My confidence that Merrick Garland will do the right thing is virtually zero

[Cyrano]

I've stayed away from the countless DU threads that have condemned Garland, as well as threads that say we need more patience. Not once have I posted to any of them. But my patience has run out.

I expect to see Trump indicted by Georgia and perhaps even New York. But while I actually believed that Garland would have acted long ago, I now doubt if he will move against Trump. Ever.

Think for a moment of the crimes Trump committed in front of the camera, the most obvious being his call for a mob to march against the Capitol and help him commit his planned coup d' etat.

Kidnapping children at the border was one of his most heinous acts. And make no mistake about it. They were intentionally kidnapped under his policies. Many kidnappers are spending life in prison.

There was/is his unlawful possession of top classified documents that he refuses to return, claims they're his, and that he'd mentally declassified them. (Give me a fucking break on that piece of insanity.) His actions are a stark difference between the handful of documents held by Biden and Pence (both of whom might not even have known they had them. Ex-VPs don't do their own packing when they leave the job.)

He used police to clear peaceful protesters out of Lafayette Square using nightsticks and tear gas. This was done to allow him to take a photo op in front of a church while holding a bible upside down. (Umm, free speech and the right to peacefully assemble is in the Constitution.)

I don't know if anyone has an accurate count of the crimes he publicly committed while in office. It seems that Merrick Garland would have a list of these crimes, along with countless others we don't know about.

I believe Garland's lack of indictments has fucked America beyond repair. There are already mini-Trumps such as Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida and Greg Abbott of Texas who have their eyes on the presidency. Both have turned their states into fascist nightmares, and don't for a second believe they wouldn't try to do it to the entire country if one of them got into the White House. Trump has sown unending lawlessness that will be reaped by virtually any Republican successor to "The Throne."

And one more thing. Even if you indict him for something tomorrow, it's too late. Your delay has let Trumpism spread like a cancer, and has helped the Orange Prick advance his desire to destroy American democracy.

[onecaliberal]

1. K&R

Sad, truth.

[edhopper]

2. There is an even chance the next President will be a Rethug

and at that point it is game over. Justice delayed will be no justice at all.

[Autumn]

8. I think it more than even. I will go with very probable.

[markodochartaigh]

112. I think that there is a 20% chance that the Republican

presidential candidate will win the popular vote in 2024, a 45% chance that the Republican presidential candidate would win the electoral college, and a 25% chance that after losing both the popular vote and the electoral college the Republicans will take the presidency with illegal machinations. Unless and until the corporate 20% of Republicans wrest control of their party from the authoritarian 80% I think that the next time that the Republicans control the presidency and both houses of Congress, they already control the supreme court of course, that time will result in a Republican Century as Newt Gingrich said. I doubt if even the amazing Philip K. Dick could predict the horrors which would be everyday life in a country ravaged by both anthropogenic climate change and authoritarian Republican control.

[Cosmocat]

119. Yep

The last four decades have been a slow decent, people think it happens in one dramatic movement.

This mid term was just a speed bump for them ...

[calimary]

134. Indeed. Justice delayed will be NO justice at all.

The Republicans understand this. That’s why they delay delay delay. Put it off. Kick it down the road and (hopefully) off the radar. Why deal with the hard parts now when you can just wait things out and the public gets tired of it, the press gets bored with it, other stuff comes up in the meantime, and we can just “take care of things” when WE get back in power?

[NewHendoLib]

3. Agreed.

[patricia92243]

4. What will happen is justice will be delayed until it is considered too close to the

election to have a trial that might sway opinions. End of story.

[Cyrano]

6. We're almost there. Campaign season has begun.

[DENVERPOPS]

59. perfect trifecta

Mueller............Garland............Smith...............WASF

After all the shit we have endured, esp these past 4+ years, and still no Dem has stepped up to be a leader of the party......WASF

[Beastly Boy]

94. Don't tell Enrique Tarrio this.

You might get him really pissed for rubbing it in.

[J_William_Ryan]

5. "Your delay has let Trumpism spread like a cancer..."

What we now call ‘Trumpism’ has been around for well over 50 years; Trump is merely a product of that disease.

‘Trumpism’ has been around since the Southern Strategy and the rise of the Christo-fascist right, since Reagan’s ‘welfare queen,’ GHWB’s Willie Horton, Gingrich’s culture wars, and GWB’s war on the justice system.

It is neither the role nor responsibility of Garland to stop ‘Trumpism,’ and indicting Trump the first day President Biden took office would have done nothing to stop its further spread.

[Cyrano]

11. Yes, it's always been around in a less toxic form

But Trump opened the doors to hell. He said aloud what they wouldn't. He spit on the Constitution. He took a dump on America and normalized insanity.

Before him, there were a few silent fringe members in congress. Now, it's run by Marjorie Taylor Greene, Boebert, Gaetz, Gym Jordan, and and countless other unhinged creatures. Do you really believe these nuts could have gained control of the House before Trump's reign of terror?

Further, it's Garland's job as Attorney General to preserve law and order. Do you really believe Trumpism represents law and order?

[Firestorm49]

13. Oh, I believe that indicting him on day one of Biden's presidency would have assured

the American people that all are to be held accountable for their actions, which we desperately need to hear, and secondly, that we choose democracy over fascism and will not tolerate an attempted coup in our country.

I also have lost faith in Garland. We’re now in the “let’s see what Smith will do” phase, and quite frankly, I’m not too optimistic.

[FelineOverlord]

18. On Day One?

How would that have been possible?

Was there even an Acting AG at that point?

[AZSkiffyGeek]

28. Shh, they don't teach facts at the Veruca Salt School of Law

I've been assured here that Garland knew about the missing documents on Jan. 20.

[ShazzieB]

74. 🤣

Thanks, I needed that!

[fightforfreedom]

32. I could not respond to that post, it was so off the wall.

Indict on day one.

[Ponietz]

55. Chris Wray, FBI Director, former Russian energy lawyer, could have arrested him on day one

This Federalist, hand-picked by Trump, has completely hamstrung effective law enforcement.

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

168. No matter what the special counsel recommends, Garland makes the final decision whether to indict.

"Justice delayed is justice denied." Trump knows that; it's why he appeals everything. Or he waits for the House to switch hands so the Repugs can disband the Jan. 6 committee. So long as he's out of prison, in his mind he's winning.

[Hekate]

187. Richard Nixon hatched the Southern Strategy

[Hekate]

195. Oh dear. "States' rights" was the deepest Deep South white racist claim that I remember...

… from my earliest childhood in the 1950s. I was born in California and my parents were from Colorado, so the only connection I had to knowledge of the racism of the South was the news on our black and white tv, and when I learned to read, the headlines in the Los Angeles Times and the photos in LIFE.

Dwight Eisenhower is the first president I recall, and I recall he integrated Southern public schools. I also recall the neverending aggrieved bellow from people like Lester “Ax-handle” Maddox, “Bull” Connor, and Gov. George Wallace was that Eisenhower and all Northern scum were violating the South’s sacred “states’ rights” to determine their own laws without interference from the federal government.

There are echoes that exist to this day in every Red state that wants to remove all rights of bodily autonomy from every girl and woman, regardless of color.

States’ rights, baby. As far as I can tell they coined the phrase before the Civil War.

[PatrickforB]

174. I don't disagree with you except on one thing.

Not indicting Trump is the wrong thing to do because Garland has an oath to uphold the Constitution, and both moral and ethical responsibilities that justice should be done.

The fact the man has brought no action against Trump so far besmirches the Department of Justice itself. They are the last bastion of upholding the law.

How can this country ever, ever say that we are 'under the rule of law' ever again?

[Beautiful Disaster]

180. It's an illogical point, anyway. Trumpism spread in 2016.

Beating Trump, throwing him in prison, isn't likely to stop Trumpism. The only way you stop it is by humiliating it at the ballot boxes.

The naiveness of so many here is amazing.

[Emile]

7. K&R off to greatest posts!

[Jarqui]

9. Indictments won't mean much unless they result in a conviction

They've nailed a bunch of Oath Keepers.
Proud Boys are in court now.
They'll flip some of those for relief in sentencing to go after the top folks.

It is kind of like Dominoes.

There is also good progress in evidence collection and cases in NY & GA - and to some extent Michigan.

It is not an easy undertaking and to condemn Garland & DoJ is doing so without all the facts - which is exactly what Trump wants you to do.

[kooth]

204. I agree

I'm still holding out hope that there will be a federal indictment. I agree also that it really looks bad, and we are frustrated, but I still can't help thinking that since tRump was the worst president, justice will come. It will still mean a great deal to us.

[BlackSkimmer]

10. Completely agree.

And rec.

[Emile]

12. After two long years clearly nothing will happen

Trump orchestrated the attack against the United States on live TV and people died that day. He should have been arrested that day!

Just like Nixon, justice will be denied.

[FelineOverlord]

26. Garland hasn't been in office two years

I believe he was sworn in on March 11, 2021.

[Emile]

31. Oh well there you go, that explains why it is taking so long.

[Ponietz]

66. Prominent posters here scoffed at alarm calls prior to January 6, 2021

[fightforfreedom]

14. Your post is defeatism.

It is based on things that are opinions , not facts. All the investigations are still moving forward. All the grand juries are still in place doing their work. More investigations are being started.

The investigations are not taking too long and it is not too late. That's how our criminal justice has always worked. It's a process that takes time. Garland has been in office less than two years. Willis just finished her investigation, it took two years. Willis just made it clear indictments are coming. These are facts.

[Emile]

17. Garland has no plans to indict. Period!

There is video of Trump declaring war against the USA and
ordering his maga troops to storm the capital and fight like hell. People died that day because of his actions.

Trump said he could shoot someone in the middle of 5th Avenue and get away with it and two years later is still proving it.

The only defeatism I see is Garland.

[fightforfreedom]

30. You do not seem to be able to comprehend this simple fact.

The investigations are not finished. The grand juries are not finished. How can you indict when they are not finished? How can you claim Garland has no plans to indict, period. That is the definition of defeatism.

[Emile]

33. When do think he will discover what the world witnessed

two years ago?

[fightforfreedom]

38. You have to win the case in a courtroom.

You have to investigate, put grand juries in place, gather evidence. You have to win the case. This is not Russia. In Russia they have swift justice. They just throw you off a balcony, no trial. We don't do that here.

[Emile]

39. So how much longer?

[BlackSkimmer]

49. I've asked that poster that same question.

Durn! Never got an answer.

[Beastly Boy]

78. Between tomorrow and never. Both extremes are equally ridiculous at this point.

[Emile]

81. and it's still up to Garland. So when is he going to do something?

[Beastly Boy]

91. He has done something unprecedented already, and it is well documented.

Facing his obviously impressive record to date and asking when he is going to do something defies logic, common sense and reality all at the same time.

[Emile]

93. Last I heard Trump is still playing golf.

[Beastly Boy]

97. And? Does this erase Garland's entire record as AG?

Or does it just conveniently block your line of sight?

[Emile]

99. No, but looks like the big fish is still swimming in the sea.

[Beastly Boy]

124. And how does THAT erase Garland's past record of accomplishments?

It exists no matter what, it is undeniable, it is in your face, but you can always find an excuse to ignore it.

[Emile]

125. When dId I say his past record is erased? If these threads upset

you about Garland why don't you start ignoring them?

[Beastly Boy]

129. Well, this is the first time you acknowledged it.

If you ever in the past gave credit to Garland's record, I would very much appreciate a link.

And why do you assume that I get upset over Garland bashing? No, I get amused by it. The escalating degree of absurdity of the genre makes me laugh.

[Emile]

136. We are not discussing Garlands past record, you are.

[Beastly Boy]

139. That's the point, isn't it?

You never discuss Garland's past record. You only discuss Garland's future record that hasn't happened yet, with varying degree of hilarity.

[Emile]

143. Its your point not mine.

[Beastly Boy]

151. You not discussing Garland's past record and only speculating on Garland's future investigations

is MY point?

Mmmm-kay!

[Emile]

163. That's it! And you are speculating that Garland is going

to prosecute Trump.

[Beastly Boy]

169. Wait a moment...

Last edited Sat Feb 4, 2023, 10:18 PM - Edit history (1)

You just proposed that you not discussing Garland's past record and only speculating on Garland's future investigations is MY point.

And now you are proposing that I am speculationg that Garland is going to prosecute Trump?

But... But... Say whaaa??? Where the hell did this come from? Can you cite a single example where I said Garland is going to prosecute Trump? No?

At the risk of repeating myself: Mmmm-kay!

[Emile]

170. So do you think Garland will prosecute?

[Beastly Boy]

177. Yes. Because I have exceptionally well developed hindsight. He not only prosecuted

over 300 Jan 6 cases cases, but got three convictions for seditious conspiracy, an extremely serious and rare charge.

But something tells me you are talking about Trump. And in this case my answer is the only answer that makes any sense at this point in time: I don't know.

[ShazzieB]

181. That's just it!

You don't know. I don't know. None of us knows. Unless someone here is clairvoyant or has an inside source at the DOJ, we are all equally in the dark.

And yet some people keep insisting that they know exactly what Garland's thinking, what he's planning, what he's done (or not done) so far, and what he's going to do (or not do). And they accuse anyone who isn't equally convinced that we know Garland's plans of making excuses for him, being Pollyannas, being in the Merrick Garland Fan Club. I am getting SO tired of it.

The fact is, we all have opinions and theories and feels (lordy, do we have feels). We are entitled to have them, and we're entitled to express them. The naysayers are entitled to be pessimistic, and I am entitled to express that I haven't completely given up hope without being insulted for it.

I know people are frustrated. I GET that! That doesn't give anyone the right to take their frustrations out on each other.

[betsuni]

198. +1

[ShazzieB]

205. He turned the investigation of Trump over to Jack Smith in November 2022.

When he announced the appointment of Smith as Special Counsel, Garland said in part:

As Special Counsel, he will exercise independent prosecutorial judgment to decide whether charges should be brought. Although the Special Counsel will not be subject to the day-to-day supervision of any official of the Department, he must comply with the regulations, procedures, and policies of the Department.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-merrick-b-garland-delivers-remarks-appointment-special-counsel

Based on that, I assume that Garland will "do something" when Smith presents his recommendations to Garland.

Smith issued this statement at the time of his appointment:

“I intend to conduct the assigned investigations, and any prosecutions that may result from them, independently and in the best traditions of the Department of Justice. The pace of the investigations will not pause or flag under my watch. I will exercise independent judgement and will move the investigations forward expeditiously and thoroughly to whatever outcome the facts and the law dictate.”

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/statement-special-counsel-jack-smith

We know he's moving the investigations forward, based on all the news of subpoenas he's been issuing, people giving Grand Jury testimony, etc. I for one will be VERY surprised if he doesn't present Garland with recommendations for multiple prosecutions, based by a plethora of evidence and very strong reasoning.

When will that happen? I have no idea, but I am quite sure that both Smith and Garland are keenly aware of the time pressures involved, probably more more so than any of us.

[BlackSkimmer]

35. I don't know if he has, or had, plans to indict.

I do believe that he will not.

[Justice matters.]

83. The Federal investigations will not finish before the next Presidential Election, if ever...

If ever, because by any bad luck (but more by no swift action on Obstruction of Justice crimeS), a sudden crisis, or another 'October Surprise,' hair furhair manages to be elected (if he's not eating steaks in a State prison, and even then...). Or any other semi-fascist successor does it, kiss goodbye to all the ongoing costly investigations.

Garland let the Statute of Limitations on the SDNY "Individual 1" ?case expire on his watch.

Garland let the Statute of Limitations on the last occurrences of Obstruction of Justice detailed in the Mueller Report (by the way, where is that un-redacted version?? Up in fumes in a fireplace??) expire on his watch.

Garland kept the Barr decision of representing hair furhair in the E. Jean Carroll defamation case, arguing that it is a sitting President's duty to insult a woman who accuses him of RAPE... (the kitty grabber... duh...) paid by your tax dollars and cents, thank you very much!!

No. Based on all these facts, Garland will not indict the lifelong, abject imbecile criminal because the Federal investigations won't be done before perhaps a decade (on purpose) due to the decision to include examining the implications of thousands of classified pages (their contents and which "entity" they might impact), instead of starting with the Obstruction of Justice case (admissions both on Lies Social and on YouTube videos; re: "they're mine and I will NEVAH return them"...) and adding supplemental charges as they will be ready (ten years after?).

Georgia and NY will probably bring charges, but expect endless appeals...

[brooklynite]

56. " ordering his maga troops to storm the capital"

Please provide an exact citation you could present in Court without relying on “we know what he meant”

[Emile]

58. Just present the damn video.

[brooklynite]

63. ...where he said they would walk to the Capitol and support the Republicans opposing the EV cert

Nothing illegal in-that statement. “No “storming”; no violence discussed (“fighting” for your country isn’t incriminating; fighting has been an acceptable political phrase for decades: remember “fight for15?”?

[NewHendoLib]

34. What's the fee to join the Garland fan club?

I call this OP realism.

[Grasswire2]

135. off topic

HEY YOU! Long time no see.

[jaxexpat]

88. It will be very poor optics to support any faith in the importance of judicial prudence.....

when those first indicted and convicted are released from prison after finishing their sentences while the top plotters remain free from indictment.

This will happen many times. To think otherwise is head-in-the-sand waiting for the villagers with their pitchforks and torches.

[Joinfortmill]

102. 👍

[SheilaAnn]

15. I'm starting to wonder if Garland has been threatened himself/family and is afraid to tell the

authorities. This is a good reason he hired Jack Smith IMO.

[brooklynite]

57. "Is afraid to tell the authorities"

If only there was a federal law enforcement agency he could notify…

[SheilaAnn]

68. I wouldn't trust any of them. n/t

[brooklynite]

73. IOW Garland is both scared AND incompetent?

He's been unable to effectively manage DOJ and its agencies during his tenure?

In my opinion, conspiracy theorists never think through the implications of their assertions.

[SheilaAnn]

77. Don't put words in my mouth. Has he been threatened? You don't know and neither do I. n/t

[brooklynite]

80. But I'm not publicly "wondering" about it.

[iemanja]

104. Of course he's been threatened

Everyone in congress has been. Why wouldn't he?

[llashram]

16. I so

hope you're wrong...

[twodogsbarking]

19. The wheels of justice run at the same speed that Trump pays bills.

[pnwmom]

20. And why do you choose to spread your defeatism here? How does tis help? nt

[AZSkiffyGeek]

41. Who does it help?

That's the question...

[pnwmom]

47. Spreading doom and gloom helps the other side. n/t

[intheflow]

82. Looking at life through rose-colored glasses is also problematic.

Personally, I think the odds are 50/50 which way Garland will go. But even if I had 100% faith in him, I would still extend grace to the folks who express their fears. DU should be a safe space for liberals and progressives to express their fears and doubts about the party/the legal system/the economy/etc. as well as their dreams and legislative victories. I read this and thought, "This person is frustrated after 2 years of nothing happening to TFG," unlike you, who immediately jumped into "This person is probably a troll" mode. Walking in lockstep is something I associate with conservatives but it's disturbing how often I see that sentiment here on DU.

[Justice matters.]

95. +1

DU will not elect the next President of the United States. Those who accuse DUers (a big majority) who express their opinions freely of "working for the other side" should understand that it's not the case. The real trolls are quickly spotted here, and alerted on 'enjoy your stay' replies...

I'm sure 99.99999999999% of all DUers will vote for the Democratic Party ticket(s).

[pnwmom]

127. I think that post encourages people to give up. I'm going to keep hoping and FIGHTING. nt

[progressoid]

186. Fighting?

How does one fight for this?

[pnwmom]

190. Voting drives, letters to our Congress people, donations, etc. The bottom line

is the 2024 election -- and every election after that.

Encouraging people to give up on the process won't help make anything better.

[Magoo48]

120. Does it help to continue supporting inaction?

And, without so much as a Fuck off y’all, or, we’re making progress, or, here’s what we’re working on now for us working folks paying for this potential charade.

My personal belief is our overseers on high don’t want it, so, it won’t be.

[Ponietz]

21. The rule of law is vastly more important than a jobs report

…or Exxon’s record profits.

[lees1975]

22. They are getting convictions for seditious conspiracy on those who claimed

Trump incited them.

So get him. Now. Not in the middle of a campaign.

Indict now.

[Emile]

37. +1

[AZSkiffyGeek]

42. Two posts in and trashing the Biden Administration

Welcome!

[AZSkiffyGeek]

64. So you don't understand how the government works

Here's a refresher. Garland is the ATTORNEY GENERAL. He is head of the JUSTICE DEPARTMENT. The Justice Department is part of the EXECUTIVE BRANCH. The EXECUTIVE BRANCH is the BIDEN ADMINISTRATION.

So yes, you are trashing the Biden Administration, but they probably didn't teach you that at the Veruca Salt Law School.

[BlackSkimmer]

62. Where was anything said about the Biden Administration?

Can you point that out?

[AZSkiffyGeek]

67. You don't understand how our government works either?

Why are you posting on a political board if you don't understand how the government works? Since you obviously need a refresher as well...
The Justice Department, of which that AG you so obviously don't have a clue what he's doing, is part of the BIDEN ADMINISTRATION. So yes, all this trashing of the AG is trashing THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION.

[choie]

71. And YOU must have forgotten

That the AG and DOJ are supposed to make decisions independent from the President.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

72. Who selected him again?

Oh, that's right, Biden. So go ahead and explain how the Justice Dept has nothing to do with the Biden Administration.
Then maybe explain how if Biden has nothing to do with it people keep blaming Biden for not getting rid of Wray - in fact, usually the same people shitting on Garland.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

154. Third time's a charm?

[AZSkiffyGeek]

156. Good luck!

[AZSkiffyGeek]

160. My fee fees are fine thank you

[Hekate]

166. Don't let the door hitya in the ass on your way out, latest-incarnation-of-sriten

[AZSkiffyGeek]

167. It's kinda cute in a pathetic sort of way

What is the definition of insanity again?

[Hekate]

171. Well, the troll seems to be very effective in stirring up a lot of agreement on its behalf. SMH

[AZSkiffyGeek]

173. Garland's taken 10 years? So you can't count either.

And apparently can't read the terms of service, but w/e. But you can wear all these bans as a badge of honor and pretend you're the big truth teller. I don't really care.

[BlackSkimmer]

101. Oh my.

Insults!

Has a nerve been hit?

[Emile]

105. That's all they got.

I never voted for Garland. Not once have I seen his name on a ballot. DOJ is a non partisan post.

[BlackSkimmer]

109. Thank you.

As many have pointed out before.

[Hekate]

188. And gathering friends like mad

Amazing

[Poiuyt]

48. Great post!

[FelineOverlord]

24. Perhaps

There will be indictments on Garland’s second anniversary in office, which is next month.

[Sneederbunk]

25. The proof will be in the pudding.

So far, no pudding.

[Sky Jewels]

27. Agree. There was a COUP attempt.

Last edited Sat Feb 4, 2023, 05:11 PM - Edit history (1)

There should have been swift action. Garland has utterly failed us.

[Iggo]

29. Welcome to the Post-Fitzmas Club For People Who Say Mm-Hmm.

Mm-hmm.

[intheflow]

85. Underrated yet spot-on post!

I am a card-carrying member of the Post-Fitzmas Club!

[bigtree]

40. this is false

...it's not 'too late,' no more than it was too late when the WH Watergate conspirators went to jail.

It took two years, and that incident was arguably much less complex than Jan, 6 or the case of hundreds of classified docs.

More infactual angst, supposing it's some defense of justice, but it's just an unnecessary attack on the people carrying that justice out.

(love that this thread comes complete with posters predicting a republican win over Pres. Biden. DU at it's most inane)

[Emile]

44. and Nixon was never charged. . . Justice Denied

[ShazzieB]

76. Nixon resigned, and then Ford gave a him full pardon. End of story.

Do people really not understand what that means?

[Emile]

84. Seriously, I just think using Nixon as an example is a piss

poor excuse seeing how it ended.

[markpkessinger]

98. It wasn't ultimately the investigation that caused NIxon to resign . . .

Nixon resigned after a Republican delegation form the House and Senate, led by Republican Senator Barry Goldwater, went to the White House and told him that a vote on articles of impeachment would be taken the following day, and that the Republican House members of the delegation intended to vote in favor of the articles, followed by Senator Goldwater and other Senate members of the delegation telling him that they would vote to convict at a Senate trial. Nothing like that will happen with today's Republican Party!

[Autumn]

152. Ford gave a blanket pardon to Nixon because of his health.

And people were not too happy. Personally I believe there was a deal between Ford and Nixon when he appointed Ford to replace Agnew

[lees1975]

43. What Democrat would ever be allowed by the other side

to campaign for office after doing everything Trump has done and not have a thing done?

Why is convicted Steve Bannon still free to push his propaganda and lies?

Don't call anyone jumping on this a defeatist or a naysayer. This is just sheer observation. Trump was counting on not being indicted so he could announce his candidacy. If there's no indictment from the DOJ, the Democratic party will lose all credibility and everything Trump has done will just get labelled as exactly what some of the extremists say it is--a political attack. And a lot of votes will either not show up or go elsewhere.

Personally, I believe the time has come to replace the attorney general with someone who will do the job, not because they felt sorry for the guy when he didn't get a Supreme Court seat.

[brooklynite]

45. Responsible opposing viewpoints are invited to request time to reply....

We now return you to your regular programming.

[stopdiggin]

46. some of what you say is true

but you make the mistake of conflating all the (evil and destructive) things Trump has done - with things Garland 'should have done something about.' (example clearing protesters, separation policy) And that's simply incorrect. An Attorney General (this or any AG) is not some magical 'savior' sent to save us from horribly toxic political choices. The idea that Garland could have somehow stopped all of this in its tracks .... Nope.

[yaesu]

50. From the very beginning I never believed tRump would pay for his many crimes, not because of Garland

or any one person but because I no longer believe in our justice system period. I also believe our federal government is pretty much worthless, too weak at keeping law and order in place.

[blueinredohio]

61. Amen!

[brooklynite]

51. " I expect to see Trump indicted by Georgia"

The Raffensperger call happened BEFORE January 6 and we have hard evidence that it happened and Trump hasn’t been indicted but you have confidence in an indictment as compared to Garland where events happened later with less hard evidence. Got it.

The only difference I see is that the Fulton County DA has chosen to be more public.

[Mr.Bill]

54. If he was indicted tomorrow

he would likely die of natural causes long beforn a trial would begin. He could delay it for five years.

[housecat]

60. I've changed my opinion and now sadly agree with you -- still hoping we are wrong

[Fiendish Thingy]

65. What was it about February 4, 2023 that exhausted your patience?

That February 3 didn’t?

I’m guessing you’ve never visited emptywheel.net, and your ever waning patience relied on the absence of meaningful headlines (Trump Indicted!) and information in the MSM that would have sustained your confidence.

I agree, all signs point to GA being the first to indict Trump, but I disagree re: NY indictments, at least from DA Bragg. James seems focused on civil, not criminal actions, but that could change.

I completely disagree that it is “too late” for Garland to act. Precisely what he will do and when is nearly impossible to predict based on the minimal public information we have (which is as it should be).

We agree on the stakes at hand- this is no Tea Party (pun intended); the future of democracy and the Rule of Law hangs in the balance.

[Joinfortmill]

106. Amen

[DENVERPOPS]

69. This entire shit show

is not much different than in the 60's, when hippies would drop acid and watch Alice In Wonderland......LOL

[old as dirt]

161. Alice Rocks!

The Annotated Alice: The Definitive Edition

https://www.amazon.com/Annotated-Alice-Definitive-Lewis-Carroll/dp/0393048470

[ancianita]

70. In the likelihood that you missed it, Garland is not running the Trump investigation show.

Jack Smith is. And Garland will do whatever Jack Smith decides. Period.

Best of luck with your indictment of Garland.

[LudwigPastorius]

86. "Garland will do whatever Jack Smith decides. Period."

Not necessarily

Jack Smith still reports to Garland at the end of the day, and it's the AG that determines yes or no on any proposed prosecution.


https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2016-title28-vol2/pdf/CFR-2016-title28-vol2-part600.pd

§ 600.7 Conduct and accountability

the Attorney General may request that the Special Counsel provide an explanation for any investigative or prosecutorial step, and may after review conclude that the action is so inappropriate or unwarranted under established Departmental practices that it should not be pursued.

[republianmushroom]

89. you are correct

[iemanja]

111. Smith makes a referral to Garland

then Garland decides. That's part of what nullifies the reason for appointing Smith. It doesn't remove the appearance of partisanship--those cries have only intensified. And it doesn't take Garland out of the equation. Garland must still make the final decision.

[Cosmocat]

122. To that point - If that was the route he was going to go why wait a year and a half to appoint him?

How long would it take Smith to go through it all?

IF he brings back a recommendation to take action, how long till he actually decides to do so given his track record?

How long until he actually gets that ball rolling on his end, and how long until that is executed?

Then you go into the slow moving justice system, with super powerful people with a lot money able to grind that to a near stop.

This country will be full burnt to the ground before anything of substance happens.

[Scrivener7]

144. That's not how it works.

[ancianita]

150. That's exactly how it works. Smith is only #2 at the very end. Until then, he's Garland's substitute

So until then, we can't blame Garland for any justice we haven't yet seen.

[Vinca]

75. Not a day goes by that there isn't a talking head - with legal expertise or not - on the tube

telling us Trump will be indicted and then listing his crimes. They've been on the tube on a daily basis for years on end. It's time to put up or shut up, not just Garland, but the Georgia investigation, the reopened New York investigation, all of them! I have this sick feeling that Trump just might end up back in the White House and then the whole "you can't indict a sitting president" baloney starts again. Wash, rinse, repeat. Indict his orange ass and let the chips fall. Now.

[Scrivener7]

202. The Koch brothers have made an announcement that infers they won't

back tfg going forward.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143029472#post11
I think this might be the end of him politically. I'm ecstatic about that, but still want to see him in court.

[republianmushroom]

79. Nailed it

24 months and counting

[Duppers]

87. 👍 I said this months ago

And caught heat here from two guys + my husband.

But I've mostly stuck to my guns and am disgusted with the system.

[Beastly Boy]

90. Your confidence seems to have difficulty catching up with reality.

Garland has been doing the right thing for a while. Over 1,000 indictments so far, including more indictments on charges of seditious conspiracy than any other AG in US history. Tell me this is not the right thing!

If, on the other hand, you define "the right thing" exclusively in terms of indicting Trump, tour guess is as good as mine. I say he will be indicted tomorrow, at 8:30 AM Eastern time.

The unfair advantage you have is that you can prove me wrong tomorrow, and I don't know how long I have to wait to prove you wrong. But as of today, we both sound ridiculous.

[Joinfortmill]

110. 👍

[Sky Jewels]

140. The point is -- it's TOO LATE.

Jan.6 was an open-and-shut fucking COUP D'ETAT attempt. Arrests of all the higher-ups -- Trump, GOP Congressional coup plotters and would-be election over-turners, Giuliani, Eastman, et al -- should have happened in February of 2021. Any functioning government that wants to protect its democracy would have taken SWIFT action against treasonous TRAITORS to the United States.

[Beastly Boy]

147. That wasn't the point of the OP

And you know your expectations are impossible, don't you?

It's too easy to set ridiculous expectations and panic when they are not met. Your idea of swift action requires laws to be violated. This is a bigger threat to democracy than the coup itself.

[Sky Jewels]

164. Why are my expectations impossible? BRAZIL took action after their coup attempt. Why didn't we?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jan/14/key-bolsonaro-ally-arrested-on-return-to-brazil-over-alleged-coup-attempt-anderson-torres

This isn't some complicated financial case requiring analysis of mountains of documents. This was a violent mass breaking-and-entering of the Capitol with clear ring leaders who organized and publicized the crime in advance.

[Beastly Boy]

176. We did.

17 arrested on 1/6/21. First indictments started coming on 1/27/21, twenty one days after the riot (https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases?combine=indicted). Over 100 arrestes within one month of the riot. Nearly 1,000, including riot leaders facing seditious conspiracy charges to date.

And it IS a complicated case, actually 1000 cases, both in magnitude and in precedent.

So how is Brazil doing 25 days after their riots? Any indictments yet? I don't know. Perhaps you can update me on this. They certainly didn't indict Anderson Torres. And something tells me they will have a hard time keeping up with DOJ - Brazil is not exactly known for the strength of their justice system.

[DeeDeeNY]

92. The Jan 6 committee turned over an abundance of evidence

Aside from inciting the insurrection, he’s been linked to the phony electors plot that took place in several states. And so much more. It doesn’t seem possible that DOJ can ignore everything.

[mchill]

96. My gf calls him Meritless Garland and

…does “imminent” plus 13 days still qualify as “imminent”?

(I added in weekend since we know nothing will happen on a Sat and Sun.)

[Fiendish Thingy]

114. Garland never used the term "imminent"

That was Fani Willis.

[mchill]

141. Did I say he did?

I assume everyone knows who said “imminent”
My bad
It was an “oh btw (‘by the way’ for you) AND”
Just the same topic

[Joinfortmill]

100. We shall see.

[iemanja]

103. I've been critical of Garland, but I wouldn't go that far

I'm doubtful, for sure, but I haven't entirely foreclosed the possibility of indictment. It sure is taking a long time though. And you're right that delay only makes a successful prosecution more difficult, particular since Trump has declared himself a candidate for president.

[CrispyQ]

107. "Too much caution turns into immunity." Adam Schiff.

Dem turnout will shrink in 2024 if Trump's not at the very least, indicted before then. That's just my opinion, but if he's not indicted & worse, allowed to run for president, don't expect 81 million democratic votes in 2024. You can't keep crying "Democracy's in danger! Get out & vote," & then not go after the ones who put democracy in danger when you get the power to do something.

I know the optimists think Garland's DOJ will pull through, but if Adam Schiff is concerned, I'm concerned. It would be poetic if Fani Willis was the one to fire the first shot. Maybe even take him down even.

[Justice matters.]

108. I don't know who the hell invented the Statute of Limitations but they're not JUSTICE.

Last edited Sat Feb 4, 2023, 08:21 PM - Edit history (1)

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=17615651

Example: When Catholics 'sin' there are no status of limitations. There are 'confessions' and 'punishments,' whatever they are...

The idiot who 'invented' the notion of Statute of Limitations probably had 'somethin' to hide... (just a guess).

[TiberiusB]

142. Statute

It's statute of limitations...

Not a big deal, just an FYI moment...

[Justice matters.]

145. Thank you.

I was using the French word version.

[CONN]

113. K&R

IMO Former-President Obama selected Merrick Garland as his pick for replacement to Scalia as a candidate that he hoped Republicans would find acceptable, since they controlled the senate.
If the president picked Garland for AG as some pay-back, it was misguided and back-fired.
Garland, based on his track record, is looking to get through without controversy and secure his legacy as simply a justice of the SC.
He should be retired!

[Scrivener7]

115. I have been vocal about my growing lack of faith in Garland. However, I am finding

a lot of new faith based on the actions of Jack Smith.

While the Garland "investigation" was silent and left no trail whatsoever - ahem - we are seeing a lot of activity out of Jack Smith.

I believe Jack Smith will do something. Whether Garland acts on it or not remains to be seen, but why would Garland have hired Smith unless it was to do what he was unwilling or unable to do? Why he waited so long to appoint someone if he was unwilling or unable to do it, I don't know. But here we are. (And yes, to the ones who are going to feel the need to school me, I do understand that he appointed him when tfg announced. So what? What prevented it before then?)

We may see something yet. I'll believe it when I see it, but at least there is now a visible paper trail forming. You know, the DOJ doesn't leak, but that Jack Smith must be a big old leaker, and I'm glad to see it.

But, on another subject, the constant cheerleading and divisive shit-stirring and namecalling on DU by those who need to demand multiple times a day that we all agree with them and have perfect faith in Garland is moronic and, in my mind, suspect.

[judesedit]

116. I'm hoping they are working as fast as they can and doing their due diligence

However you say it. Their reputations are on the line, not ours. They know what has to be done. I'm just praying they're doing it. I want everyone involved in the planning and execution of the coup to be charged. There are many in high positions with financial backing. The results have to be tied tight. I'm just as anxious as everyone else to see justice doled out. No choice but to wait til they're ready.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

117. We will see but I tend to trust people who know AG Garland

Link to tweet

[republianmushroom]

118. Here is some facts.

President Trump’s staggering record of uncharged crimes

https://www.citizensforethics.org/reports-investigations/crew-reports/president-trumps-staggering-record-of-uncharged-crimes/#table

As of November 2022, Donald Trump has been credibly accused of committing at least 56 criminal offenses, 47 Federal statute and 9 State statute, since he launched his campaign for president in 2015. That total only reflects allegations relating to his time in or running for office and omits, for instance, Trump’s criminal exposure for fraudulent business dealings.

Merrick Garland Weighed Search of Trump's Mar-a-Lago for Weeks. Notice plural, weeks. He knew they were there.

WASHINGTON—Attorney General Merrick Garland deliberated for weeks over whether to approve the application for a warrant to search former President Donald Trump’s Florida home, people familiar with the matter said, a sign of his cautious approach that will be tested over coming months.

Read More https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142956907

Read more: https://www.wsj.com/articles/merrick-garland-weighed-search-of-trumps-mar-a-lago-for-weeks-11660601292

[ananda]

121. He looks and acts like a scared milquetoast.

Oh well.

[bigtree]

175. he prosecuted Tim McVeigh

McVeigh was convicted by a jury on 11 out of 11 charges, sentenced to death and executed in 2001. His main accomplice, Terry Nichols, was convicted and is serving a life sentence without possibility of parole. Two other accomplices became key witnesses for prosecutors.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/feb/01/merrick-garland-oklahoma-city-timothy-mcveigh-attorney-general

Unabomber, too.

[ananda]

184. Was Tin McVeigh a threatening poliktical figure...

who belonged to the same party?

[AZSkiffyGeek]

189. So now he's not just not a Democrat

He’s a seekrit Republican?
I’m sure you have evidence?

[bigtree]

191. you called him milquetoast

...such a different view of practically everyone who worked with him.

“We had tremendous confidence in him, and I think his handling of that very challenging situation was flawless,” said Jamie Gorelick, Garland’s boss at the time of the Oklahoma City attack and one of the country’s longest-serving deputy attorneys general. “If you look at his background, he was very well suited for working both with the FBI and the other investigative agencies, and well-regarded by all of them, and he had a wonderful way of bringing people together on the ground.”

“The Oklahoma City bombing and its legacy are critical to understanding the domestic extremist movements of today,” the Southern Poverty Law Center said in a report last year.

People who know Garland from his work in Oklahoma believe that the country could have no better ally in the fight against homegrown extremism, a broad job whose challenges include not only prosecuting the recent insurrectionists but also preventing the next attack, disrupting extremist groups on social media, rooting out white supremacists from police forces and the military, and restoring public trust in the rule of law.

“He played a pivotal role here, but I think, fast-forward to 2021, and he can play a remarkable role in bringing our country back together,” said Kari Watkins, executive director of the Oklahoma City National Memorial Museum. “Judge Garland is a unifier. He brought families to the table, he brought survivors, first responders to the table that were still dealing with loss, and surgeries, and putting their lives back together.”

“I would say that his experience in Oklahoma City – and the work we needed to do in response to the church bombings that took place when we were at main justice in the mid-1990s, as well as the abortion clinic bombings – grounded him in the importance of civil rights,” Gorelick said, “and in the importance of coordinated and strong approaches to dealing with the enforcement of our laws relating to civil rights and protecting the country against terrorism of any sort.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/feb/01/merrick-garland-oklahoma-city-timothy-mcveigh-attorney-general


...this isn't the only account. There's nothing timid in this man's experience, but you do you.

[Paladin]

123. I'm with you. I have zero confidence in Garland.

His lack of action on trump has made an awful situation into a nation-threatening situation, something that may be beyond repair.

[Just_Vote_Dem]

132. I like how you're channeling The Rock!

&ab_channel=TheLostPodcasts

[Cha]

133. LOL! TY!

[Texaswitchy]

128. I never had faith in Garland.

I am not upset either.

We needed a younger person.

Garland is my age.

The other guy might do something.

[brachism]

131. I Find Your Lack of Faith Disturbing

[Mosby]

137. K and R.

[FeelingBlue]

138. When has he...

Not??

[claudette]

146. Agree 100%

He is useless

[pecosbob]

157. I do not believe Trump will ever be incarcerated

Our justice system has never been particularly capable of jailing rich politically-connected white people. It has repeatedly crumbled when faced with political pressure and failed at it's mission. The Great Sedition Trial is a good example of justice denied by political cronyism as multiple members of Congress were involved with aiding freaking German saboteurs and afterward exerted pressure on DOJ to end the investigation. About the only time these rich politically-connected individuals go to jail is when they steal from other rich people, like Madoff or they constitute a serious threat to other rich politically-connected people such as Epstein.

I call 'em like I see 'em.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

197. Interesting. Makes me think ok, who has been jailed. Immediately thought

What about ...

Blagojevich was impeached, convicted, and removed from office in 2009 by the Illinois General Assembly. He was also subsequently barred by the Illinois Senate from holding public office within the state ever again. For his role in the corruption scandal, Blagojevich was sentenced to 14 years in federal prison.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

199. List of all politicians convicted of crimes. Not too many

actually spent time in prison I guess. Lots of "sentenced to X months". Not sure why no follow up about what transpired after that.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_federal_politicians_convicted_of_crimes

[Eliot Rosewater]

158. As badly as I want him and a few others convicted of insurrection or Jan 6, I dont see an indictable

statement or action on his part that makes that possible. Of course we all KNOW what he did, but proving it and showing cause and effect links where the statements are criminal, very tough to do.

I also believe that Garland and Joe (they dont have to directly talk to each other about this, but their feelings on it are basically the same or Garland would not have been nominated in the first place, is my opinion) will not risk potential civil unrest without having an ironclad case.

As to any of the other crimes he should rot in prison for like GA and election interference or his multiple RICO violations, yes please!

[Prairie_Seagull]

162. Without the 'Rule of Law', the gard rails come off of our form of government. What then?

Merrik Garland knows this and the downside of not charging is so dire that IMO even if his cases loose (they won't) but even if they do it would appear that the Rule of law still reigns. Because they at least tried and the evidence was lacking. (it is not)

The downside is that if the DOJ were to loose (it won't) it would add so much gravitas to tfg, it would certainly guarantee at a minimum the Nomination of his now hate filled party.

Perfect? No
Quick? No
Good enough? I think so. The downside is to dire. IMO

[Beautiful Disaster]

178. I'm sure he's devastated that you don't have confidence in him.

[Beautiful Disaster]

178. I'm sure he's devastated that you don't have confidence in him.

[usonian]

182. White traitors get drawn out due process.

You know the rest.

[treestar]

183. Who decides the timeline?

My experience with government is that individuals think it should be faster than it is. But they have to live with it. There's no specific time. It depends on the case.

[Ligyron]

185. If the shoe were on the other foot, Biden would be convicted and in jail by now.

Just because it isn't, doesn't mean it won't happen though.

[bigtree]

203. tell us how many court cases republicans have won in the past 6 years

Link to tweet

[nightwing1240]

194. Very well written and I agree!

"I believe Garland's lack of indictments has fucked America beyond repair. There are already mini-Trumps such as Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida and Greg Abbott of Texas who have their eyes on the presidency. Both have turned their states into fascist nightmares, and don't for a second believe they wouldn't try to do it to the entire country if one of them got into the White House. Trump has sown unending lawlessness that will be reaped by virtually any Republican successor to "The Throne.".."

Yes, this (IMHO) is where we are now, the part from the OP. Bravo!

[Laura PourMeADrink]

196. Don't you think that DU " condemned Garland" is an exaggeration?

I mean it's not even allowed here

We're waiting on Jack Smith now right? Who will take his findings/ recommendations to Garland.

I know, been forever!!!

[betsuni]

200. I agree with Joy Behar: "I don't even care if he doesn't go to jail, I don't care!"

Even if he runs for president, he won't win against Biden. Even if he goes to prison, it won't stop any other criminal from breaking laws.

[applegrove]

201. It is up to Jack Smith.

[brooklynite]

206. Would you like to revise and extend your remarks?