Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Fiendish Thingy

(15,568 posts)
18. It's easy to explain why Garland hasn't indicted Meadows yet
Tue Mar 29, 2022, 12:14 PM
Mar 2022

If Meadows were indicted now, it would be for the contempt referral made by the committee.

That charge Carries a one year max sentence. Once indicted, Discovery is triggered, and Meadows (and his unindicted co-conspirators) would have access to every scrap of evidence the DOJ has.

Rather than rush to charge Meadows for contempt and risk fouling the investigation and prosecution of far more serious crimes of the Trump administration, it makes much more sense for DOJ to prepare a case to indict him for seditious conspiracy or conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, both of which carry a maximum 20 year sentence.

The significant evidence for these more serious charges has just emerged in the past two months, since the SCOTUS ruling and the testimony of Pence’s staff, and more emerges every day (Meadows texts with Ginni Thomas, Judge Carter’s ruling on Eastman’s emails, etc.)

I think Meadows would be more likely to flip if facing 20 years than if facing only one year, don’t you?

Garland must be aware of all the frustration and criticism Walleye Mar 2022 #1
If the committee is frustrated wryter2000 Mar 2022 #6
Exactly Walleye Mar 2022 #9
No one is more frustrated than I am. bottomofthehill Mar 2022 #15
Shouldn't some of the folks who are stonewalling be in jail now? wryter2000 Mar 2022 #25
Perfectly stated. cilla4progress Mar 2022 #2
The standard is set by a jury, not by DOJ Bobstandard Mar 2022 #13
Timing it just before the election would not stop the traitors from running - would be way too late. lagomorph777 Mar 2022 #16
. Scrivener7 Mar 2022 #3
All well and good, but... wryter2000 Mar 2022 #4
Like I said, no one knows why he has not indicted Meadows. There may be a good reason. fightforfreedom Mar 2022 #11
106 days for Meadows hamsterjill Mar 2022 #34
Catching all these traitors... Cracklin Charlie Mar 2022 #5
👍 Joinfortmill Mar 2022 #8
DOJ may be negotiating with Meadows. Joinfortmill Mar 2022 #7
What if the clock runs out and nothing has happened? Bobstandard Mar 2022 #14
Do you see inaction, or just the lack of public information? Fiendish Thingy Mar 2022 #19
Exactly Bobstandard Mar 2022 #22
that's what I say agingdem Mar 2022 #23
Exactly. hamsterjill Mar 2022 #35
Well put. NanceGreggs Mar 2022 #10
Or, he's thinking the longer he takes, the more job security he has. PoindexterOglethorpe Mar 2022 #12
I am perfectly fine with people wondering about the progress of investigations Beastly Boy Mar 2022 #17
It's easy to explain why Garland hasn't indicted Meadows yet Fiendish Thingy Mar 2022 #18
You may be right, that makes sense. fightforfreedom Mar 2022 #20
I bet Lisa Monaco (#2 at DOJ) knows. Nt Fiendish Thingy Mar 2022 #24
You may be right, that makes sense. fightforfreedom Mar 2022 #21
No, not true. former9thward Mar 2022 #32
No, not true- Bannon is using his contempt charge to mine the DOJ for all evidence Fiendish Thingy Mar 2022 #36
He said he going after all levels. Why did he start at the bottom level? Trump Emile Mar 2022 #26
Burden of proof is insanely high for the key players Johnny2X2X Mar 2022 #27
Attempting to stop congress from performing their constitutional duties is a crime. fightforfreedom Mar 2022 #28
Apparently the DOJ has a different set of rules for rich guys and that's why he is starting at the Emile Mar 2022 #29
Many rungs to this ladder reaching trump... lame54 Mar 2022 #30
As an old man I can wisely say it is easier going down a ladder than going up! The DOJ Emile Mar 2022 #31
meanwhile... myohmy2 Mar 2022 #33
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The DOJ investigation int...»Reply #18