General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBoom! Yesterday Garland did what I was waiting for.
He spoke out plainly and explained the investigation clearly. He said the DOJ does not do its investigations in public view. He said again no one is above the law.
He said what I have posted numerous times. This is the largest, most sensitive criminal investigation the DOJ has Ever entered into. It has to be done right. We have to get this right.
Trump and his inner circle are fucked.
Joinfortmill
(14,479 posts)ecstatic
(32,740 posts)Why should it stop before then?
Magoo48
(4,721 posts)I too will be satisfied when we see the process in action and come to fruition.
Chainfire
(17,659 posts)AdamGG
(1,295 posts)At least I hope that's a possible explanation. When there was an active wire up on John Gotti, the feds weren't talking about how they planned on busting him.
It may be good policy to stay quiet until there's a broad ranging indictment.
I've been saying here and elsewhere, for awhile, I hope and pray I'm proved wrong about him.
Abigail_Adams
(307 posts)I've been bashing Garland but I've been as frustrated and impatient as millions of others. I'm glad to see this signal of action from him.
wnylib
(21,656 posts)It is a raison d'etre for people who have a lot invested in hopelessness. Or, in making the rest of us feel hopeless.
Chainfire
(17,659 posts)wnylib
(21,656 posts)about how investigations are conducted, and stop sounding like kids on a road trip asking, "Are we there yet?"
quakerboy
(13,921 posts)Its amazing how watching Nixon go to jail has kept future presidents in line. Except for shrub, of course. But his jail sentence was also very corrective for future ill-dooers who might want to misuse the powers of the presidency. right?
Similarly the great number of corrupt senators and congress persons who have been prosecuted for their various malfeasences gives one great confidence in the system and its likelyhood of actually seeing consequences come to those in power.
Stinky The Clown
(67,828 posts)What the fuck does that even mean???????????
Serious question, here. You made the assertion. Explain it, please, because it has a decidedly group bashing odor about it.
wnylib
(21,656 posts)who insist that Garland is doing nothing. Some of them have so many back to back posts and threads about Garland doing nothing and how his "inaction" dooms us to a RW takeover, that it would be enough to put Pollyanna in despair. There is a lot of time invested in creating those posts and threads.
Then there are the posters who claim that Garland is a Republican. He is not. Others say that he is a member of the Federalist Society. He is not. Why would people post those unless it's what they want people to believe? Garland's background info is available online for people to check.
I am very much aware of the dangerous threat to democracy, not only in the US, but in the world today. I can understand people's anxiety about it becausd I feel it intensely, too. But there is a difference between saying "I fear that we could lose our republic to dictatorship" and saying, "I know that we will lose because the AG is doing nothing."
The first statement can motivate people to action in getting out the vote, and donating to candidates and legal causes. The second statement is so discouraging that it can lead to giving up.
We are free to give opinions about Garland and the investigation. But there is a difference between opinion and fact. Claiming to know an outcome, with absolute certainty, is not fact.
Stinky The Clown
(67,828 posts). . . . the post to which I replied had a tone and tenor that was accusatory, conspiratorial, and honestly, stated with far too broad a brush.
I am one who has been pretty vocal about the lack of obvious activity from the DOJ. My concerns, to be honest, are mostly the result of listening to the likes of Adam Schiff and others, who voice worry about what the DOJ may or may not be up to. Is Schiff a person you think is "invested" in this?
wnylib
(21,656 posts)He is not constantly pushing doubt about Garland on a daily basis. He is not saying with absolute certainty that Garland is doing nothing.
Other well respected Democrats are not echoing Schiff. I have not heard Nancy Pelosi say that Garland is not proceeding with an investigation, or that he will not indict Trump or others in the Trump circle. Same with Representative Jamie Raskin who has expressed confidence in Garland.
Stinky The Clown
(67,828 posts). . . . words of doubt or concern or whatever you wish to call it are coming from credible sources, too. That doubt is at the forefront of the national conversation.
Talking on DU is like racketball - a little bitty ball bouncing off the floor, walls, and ceiling of a small room.
Evolve Dammit
(16,781 posts)Especially when the evidence is obvious, overwhelming and 45 has never been held accountable for virtually anything. Except the biggest judgment in NY/NYC regarding housing discrimination in which Fred and Donald were found guilty. That's one. Zero since that I am aware of. Lots of out-of-court settlements.
Bev54
(10,076 posts)the DOJ is indeed investigating and Merrick Garland has been very clear. I had one person say to me yesterday that these officials answer to us "we the people" obviously doesn't understand that the DOJ answers to the constitution and the rule of law. It does not do what the public decides they think they should do. Way too invested to see anything else.
deelee
(41 posts)We'd certainly not be running around indictment free 18+ mos later, allowed to continually hold rallies and to post on social media about the justification for our crimes.
Garland has more than enough proof (he had it after the impeachment) to start making arrests - Giuliani, Powell, Eastman, TFG......so yes he deserves to be held accountable to do his job to protect our country. It's well past time
Bev54
(10,076 posts)and against all defenses that will be used by the defendants, in a court of law? I think that is best left up to the real lawyers that know what they have and what they need.
EndlessWire
(6,573 posts)But, he didn't say anything unusual or reaffirming. He did, however, emphasize his desire for the dignity of his branch, and a desire to keep it innocent of wrongdoing. Nothing else he said was unusual.
This latest uproar is over the memo he put out. It was ill considered. If he can shush our anger over the fact that nothing is intended to be done until after Midterms, maybe for YEARS, then I guess he will accomplish his mission. Why didn't he make a statement sooner? He did have a reporter ask a question, and he answered it as generically as possible.
I think, from reading DU comments, that most people here WANT all the ducks lined up in a row. We don't want Donald to slip through the cracks. But, if the J6 Committee has lined up those ducks, then start the process NOW. The longer we wait, the less likely that we'll get him. It's as simple as that.
I'll be honest, the low hanging fruit of basic rioters is gratifying but somehow unsatisfactory as they can be seen to be easily influenceable idiots who are getting spanked and sent to their corners. The real graft is sitting right there in Congress. But, who do we want to really convict?
Donald J. Trump, mob boss.
I appreciate the need to appear nonpartisan, I really do. But, you know that screaming "it's a witch hunt!" won't really fly in Court, anyway. What about us, the American people? All we want is to have a job and a family, and to have some rewards and fun. We want Donald GONE.
We are going to have to live through this nightmare AGAIN if Donald can legally run again. And, somehow, it is not reassuring to hear that it won't make a difference to prosecution, because it WILL. Garland's memo said as much. He doesn't want prosecutions to seem to impact any election, so we can kiss that goodbye. We need to charge Trump with some crime that will prevent him from holding office ever again, even if that crime doesn't send him to jail.
Donald J. Trump tried to prevent the transfer of power from himself to Biden. He ginned up a coup, and sat around probably hoping to hear that his major enemies in Congress had been executed by his insurrectionist mob. He owns that. By all means, let's line up our ducks. But, let's hurry that along. And, for goodness sakes, quit telling us that your afraid to get your hands dirty. This is nasty business, anyway. You can't pretend that you need to wear sterile gloves while doing it. Hell, we don't get to, we just have to keep taking it until we want to throw up.
soldierant
(6,938 posts)was the exact same memo every AG has put out every Federal election year since forever Only yhe ames and dates were changed.. Otherwise it was pure boilerplate.
It is, for instance, the same memo that James Comey violated in 2016.
3Hotdogs
(12,439 posts)Melania to staff: "If big Amazon box shows up on the back porch, it's a cased of adult Depends. Bring it right up."
smb
(3,475 posts)Half to put on food, half for Trumpelthinskin to throw at the wall.
Stuart G
(38,449 posts)Wuddles440
(1,128 posts)she's pursuing a civil investigation of the tRump syndicate, not a criminal one.
gab13by13
(21,438 posts)Trump keeps delaying his deposition which is now scheduled.
LastDemocratInSC
(3,652 posts)along with his co-conspirators.
gab13by13
(21,438 posts)there won't even be a trial.
Bev54
(10,076 posts)It is a board that makes the decision.
gab13by13
(21,438 posts)When would a DOJ trial of Trump occur? 2004? 2005? Will Merrick Garland still be AG in 2005?
I remember the Cy Vance prosecution of Trump in Manhattan. For 2 years cracker jack prosecutors gathered evidence to convict Trump.
Then Cy Vance retired and Alvin Bragg took over and Alvin Bragg deep sixed the prosecution. If a Republican wins the presidency in 2024, the same thing will happen. The longer it takes Merrick Garland to indict Trump the more realistic my scenario becomes.
Also remember, Merrick Garland chose not to indict Trump for "individual one," and for 10 obstruction of justice crimes. Robert Mueller did not indict Trump for those crimes because he was a sitting president, I have no idea why Merrick Garland chose not to indict Trump. The statute of limitations has run out on those crimes.
In February, however, DOJ is defending Trump against E. Jeanne Carroll. Defending the office is the same thing as defending Trump. Garland did not have to get involved in the E. Jeanne Carroll law suit, but he did.
fightforfreedom
(4,913 posts)Wuddles440
(1,128 posts)was entirely true and relevant! Unlike the GQP we don't migrate to an alternative universe when 'inconvenient facts' contradict a narrative.
uponit7771
(90,367 posts)... for TFG crimes !!
Like f**kin 2015 didn't happen !!
Shit, the guy lied about the lethality of a deadly virus and admitted on tape ... that's genocide !!!
BlackSkimmer
(51,308 posts)And how is it not relevant?
wnylib
(21,656 posts)Captain Zero
(6,836 posts)Fiendish Thingy
(15,683 posts)MineralMan
(146,338 posts)uponit7771
(90,367 posts)PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,908 posts)Bev54
(10,076 posts)Scrivener7
(51,026 posts)greenjar_01
(6,477 posts)Yeesh.
Magoo48
(4,721 posts)The powers that be dont do for us what we can do for ourselves. What I can do is help keep the pressure on.
greenjar_01
(6,477 posts)Used sarcastically, it indicates that the result being celebrated (in this case, in the OP) is actually very minor and inconsequential.
Magoo48
(4,721 posts)fightforfreedom
(4,913 posts)Scrivener7
(51,026 posts)I and others will believe tfg will be prosecuted when we see tfg prosecuted.
I get that this position chaps your ass and you feel a need to continue to demand that everyone join the "there's no question about how this will come out" cheer squad.
I find that bizarre.
BlackSkimmer
(51,308 posts)fightforfreedom
(4,913 posts)People who repeat what Garland said are not shit stirring. Garland was very clear. He is investigating everyone involved and if the evidence says indict, he will indict. If you don't want to listen to Garland, that's your choice.
Scrivener7
(51,026 posts)Insisting that others agree that the outcome is certain is shit-stirring.
fightforfreedom
(4,913 posts)I am being optimistic and the evidence backs me up. If being optimistic is shit stirring, then I am a proud shit stirrer.
Scrivener7
(51,026 posts)fightforfreedom
(4,913 posts)See ya.
Scrivener7
(51,026 posts)BlackSkimmer
(51,308 posts)I fear you're in for a big letdown.
jaxexpat
(6,860 posts)What, then, is to prevent "the largest, most sensitive criminal investigation the DOJ has ever entered into" from becoming another whitewash project the GOP is famous for? Something along the lines of Iran-Contra, Russia-gate or maybe even simply obfuscated into impotence like the Mueller Report.
TIME IS PASSING! Adequate time has already passed. If "decorum" is the hold-up, we've got some screwy priorities. The rabble will eat its fill.
Karma13612
(4,555 posts)Republican hands would be a disaster. And that they will start their own inquiries. They will try to discredit the Jan 6 committees work. As you say, they will white wash, obfuscate and kill.
But, do they control what Investigations and Prosecutions the DoJ takes up?
Do they have the power to STOP an Investigation and Prosecution of Donald J Trump?
I know that POLITICALLY it would be difficult, but does the DOJ lose their power if the House and Senate are in the wrong hands??
Remember, It was the other way around re: Mueller Report. We had the House for the Mueller Report. It was the DOJ that buried it.
In the instance we have now, IF the House went Republican, we still have the DoJ. Unless Garland is pressured into not following thru. And then we have much bigger problems. Does Biden replace Garland. Not a safe option if we dont have a strong majority in the Senate.
Garland stays. So, we hope Garland stays STRONG and prosecutes.
It would send a good strong message. NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW. Not even a former President.
greenjar_01
(6,477 posts)gab13by13
(21,438 posts)but Robert Mueller laid out all of the ducks in a row to indict Trump and Garland chose not to, that is a fact. The case of "individual one" was a slam dunk case because Michael Cohen went to prison for giving Stormy Daniels a check that was signed by Donald Trump.
How do you think that Michael Cohen feels that Trump was not indicted? I bet that Michael Cohen feels that Trump is above the law.
Magoo48
(4,721 posts)Novara
(5,856 posts)He was a hell of a lot more forceful than I've seen him in the past. I think he's tired of the criticism.
He absolutely needed to say that prosecutors don't do their investigations in public because there are a hell of a lot of people who need to hear this. They seem to think that every move he makes must be accompanied with a tell-all press conference.
gab13by13
(21,438 posts)but we find out when warrants have been served, when people go to a grand jury, from people who have been targeted, from their lawyers. We know when investigations happen, maybe not all of them, but most of them.
Marcuse
(7,528 posts)Magoo48
(4,721 posts)Novara
(5,856 posts)Prosecutors don't publicly make announcements about investigations - or targets - because they may tip somebody off and compromise the investigation.
Don't you all think it's better the orange fuck think he might not be under investigation? Because if he knows for sure he is under investigation, evidence will be destroyed. Or he may take a runner. Besides, he is continuing to crime (STILL trying to get WI to throw out their election results for fuck's sake), so they can get him on even more crimes! That's a win, man.
ecstatic
(32,740 posts)Just trying to understand which officials owe us answers and which ones don't.
I always thought that victims of a crime, in this case, the American people, deserve to know the progress of finding and/or locking up their attackers. Why should it be different in this case?
Novara
(5,856 posts)Prosecutors do not tell the public what they're doing when they are investigating.
Emile
(23,021 posts)Thanks to the Jan 6 committee!
disndat
(1,887 posts)could have endless repercussions and unexpected consequences. In that sense the President.
any President, if above the law because it could open up a can of worms. TFG probably has an island somewhere, to escape to, a place that has no extradition law.
usonian
(9,916 posts)Could even be a squeeze play.
Now, about that golf tournament .... Moe Bone Saw (MBS) seems his kind of pal.
DownriverDem
(6,232 posts)Folks do not get how the law works. They focus on the wrong things.
fightforfreedom
(4,913 posts)StrkSrviver
(85 posts)I just think that he's kinda waiting for the public hearings to get over and he's convicted in the minds of the independent voters. Add in the fact that the DOJ is pushing for sentencing enhancements for the guy that was convicted at trial. That's going to convince a lot of those yahoo's that were arrested and still awaiting trial to take plea bargains thus freeing up more investigators and adding another layer of flippers.
Don't get me wrong though. I'm from the generation of posters of the two buzzards,
" Patience my ass, I'm going to kill something "
Pluvious
(4,326 posts)I remember that pair, but their snarky humor prolly went over my head lol
Great line: Patience my ass, I'm going to kill something
Most apropos !
Chainfire
(17,659 posts)The tag line was, "Talk, talk, talk, when do we eat?"
Magoo48
(4,721 posts)Snackshack
(2,541 posts)No one is above the law
.that is unless of course they are the majority party. He does realize that this is the GOP dream rt
.that garland move much like molasses in winter giving the GOP enough time to steal the next election and shut all of this down. If GOP regains majority they will terminate the committee and any investigations going on, void any criminal referrals
everything. DT said as much just recently that if he runs in 2024 it will basically be to shield him from justice.
So the GOP loves hearing garland talk about how this must take years to do.
kentuck
(111,110 posts)With the Rachel story the night before and all the negative comments, it did not appear that he was going to seriously investigate the most serious crime of our lifetimes.
Sogo
(4,997 posts)I had given up hope. After Rachel Maddow featured the Barr memo, I was sure the process had been or would be hamstrung....
CaptainTruth
(6,607 posts)Bluethroughu
(5,202 posts)PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,908 posts)And a trial. And a conviction.
Until then, it's still a lot like Fitzmas.
Baggies
(503 posts)I have a strong feeling that the popularity of Garland at this site is dependent upon the decision he makes on this issue. Hell either be a hero or a goat. And thats a shame because people should determine at this moment, right now, whether they trust his judgment or not, and then stick with that determination regardless of the decision he makes. But that would take integrity.
Turbineguy
(37,374 posts)a Democrat he'd get the uncombed hair, unshaved, in his pj's, perp walk.
MarcA
(2,195 posts)as he did with 9/11.
ificandream
(9,400 posts)Merrick Garland: Nothing to prevent investigating Trump or anyone else for Jan. 6 attack
WASHINGTON Attorney General Merrick Garland reiterated Wednesday he would pursue investigations into the Capitol attack on Jan. 6, 2021, by following the facts and the law, after some advocates worried a recent memo signaled he would avoid investigating former President Donald Trump.
No person is above the law in this country, Garland said. I cant say it any more clearly than that. There is nothing in the principles of prosecution and any other factors which prevent us from investigating anyone anyone who is criminally responsible for an attempt to undo a democratic election.
Garland has previously said he would follow the facts and law while investigating the attack.
His comments came after MSNBC host Rachel Maddow reported Monday on a May 25 Garland memo that reminded prosecutors to remain neutral and impartial during the election year.
--------------
And to be honest, I kind of had it figured this way. He's acting as the professional he is. Very reassuring, though it's kind of too bad he had to spell it out. But I'm glad he did. Hopefully the Orange Bimbo is tossing and turning at night.
czarjak
(11,299 posts)Skittles
(153,212 posts)that for criminal activity of this magnitude, it is prudent to check in occasionally with We the People?
Good
flying-skeleton
(698 posts)I'll believe it when he ACTUALLY does something other than innuendos.
Cha
(297,794 posts)Focus!
Please Fight to Save Our Democracy💙 in 2022 & 2024!
Calista241
(5,586 posts)All he had to do was videotape himself pardoning himself in the Oval Office, or anywhere really, before his term expired.
There are no reporting requirements, no law that says he has to do pardons in a certain way. He didnt even have to tell anyone he pardoned himself. As long as he can prove he did it before Biden was sworn in.
fightforfreedom
(4,913 posts)Including himself.
Postal Grunt
(218 posts)"The moment the department moves against Trump, it has major litigation on its hands. It also has a major political imbroglio on its hands. It also has to face significant legal questions. Why would it do these things before it is maximally prepared to defend its position?
Heres a hint: It wouldnt do them to alleviate youror mysense that things are taking too long.
So sit back, take deep breaths, and pour yourself another cup of tea.
Were going to be here for a while."
https://www.lawfareblog.com/defense-justice-department