple as the "It's Charles Allen's fault" posters would have us believe. What should be a funnel from arrests to jail has become a sieve that is leaking at every stage.

If or when you are prepared to address the substance of what I actually post rather than straw men that you create, I'll respond further.

Do you actually believe that those of us criticizing Charles Allen don’t realize the issues are complex, or that we don’t know the AUSA prosecuted felonies here? Maybe you’re not really ready for this discussion.

Based on your posts, there is no evidence that you blame anyone other than Charles Allen. My original post pointed out the dropping percentage of prosecutions by the USAO. Your initial post was to blame this entirely on Charles Allen. My follow-up post contained the quote that I posted above saying that this was a complex problem. Your follow-up to that was to again blame only Charles Allen. If you agree that the issues are complex and go beyond Charles Allen, I would expect that at some point you would actually agree with my posts saying exactly that. Instead, you have only blamed Charles Allen.

To be clear, I am more than ready for a serious discussion. I am not prepared to waste time talking to someone who is a broken record blaming Charles Allen and who either misrepresents or ignores my posts.

Jeff, clearly you can tell no one is squarely laying all the blame at CA’s feet, but that he is an emblematic figure who helps foster a climate of violence going unchecked through progressive criminal justice leniency.

Obviously, other council members are to blame as well. Trayon White and Naudeau are others who don’t seem to grasp that certain types of violence is rising, car jackings for example, and that people want actual measures taken to address crimes. Violence interruptors aren’t cutting it. Lowering sentences also seems to be letting out more violent criminals earlier. Yes, AUSA is lenient too.

What’s weird on the whole is that people have asked for criminal justice reform because of the shock of the last few years and police brutality. But when they get what they want, progressive criminal justice reform, crime only gets worse. It’s very nuanced. I get it. Places like Sweden approach crime, violence and recidivism in drastically different way. We are sort of piecemealing our approach in America now.

The stats documented in my opening post in this thread show reduced prosecutions. The USAO's response to that data has been to blame poor evidence provided by the police and other similar issues. This is exactly why I used the analogy of a sieve. If police procedures are leading to low-quality arrests, and the USAO is prosecuting fewer cases, does it really matter what Charles Allen is tweeting about?

I understand your criticisms of Charles Allen, even if I don't agree with them. What I don't understand is the almost singular obsession multiple posters seem to have with him to the exclusion of almost everything else. Have you devoted similar energy to analyzing the performance of the MPD? Is the department acting at a level of professionalism that we expect or is it, as the USAO is claiming, making prosecutions impossible through incompetence? And, what of the USAO whose record of prosecutions is declining? Is the office correct to blame poor policing or are there other factors that can be addressed? If you are truly interested in crime in DC, these are important topics. But, I don't see them being addressed. All I see is thread after thread about Charles Allen.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Wow, some of you are either simple trolls who have no interest in a serious discussion or are woefully uninformed about politics. The idea that the Trump administration was pursing progressive ideas about justice is so laughable that only an anonymous poster would bother typing such a thing. Similarly, those who think Charles Allen is either pulling the Federal government's strings or failing to convince it to change its behavior may want to research how successful any DC politician has been at wielding influence over the Feds. FYI, we have no voting representation on Capital Hill that might except a bit of influence and Federal employees have no fear or respect for a DC Council Member.

I have no idea why the percentage of prosecutions declined. I suspect those suggesting underfunding and unprepared staff are likely correct. But, the main point that I think should be understood is that crime and justice are DC is complex and not as simple as the "It's Charles Allen's fault" posters would have us believe. What should be a funnel from arrests to jail has become a sieve that is leaking at every stage.

Come on Jeff. Yes, I expect my elected officials to try to use their power to change policy in DC, including federal policy. You are creating a giant straw man. Nobody said Charles Allen has direct and independent control over this stuff. But obviously he has influence. If your argument is “Charles Allen can’t do anything about public safety!!!” that does not seem to be a ringing endorsement.

And also - we KNOW he approves of the decrease in prosecutions.

Charles Allen has no more power over Federal policy than any other DC resident, which is none. So, yes, Charles Allen can't do anything about Federal public safety policy. Are you just now learning this?

This is truly absurd. So your belief is that Charles Allen has no accountability for crime in DC because there is a federal role? When you know *full well* that he likely thinks the declines in prosecution is a good thing.

No serious person could interpret my post in this manner. When you are prepared to have a serious discussion, let me know. Until then, I won't waste my time.

What are you trying to say? As far as I can tell, you’re trying to use the fact that the feds have power over prosecuting felonies as some sort of gotcha to prove that Charles Allen has no responsibility for addressing crime in DC. Or you’re using it because you’re making up a strawman that Charles Allen’s opponents are completely wrong because they claim he is solely responsible for criminal justice policies in DC. Both of those are absurd.

And you’re wrong on this particular example anyway. US atty prosecution policy *is* susceptible to political pressure, including by the DC Council. To believe otherwise is just a frankly ignorant take on politics. And there is one person in W6 who has engaged in pushing those pressure points - Denise Krepp - and she is a pariah to progressives including CA.

I said what I am trying to say pretty clearly in an earlier post:

the main point that I think should be understood is that crime and justice in DC are complex and not as simple as the "It's Charles Allen's fault" posters would have us believe. What should be a funnel from arrests to jail has become a sieve that is leaking at every stage.

If or when you are prepared to address the substance of what I actually post rather than straw men that you create, I'll respond further.

Do you actually believe that those of us criticizing Charles Allen don’t realize the issues are complex, or that we don’t know the AUSA prosecuted felonies here? Maybe you’re not really ready for this discussion.

Based on your posts, there is no evidence that you blame anyone other than Charles Allen. My original post pointed out the dropping percentage of prosecutions by the USAO. Your initial post was to blame this entirely on Charles Allen. My follow-up post contained the quote that I posted above saying that this was a complex problem. Your follow-up to that was to again blame only Charles Allen. If you agree that the issues are complex and go beyond Charles Allen, I would expect that at some point you would actually agree with my posts saying exactly that. Instead, you have only blamed Charles Allen.

To be clear, I am more than ready for a serious discussion. I am not prepared to waste time talking to someone who is a broken record blaming Charles Allen and who either misrepresents or ignores my posts.

Jeff, clearly you can tell no one is squarely laying all the blame at CA’s feet, but that he is an emblematic figure who helps foster a climate of violence going unchecked through progressive criminal justice leniency.

Obviously, other council members are to blame as well. Trayon White and Naudeau are others who don’t seem to grasp that certain types of violence is rising, car jackings for example, and that people want actual measures taken to address crimes. Violence interruptors aren’t cutting it. Lowering sentences also seems to be letting out more violent criminals earlier. Yes, AUSA is lenient too.

What’s weird on the whole is that people have asked for criminal justice reform because of the shock of the last few years and police brutality. But when they get what they want, progressive criminal justice reform, crime only gets worse. It’s very nuanced. I get it. Places like Sweden approach crime, violence and recidivism in drastically different way. We are sort of piecemealing our approach in America now.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Wow, some of you are either simple trolls who have no interest in a serious discussion or are woefully uninformed about politics. The idea that the Trump administration was pursing progressive ideas about justice is so laughable that only an anonymous poster would bother typing such a thing. Similarly, those who think Charles Allen is either pulling the Federal government's strings or failing to convince it to change its behavior may want to research how successful any DC politician has been at wielding influence over the Feds. FYI, we have no voting representation on Capital Hill that might except a bit of influence and Federal employees have no fear or respect for a DC Council Member.

I have no idea why the percentage of prosecutions declined. I suspect those suggesting underfunding and unprepared staff are likely correct. But, the main point that I think should be understood is that crime and justice are DC is complex and not as simple as the "It's Charles Allen's fault" posters would have us believe. What should be a funnel from arrests to jail has become a sieve that is leaking at every stage.

Come on Jeff. Yes, I expect my elected officials to try to use their power to change policy in DC, including federal policy. You are creating a giant straw man. Nobody said Charles Allen has direct and independent control over this stuff. But obviously he has influence. If your argument is “Charles Allen can’t do anything about public safety!!!” that does not seem to be a ringing endorsement.

And also - we KNOW he approves of the decrease in prosecutions.

Charles Allen has no more power over Federal policy than any other DC resident, which is none. So, yes, Charles Allen can't do anything about Federal public safety policy. Are you just now learning this?

This is truly absurd. So your belief is that Charles Allen has no accountability for crime in DC because there is a federal role? When you know *full well* that he likely thinks the declines in prosecution is a good thing.

No serious person could interpret my post in this manner. When you are prepared to have a serious discussion, let me know. Until then, I won't waste my time.

What are you trying to say? As far as I can tell, you’re trying to use the fact that the feds have power over prosecuting felonies as some sort of gotcha to prove that Charles Allen has no responsibility for addressing crime in DC. Or you’re using it because you’re making up a strawman that Charles Allen’s opponents are completely wrong because they claim he is solely responsible for criminal justice policies in DC. Both of those are absurd.

And you’re wrong on this particular example anyway. US atty prosecution policy *is* susceptible to political pressure, including by the DC Council. To believe otherwise is just a frankly ignorant take on politics. And there is one person in W6 who has engaged in pushing those pressure points - Denise Krepp - and she is a pariah to progressives including CA.

I said what I am trying to say pretty clearly in an earlier post:

the main point that I think should be understood is that crime and justice in DC are complex and not as simple as the "It's Charles Allen's fault" posters would have us believe. What should be a funnel from arrests to jail has become a sieve that is leaking at every stage.

If or when you are prepared to address the substance of what I actually post rather than straw men that you create, I'll respond further.

Do you actually believe that those of us criticizing Charles Allen don’t realize the issues are complex, or that we don’t know the AUSA prosecuted felonies here? Maybe you’re not really ready for this discussion.

Based on your posts, there is no evidence that you blame anyone other than Charles Allen. My original post pointed out the dropping percentage of prosecutions by the USAO. Your initial post was to blame this entirely on Charles Allen. My follow-up post contained the quote that I posted above saying that this was a complex problem. Your follow-up to that was to again blame only Charles Allen. If you agree that the issues are complex and go beyond Charles Allen, I would expect that at some point you would actually agree with my posts saying exactly that. Instead, you have only blamed Charles Allen.

To be clear, I am more than ready for a serious discussion. I am not prepared to waste time talking to someone who is a broken record blaming Charles Allen and who either misrepresents or ignores my posts.

Jeff, clearly you can tell no one is squarely laying all the blame at CA’s feet, but that he is an emblematic figure who helps foster a climate of violence going unchecked through progressive criminal justice leniency.

Obviously, other council members are to blame as well. Trayon White and Naudeau are others who don’t seem to grasp that certain types of violence is rising, car jackings for example, and that people want actual measures taken to address crimes. Violence interruptors aren’t cutting it. Lowering sentences also seems to be letting out more violent criminals earlier. Yes, AUSA is lenient too.

What’s weird on the whole is that people have asked for criminal justice reform because of the shock of the last few years and police brutality. But when they get what they want, progressive criminal justice reform, crime only gets worse. It’s very nuanced. I get it. Places like Sweden approach crime, violence and recidivism in drastically different way. We are sort of piecemealing our approach in America now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here:
Instead of 30 threads about Charles Allen, why are there not at least 30 threads about Matthew M Graves and the piss poor job he’s doing?

Y’a know, the guy who actual has near total control of criminal prosecutions in DC.

There are so many posts about Allen because nearly every word out of his mouth -- and many of his actions -- seem to express more sympathy for people who commit violent crimes than their victims. It's going into great detail about how the guy who shot the WMATA employee "was having an episode" before even mentioning the person he killed (and expressing only rote sympathy for him, at that). It's telling his constituents that people are carjacking because they're "using the car as a warm place to stay," as if that makes it ok to point a gun in someone's face and take their car. It's tweeting out a warning about a broken water main before acknowledging -- many, many hours later -- the rolling gun battle that took place in his ward, killing an immigrant.

That, and his absolutely hamfisted, tin-eared handling of the crime bill, are why there are so many posts about Allen.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Wow, some of you are either simple trolls who have no interest in a serious discussion or are woefully uninformed about politics. The idea that the Trump administration was pursing progressive ideas about justice is so laughable that only an anonymous poster would bother typing such a thing. Similarly, those who think Charles Allen is either pulling the Federal government's strings or failing to convince it to change its behavior may want to research how successful any DC politician has been at wielding influence over the Feds. FYI, we have no voting representation on Capital Hill that might except a bit of influence and Federal employees have no fear or respect for a DC Council Member.

I have no idea why the percentage of prosecutions declined. I suspect those suggesting underfunding and unprepared staff are likely correct. But, the main point that I think should be understood is that crime and justice are DC is complex and not as simple as the "It's Charles Allen's fault" posters would have us believe. What should be a funnel from arrests to jail has become a sieve that is leaking at every stage.

Come on Jeff. Yes, I expect my elected officials to try to use their power to change policy in DC, including federal policy. You are creating a giant straw man. Nobody said Charles Allen has direct and independent control over this stuff. But obviously he has influence. If your argument is “Charles Allen can’t do anything about public safety!!!” that does not seem to be a ringing endorsement.

And also - we KNOW he approves of the decrease in prosecutions.

Charles Allen has no more power over Federal policy than any other DC resident, which is none. So, yes, Charles Allen can't do anything about Federal public safety policy. Are you just now learning this?

This is truly absurd. So your belief is that Charles Allen has no accountability for crime in DC because there is a federal role? When you know *full well* that he likely thinks the declines in prosecution is a good thing.

No serious person could interpret my post in this manner. When you are prepared to have a serious discussion, let me know. Until then, I won't waste my time.

What are you trying to say? As far as I can tell, you’re trying to use the fact that the feds have power over prosecuting felonies as some sort of gotcha to prove that Charles Allen has no responsibility for addressing crime in DC. Or you’re using it because you’re making up a strawman that Charles Allen’s opponents are completely wrong because they claim he is solely responsible for criminal justice policies in DC. Both of those are absurd.

And you’re wrong on this particular example anyway. US atty prosecution policy *is* susceptible to political pressure, including by the DC Council. To believe otherwise is just a frankly ignorant take on politics. And there is one person in W6 who has engaged in pushing those pressure points - Denise Krepp - and she is a pariah to progressives including CA.

I said what I am trying to say pretty clearly in an earlier post:

the main point that I think should be understood is that crime and justice in DC are complex and not as simple as the "It's Charles Allen's fault" posters would have us believe. What should be a funnel from arrests to jail has become a sieve that is leaking at every stage.

If or when you are prepared to address the substance of what I actually post rather than straw men that you create, I'll respond further.

Do you actually believe that those of us criticizing Charles Allen don’t realize the issues are complex, or that we don’t know the AUSA prosecuted felonies here? Maybe you’re not really ready for this discussion.

Based on your posts, there is no evidence that you blame anyone other than Charles Allen. My original post pointed out the dropping percentage of prosecutions by the USAO. Your initial post was to blame this entirely on Charles Allen. My follow-up post contained the quote that I posted above saying that this was a complex problem. Your follow-up to that was to again blame only Charles Allen. If you agree that the issues are complex and go beyond Charles Allen, I would expect that at some point you would actually agree with my posts saying exactly that. Instead, you have only blamed Charles Allen.

To be clear, I am more than ready for a serious discussion. I am not prepared to waste time talking to someone who is a broken record blaming Charles Allen and who either misrepresents or ignores my posts.

Anonymous wrote:NP here:
Instead of 30 threads about Charles Allen, why are there not at least 30 threads about Matthew M Graves and the piss poor job he’s doing?

Y’a know, the guy who actual has near total control of criminal prosecutions in DC.

Anonymous wrote:NP here:
Instead of 30 threads about Charles Allen, why are there not at least 30 threads about Matthew M Graves and the piss poor job he’s doing?

Y’a know, the guy who actual has near total control of criminal prosecutions in DC.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Wow, some of you are either simple trolls who have no interest in a serious discussion or are woefully uninformed about politics. The idea that the Trump administration was pursing progressive ideas about justice is so laughable that only an anonymous poster would bother typing such a thing. Similarly, those who think Charles Allen is either pulling the Federal government's strings or failing to convince it to change its behavior may want to research how successful any DC politician has been at wielding influence over the Feds. FYI, we have no voting representation on Capital Hill that might except a bit of influence and Federal employees have no fear or respect for a DC Council Member.

I have no idea why the percentage of prosecutions declined. I suspect those suggesting underfunding and unprepared staff are likely correct. But, the main point that I think should be understood is that crime and justice are DC is complex and not as simple as the "It's Charles Allen's fault" posters would have us believe. What should be a funnel from arrests to jail has become a sieve that is leaking at every stage.

Come on Jeff. Yes, I expect my elected officials to try to use their power to change policy in DC, including federal policy. You are creating a giant straw man. Nobody said Charles Allen has direct and independent control over this stuff. But obviously he has influence. If your argument is “Charles Allen can’t do anything about public safety!!!” that does not seem to be a ringing endorsement.

And also - we KNOW he approves of the decrease in prosecutions.

Charles Allen has no more power over Federal policy than any other DC resident, which is none. So, yes, Charles Allen can't do anything about Federal public safety policy. Are you just now learning this?

This is truly absurd. So your belief is that Charles Allen has no accountability for crime in DC because there is a federal role? When you know *full well* that he likely thinks the declines in prosecution is a good thing.

No serious person could interpret my post in this manner. When you are prepared to have a serious discussion, let me know. Until then, I won't waste my time.

What are you trying to say? As far as I can tell, you’re trying to use the fact that the feds have power over prosecuting felonies as some sort of gotcha to prove that Charles Allen has no responsibility for addressing crime in DC. Or you’re using it because you’re making up a strawman that Charles Allen’s opponents are completely wrong because they claim he is solely responsible for criminal justice policies in DC. Both of those are absurd.

And you’re wrong on this particular example anyway. US atty prosecution policy *is* susceptible to political pressure, including by the DC Council. To believe otherwise is just a frankly ignorant take on politics. And there is one person in W6 who has engaged in pushing those pressure points - Denise Krepp - and she is a pariah to progressives including CA.

I said what I am trying to say pretty clearly in an earlier post:

the main point that I think should be understood is that crime and justice in DC are complex and not as simple as the "It's Charles Allen's fault" posters would have us believe. What should be a funnel from arrests to jail has become a sieve that is leaking at every stage.

If or when you are prepared to address the substance of what I actually post rather than straw men that you create, I'll respond further.

Do you actually believe that those of us criticizing Charles Allen don’t realize the issues are complex, or that we don’t know the AUSA prosecuted felonies here? Maybe you’re not really ready for this discussion.

Based on your posts, there is no evidence that you blame anyone other than Charles Allen. My original post pointed out the dropping percentage of prosecutions by the USAO. Your initial post was to blame this entirely on Charles Allen. My follow-up post contained the quote that I posted above saying that this was a complex problem. Your follow-up to that was to again blame only Charles Allen. If you agree that the issues are complex and go beyond Charles Allen, I would expect that at some point you would actually agree with my posts saying exactly that. Instead, you have only blamed Charles Allen.

To be clear, I am more than ready for a serious discussion. I am not prepared to waste time talking to someone who is a broken record blaming Charles Allen and who either misrepresents or ignores my posts.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So there is a federal government conspiracy to release criminals in DC or...what is the reasoning here?

More likely is that DC USAO is (1) overwhelmed with cases given the jurisdiction and (2) deprioritizes local crimes in favor of big stuff involving international conspiracy, money, national security, etc.

In short, the local crime prosecution unit is probably the backwater of DOJ that no one wants to do. It’s probably staffed with a bunch of people straight out of law school biding their time to jump to more prestigious gigs in DOJ.

. . .

Not exactly.

My office once sent a few of our attorneys each year (less than 2%), on detail, to the USAO. Our attorneys are specialists in a very different area of the law. We only deal tangentially with criminal law matters.

Our attorneys are highly skilled at what they do. However, the six-month details to D.C.’s USAO involved essentially a crash-course in practical prosecution/ settlement of petty crimes such as prostitution and drug possession. Training was “learn as you go.” Plea agreements were by far the most common outcome. To to one’s surprise recidivists were the overwhelming bulk of arrestees.

The detail was used as a resume enhancer. And it has long been clear, through administration after administration, the office is woefully underfunded. Democrat and R administrations alike do not care about DC crime.

I will add: even Biden refused to intervene to save the radical, equity-driven, proposal to weaken DC’s criminal code. Similar initiatives across the country have done nothing beyond drive crime waves in urban areas.

Such reforms are clearly the wrong answer.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Wow, some of you are either simple trolls who have no interest in a serious discussion or are woefully uninformed about politics. The idea that the Trump administration was pursing progressive ideas about justice is so laughable that only an anonymous poster would bother typing such a thing. Similarly, those who think Charles Allen is either pulling the Federal government's strings or failing to convince it to change its behavior may want to research how successful any DC politician has been at wielding influence over the Feds. FYI, we have no voting representation on Capital Hill that might except a bit of influence and Federal employees have no fear or respect for a DC Council Member.

I have no idea why the percentage of prosecutions declined. I suspect those suggesting underfunding and unprepared staff are likely correct. But, the main point that I think should be understood is that crime and justice are DC is complex and not as simple as the "It's Charles Allen's fault" posters would have us believe. What should be a funnel from arrests to jail has become a sieve that is leaking at every stage.

Come on Jeff. Yes, I expect my elected officials to try to use their power to change policy in DC, including federal policy. You are creating a giant straw man. Nobody said Charles Allen has direct and independent control over this stuff. But obviously he has influence. If your argument is “Charles Allen can’t do anything about public safety!!!” that does not seem to be a ringing endorsement.

And also - we KNOW he approves of the decrease in prosecutions.

Charles Allen has no more power over Federal policy than any other DC resident, which is none. So, yes, Charles Allen can't do anything about Federal public safety policy. Are you just now learning this?

This is truly absurd. So your belief is that Charles Allen has no accountability for crime in DC because there is a federal role? When you know *full well* that he likely thinks the declines in prosecution is a good thing.

No serious person could interpret my post in this manner. When you are prepared to have a serious discussion, let me know. Until then, I won't waste my time.

What are you trying to say? As far as I can tell, you’re trying to use the fact that the feds have power over prosecuting felonies as some sort of gotcha to prove that Charles Allen has no responsibility for addressing crime in DC. Or you’re using it because you’re making up a strawman that Charles Allen’s opponents are completely wrong because they claim he is solely responsible for criminal justice policies in DC. Both of those are absurd.

And you’re wrong on this particular example anyway. US atty prosecution policy *is* susceptible to political pressure, including by the DC Council. To believe otherwise is just a frankly ignorant take on politics. And there is one person in W6 who has engaged in pushing those pressure points - Denise Krepp - and she is a pariah to progressives including CA.

I said what I am trying to say pretty clearly in an earlier post:

the main point that I think should be understood is that crime and justice in DC are complex and not as simple as the "It's Charles Allen's fault" posters would have us believe. What should be a funnel from arrests to jail has become a sieve that is leaking at every stage.

If or when you are prepared to address the substance of what I actually post rather than straw men that you create, I'll respond further.

Do you actually believe that those of us criticizing Charles Allen don’t realize the issues are complex, or that we don’t know the AUSA prosecuted felonies here? Maybe you’re not really ready for this discussion.