An observation of how the news media portrays Jack Smith and Garland.

[fightforfreedom]

Smith has been back in America for less than two months. He gets rightfully praised for moving quickly in the investigations. Garland gets blamed for moving too slowly.

Smith did not start the investigations when he returned less than two months ago. Most of the work had been done. most of the evidence gathered. You can't gather all that evidence, do all that work in less than two months.

Garland hired Smith in early November. He arrived back in America near the end of December. During that time Smith was recovering from an injury. He was probably getting physical therapy. He had to make plans to move. He had to close down the important work he was doing overseas. He had to pack up his office, home. He was busy. He wasn't doing a lot of investigating. He was talking to Garland and his people catching up on all the evidence. Reading up on all the evidence.

When Smith arrived back here. He had to move into a new home. Set up a new office. Meet with Garland and his people. He was busy.

This is not a knock against Smith. There is no way in hell Smith has done a massive amount of investigating in such a short period of time. He is working off the massive amount of evidence that was already collected by Garland, his people, and the J6 committee. He is moving that evidence forward, towards the people at the top as quickly as possible.

In my opinion Smith gets too much credit and Garland not enough credit. I blame the news media and all the people, prosecutors, who are guessing about the investigations.

[gab13by13]

1. All of what you say is purely speculation on your part.

Jack Smith picked his team as soon as he was selected, some of whom he worked with at DOJ. I guarantee that after Smith set his team up that they went to work immediately. It was even reported that Smith was working remotely via Zoom from the Netherlands.

Where do you come up with these time lines?

There is no more argument over the fact that DOJ waited too long to go after Trump and his inner circle.

How long ago was it that the Michigan AG sent the criminal referral to DOJ for the fake electors? Lisa Monaco many months later gave a press conference saying that DOJ would look into the referral. DOJ did absolutely nothing. It wasn't until Jack Smith took over did he subpoena documents from the Michigan fake electors. Need more examples of DOJ's inaction? I can provide it. The nonsense that we don't know what DOJ was doing doesn't cut it because once Smith took over we do know what he is doing, it gets leaked from other sources.

Face the facts, Garland went overboard trying to appear not to be partisan and in doing so he became partisan. Who exactly was Garland trying to show he wasn't partisan?

[we can do it]

2. Do you read these things before you post them?

[gab13by13]

4. Right below your post is one example,

I can give many more. I get my information from good sources; Nicolle Wallace, Stephanie Miller, Thom Hartmann.

[fightforfreedom]

8. If Nicolle Wallace says it it must be a fact.

[gab13by13]

10. That doesn't refute what I said, does it?

Curious where you get your news? I do listen to Stephanie Miller and Thom Hartmann along with Nicolle.

[Moosepoop]

17. I added some news items to your "example."

There are probably many more, if I were inclined to look them up.

[fightforfreedom]

11. You are obsessed with attacking Garland.

You hear an opinion about Garland on cable news and you run with it. It must be true.

The time line I gave about Smith is common knowledge. He has been here less than two months. He was hired last November. That is not enough time for someone to start two major investigations, one of them the largest investigation in history. A lot of work had been done before Smith took over. This is commonsense.

[gab13by13]

3. Here is the actual Michigan timeline,

On Jan. 14, 2022 the Michigan AG sent a criminal referral to DOJ about the fake electors.

On Dec. 6, 2022 Jack Smith sent subpoenas to Michigan and other states regarding communications involving the fake electors.

What pray tell was DOJ doing from Jan. 14 until Dec. 6? Gathering volumes of evidence? maybe DOJ was appearing not to be partisan by subpoenaing communications from Republican traitors?

[fightforfreedom]

13. It is possible they were investigating. Have to you talked to Garland? Get his side of the story.

Jack Smith just shows up, snap his fingers and issues subpoenas? You accuse me of speculation?

Your post shows how you are not thinking things through.

[Moosepoop]

16. You left out the subpoenas that were issued in May and June of 2022.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/26/politics/doj-georgia-republicans-trump-fake-elector-probe/index.html

Exclusive: Federal investigation into Trump fake elector probe expands to multiple states
...

Investigators have sought answers this month from Gartland and others connected to the GOP in Georgia and in Michigan – both in FBI interviews and in grand jury subpoenas for documents and testimony. Investigators are looking at whether the Trump campaign played a role in the submission of false election certificates, according to people approached by the Justice Department.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/07/politics/justice-department-subpoenas-gop-fake-electors-trump/index.html

Justice Department closes in on documents subpoenaed from GOP operatives connected to Trump fake electors plan
...

In late June, the Justice Department issued several subpoenas to individuals involved in the fake electors plot, including GOP officials in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Two Republican state senators in Arizona also received subpoenas around the same time.

The documents to be turned over under subpoenas are likely to include communications between fake electors, as well as with Trump campaign officials who helped orchestrate the effort.

Also in late June, federal investigators seized electronics from Trump attorney John Eastman. Electronics were also seized during an early morning raid at the home of former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark, who attempted to help Trump enlist the department in the effort to claim the 2020 election was fraudulent.

Do you still claim that the DOJ was doing "absolutely nothing" through all of 2022?

[fightforfreedom]

18. Thank you. You proved my point.

Some people refuse to listen. You show them their mistakes and they still repeat their mistakes over and over again.

[quickesst]

5. I agree with your observation

It's a lot easier win a marathon when you get to start at the halfway point. Sounds logical to me.🤔

The irony of it all is that the "villain" is the one who appointed the villain's detractor's hero, Jack Smith, who wouldn't even be here if it were not for Merrick Garland. 🥴

[LexVegas]

6. "I blame the news media and all the people, prosecutors, who are guessing about the investigations."

[Johnny2X2X]

7. Mueller

People are still sore from how the Mueller investigation turned out. The Mueller investigation was never going to indict, because that was left to the justice department and Trump's justice department was never going to indict.

Garland will follow the law, but this is so painfully slow of a process. And that's to trump's advantage, he is just trying to run out the clock.

[gab13by13]

9. Really? Mueller had to navigate Bill Barr,

Here is another tid bit. Mueller had to navigate Trump appointed DC prosecutor Michael Sherwin. Sherwin worked with Barr to allow Michael Flynn to withdraw his guilty plea and later they dropped the charges. Sherwin was also instrumental in getting Paul Manafort off the hook. With that said, Robert Mueller did get indictments or guilty pleas from 34 people and 3 companies.

Fast forward to when Garland takes over, Sherwin and a prosecutor named Shea were still working at the DC office, they advised Garland on his pyramid strategy prosecution. Sherwin didn't last long though after he went on 60 Minutes without authorization.

[fightforfreedom]

14. Oh no, the evil pyramid strategy. Working from the bottom up. Garland is working with Trumps people.

Garland is not doing nothing. Nicole Wallace told me so. Look what Mueller did, 34 people indicted. Look what Garland has done, nothing. Oops, wait a minute, almost one thousand people arrested and put on trial. Oath Keeper sand the Proud Boys put on trial. All of this and the investigations continue, they are intensifying. Garland has failed. I saw it on cable.

[brooklynite]

12. What has "the media" said about the progress being made?

Only complaints I hear come from these parts.

[gab13by13]

19. Define media.

What complaints? Do you believe that the insurrection ended on 1/6/2021?

Progress is being made now regarding Trump and his inner circle. I have no problem with Garland's appointment of Jack Smith, but if he was going to go that route he should have appointed him from the beginning. The only reason that Garland appointed Smith was because of politics, because Trump declared for the presidency, DOJ could have handled the investigation/ prosecution without a special counsel.

My main complaint has been time. I never wanted indictments before they were warranted, I only wanted investigations into Trump and his inner circle to have started sooner.

[fightforfreedom]

15. Mueller 30 something indictments. Garland one thousand indictments.

Mueller did a good job. Garland has failed. That is some interesting math don't ya think.

[gab13by13]

20. Sometimes I worry about you,

you get a bit too personal. I respect your opinions and I hope that you are right in your opinions.

Hopefully the special grand jury report will be released before Deadline Whitehouse so we can watch and learn. 😊

[fightforfreedom]

21. I have been trying to help you but you continue to post misleading information.

It is not personnel. I have trying to get you to see what you are doing. You repeat things like Garland did not investigate the fake electors before Smith arrived. That is false. You can look it up.

You keep repeating Garland did not investigate people at the top before Smith arrived. That is false. You can look it up.

You are misleading when you compare the Mueller investigation to the Garland investigation. You correctly point out Mueller indicted 30 something people. They you completely ignore the fact Garland indicted 1000 people and he is not done yet.

I am not attacking you. When people post misleading information here at DU I feel it must be called out, corrected. Usually when people are informed of their mistakes they will stop repeating it. You don't do that.