Garland moved too slowly. Those here who said this were right.

[lees1975]

The odds of seeing a trial of Trump before the election are winding down to just about zero.

[brush]

1. Absolutely. J6 is more than 3 years ago. trump should've been tried months ago.

Garland IMO has been a huge disappointment.

[RKP5637]

5. Reminds me of what we called in the corporations analysis paralysis, so careful and triple checking deadlines are missed

[Merlot]

2. NY hush money case is on track.

Georgia, maybe, maybe not.

[lees1975]

4. Because Garland has nothing to do with that one.

[Be The Light]

20. because they are the most important ones

Lets get the scintillating sex ones out there first, then Georgia and the coup trial will start

after the election, but likely never at all,...since voting rights will be over.

[gab13by13]

38. Fani Willis started investigating Trump

March 16, 2021.

[RockRaven]

7. Also should have been years ago. Vance stalled it until out of office,

and Bragg dragged his feet so badly the prosecutors brought into the office specifically for that case resigned.

[gab13by13]

39. Vance actually gave the go ahead

to Pomerantz and Dunne to indict Trump but Bragg shit canned it.

[jalan48]

41. Delay, by both sides, seems to be a common theme here. Interesting.

[dalton99a]

3. The traitor won't spend a day in prison. Ever.

He knows how to play the system.

People have always underestimated his street smarts and criminal instincts.

[brush]

9. We'll see. Bragg's case starts in a couple of weeks.

The documentation is there that he paid Stormy Daniels and the other woman to keep quiet so it wouldn't affect his election chances.

And remember, Michael Cohen had to take him by the hand to walk him thru it...he wanted to write a check to Daniels,

He's not that smart, he's just got money to hire lawyers. And btw, he inherited that money, he didn't have the smarts to earn it. And much of it he stole from his dead brother's estate. His niece has spoken of that often.

You're not smart if ya go bankrupt 6 times running casinos.

[sop]

28. After Trump loses the media will start warning about "the national nightmare of prosecuting an ex-president."

The conversation will turn to "the angry mood of Republican voters," avoiding "more division" and "preventing violence." Pundits will urge Jack Smith to be "more conciliatory" and to "make a deal."

You're right, Trump will never serve a day in prison.

[donte]

33. Trumps punishment

Will be house detention at mar alargo. No real jail with bars!

[SleeplessinSoCal]

29. We underestimated his level of commitment to being treacherous.

Shouldn't have. Does everyone in authority fear being tossed off a building?

[donte]

34. Or

Tripping out a window or accidentally falling down an elevator shaft!

[Earth-shine]

6. I hate Trump (but I do love being right).

Garland was the wrong man for the job. His inactions will contribute to a potential loss of democracy.

I do not believe he had ill intentions. He had some bad judgment about not wanting to seem political. He felt a need to preserve the institutions at the expense of true justice.

[kiri]

14. Garland is a cult Federalist

Garland has been a member of the Federalist Society all his life. They have been inimical to democratic values since the beginning. Contrast Garland with Luttig.

[brush]

30. Word. Great point on contrasting Garland with Littig.

And how Garland released that Hur report on Biden without editing out the derogatory comments on the President...the was just as passive-aggressive as it gets.

He let that go out and repugs are going to use that negative campaigns ads when the we get through all the primaries...24/7.

[Goddessartist]

64. 100% nt

[Goddessartist]

63. And his mentor was Jamie Gorelick

whose mentor was Alan Derschowitz.

[ShazzieB]

22. I'm on the same page as you, Earth-shine.

He was too slow to act, but that's all I'm ready to accuse him of at this point in time.

The slowness is something everyone can see, but I'm not comfortable making pronouncements about things I have no way of knowing. Of course people are going to speculate; that's human nature. But making unfounded accusations about his intentions with no evidence is a bridge too far to me. I don't know what his intentions were, and I can't claim to know.

People are angry with him, because we're all worried about the outcome of the upcoming election. That's understandable. Complaining about the delays is also understandable. We didn't have to be where we are right now, and being upset about that is 100% understandable. I'm upset myself.

What I am not, however, is a mind reader. I'm not going to defend him, but I'm not comfortable accusing him of deliberately sabotaging the prosecution of TSF, as some here seem to be doing. That is very serious accusation, and I'm nowhere near ready to jump on that bandwagon.

[Think. Again.]

31. I think the only possible explanation...

....for his inaction on an extremely time-sensitive issue of national importance and national security could only be ill-intentions.

[MOMFUDSKI]

8. Thanks.

I will never understand what he was thinking. Bias may come out someday.

[Kid Berwyn]

10. Trump shoulda been arrested Jan. 6, 2021.

Traitor would be up for parole in about another 20 years.

[jaxexpat]

21. The most powerful nation the world has ever seen is powerless to curb a creature such as Trump.

The US constitution is useless in the face of corruption within the ranks of the most prosperous of its citizens. (Regarding this, Trump is small fry, useful as a distraction and, ultimately, a scapegoat.) There are too many in the cream of society whose inherited patriotism has been diluted by inbreeding, the product of which is generations marked by lack of imagination as the mean IQ drops off. Thus, in the place of luminescence we have the "Heritage Society" et al, a sort of Daughters of the Confederacy, only for the scions of multigenerational war-profiteering, but serving much the same purpose, touchstones and methodology.

[Kid Berwyn]

23. Absolutely. Like that time George HW Bush lied America into war...

...SOB shoulda been investigated, indicted and prosecuted. But...no.



https://www.democracynow.org/2018/12/5/how_false_testimony_and_a_massive

Then his idiot son did the same thing. "Lemme put it this way, sometimes...Money trumps peace." Again...nada.

[Oopsie Daisy]

11. This helps.

[Paladin]

12. +1000. (nt)

[Orrex]

13. If I had a nickel for every time I was scolded on DU for my imperfect faith in Garland

I'd be able to pay Trump's civil fine.

[AllaN01Bear]

16. hear. hear. me too also.

[AllaN01Bear]

15. if biden wins , i want garland out.

[jcgoldie]

68. better hope we retain the senate...

...or he may be as good as it gets.

[samsingh]

17. his speed of doing his job has been disappointing.

[Think. Again.]

35. Yes, much like the police department...

...in Uvalde Texas who allowed the school shooter to keep shooting while they stayed back under cover, disappointing

[bucolic_frolic]

18. The position needed an aggressive prosecutor, not a genteel former judge.

Garland understands Washington DC and government, and managing a large bureaucratic institution. I think he failed to see J6 as far more political than it appeared to be.

[GuppyGal]

19. Total Dereliction of DUTY !!! NT

[usaf-vet]

24. How about Garland PURPOSELY moved to slowly. When Biden win in 2024 must replace Garland with one.....

..... who meets these requirements.

The common qualifications to be United States Attorney General is that he must be a citizen of the country, at least 18 years old so he can qualify for an electoral status and has bar membership. The President will nominate the United States Attorney General, and the US Senate will confirm the nomination.

Someone with the guts to challenge the Republican extremists. No more semi-retired cowards.

Jamie Raskin
Eric Swalwell
Glenn Kirschner
Gretchen Whitmer
Jack Smith
Neal Katyal** Forgot him at the top of my list. If Not an actual SCOTUS seat.




Add to the list:______________________________

[lees1975]

25. Gretchen Whitmer

[usaf-vet]

27. Exactly!

[Think. Again.]

36. Jack Smith.

[WA-03 Democrat]

52. Doug Jones

[WiVoter]

57. Neal Katyal

[moniss]

26. I see the Georgia case

possibly playing out along the following lines. If the judge doesn't rule against Willis then the appeals will follow and delay that trial even more. If the appeals are unsuccessful I would look for Kemp and the GQP to try and muck things up awhile about trying to remove Willis etc. even though their newly passed law wouldn't support it legally. In other words they apply the law illegally to Willis and then she would have to fight that in court in order to remain. All of that taking more time.

If the judge rules against Willis the motions for mistrial, dismissal with prejudice etc. will be flooding in for weeks and then motions filed back and forth. Taking more time. Hearings scheduled to talk about a schedule for hearings on the motions. Taking more time. Then requests for extensions/rescheduling and motions on that. Taking more time. Then hearings on all the various motions for dismissal etc. Then more time for issuing decisions on the motions. Then appeals of any denials. Taking more time.

[Silent Type]

32. Before the Willis/Wade crud even started, Willis had requested a trial date of late August, but acknowledged

it could be 2025 before trial is over. It was likely never going to happen before election, unfortunately.

[moniss]

46. My belief is that the Georgia case

may go away with some minor pleas to lesser charges and even that may not happen until a long time from now. The Georgia State Senate is investigating Willis and has today demanded that the attorney who brought the charges against Willis now appear before them. It's Georgia and you can be sure they are looking for a way to proclaim guilt rather than to exonerate.

[bigtree]

37. you provide no proof of that, so it didn't actually happen

...NONE of these clipped attacks on Garland provide ANYTHING but their own projections to make this claim.

Those details of Garland's investigative efforts are mostly secret, but that doesn't stop people invested in attacking President Biden's Attorney General (unlike the president who has never said one word of criticism against his AG) from making these unproven claims.

Weissman and the rest who are quoted here ad nauseam, and the MSNBC host who picked Sarah Palin who sneers 'Garland' at every opportunity, began and ended their proof with WaPo's Carol Leonning's bullshit article, not bothering to even mention a word that she said, but repeating this false meme over and over until it sticks.


That's what's going on here, isn't?

You have no actual evidence of this other than time that's passed, but many people accept things from anonymous internet posters without proof, if it confirms their own predilections.

If you had proof you'd post it.

And even worse, you want us to accept the outrageous notion that what the DOJ and the SC are doing should be on a political timetable. That DOJ is supposed to win this election for us.

No matter that neither charges or a conviction can keep trump from running or assuming office. Did you just ignore the fucking Supreme Court today knocking down any chance that the criminal can be kept off of the ballot?

I call bullshit on any attack on the president's AG, the man who hired the person prosecuting Trump, that doesn't come with evidence of whatever is being complained about.

This complaint is a provable lie.

It's that insidiously pernicious lie which has obscured the actual work Merrick Garland has done from the beginning, including appointing the special counsel, by his own decision, who accelerated and deepened the investigations into Trump.

Even less is made by critics of the absolute importance of Garland's prosecutors convictions of 1000's of 'foot soldiers,' including convictions for sedition and interfering with the certification of votes by Congress.

It's precisely those convictions for interfering with the vote which are the subject of appeals right now in the Supreme Court. And it's that decision which will determine whether Trump is held accountable for the same criminality.

It should be obvious that, without the Garland convictions of rioters and riot leaders, there wouldn't be firm evidence of Trump's complicity in anything to do with the rioting.

Not only was it Merrick Garland's correct and prescient decision to appoint Jack Smith, it was his efforts laying the ground work; fighting the court challenges over privilege and access; obtaining the search warrant of Maralago which has resulted in an indictment of Trump on dozens of charges; which effectively enabled this administration's DOJ to carry out their responsibilities of checks and balances.


MY receipts:

Politico: Prosecutors eyed obstruction charges months before Jack Smith took over Trump case
A newly unsealed court document underscores the Justice Department’s long pursuit of evidence to support the obstruction allegations now lodged against Trump.

A newly unsealed court document underscores the Justice Department’s long pursuit of evidence to support the obstruction allegations now lodged against Trump.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/12/19/obstruction-charges-jack-smith-trump-case-00132500


or this one:

"It is not unusual for FBI agents and Justice Department prosecutors to disagree during an investigation about how aggressively to pursue witnesses or other evidence. Often, those disagreements are temporary flare-ups that are debated, decided and resolved in due course."

"The idea of closing the probe was not something that was discussed or considered by FBI leadership and would not have been approved, a senior law enforcement official said."

or this one:

This July 26, 2022 article by Carol D. Leonnig, the same person who claimed there wasn't attention at DOJ on the Trump WH, including the president, should give pause in accepting the claims that DOJ was negligent in the early days of Garland's time in office.

Justice Department investigators in April (2022) received phone records of key officials and aides in the Trump administration, including his former chief of staff, Mark Meadows, according to two people familiar with the matter. That effort is another indicator of how expansive the Jan. 6 probe had become, well before the high-profile, televised House hearings in June and July on the subject.

The Washington Post and other news organizations have previously written that the Justice Department is examining the conduct of Eastman, Giuliani and others in Trump’s orbit. But the degree of prosecutors’ interest in Trump’s actions has not been previously reported, nor has the review of senior Trump aides’ phone records.

...or, consider this:

(@MuellerSheWrote) Before Jack Smith was appointed, Merrick Garland:

Seized John Eastman's phone
Seized Jeffrey Clark's phone
Seized Scott Perry's emails
Seized Eastman's emails
Seized Epshteyn's phone
Seized Mike Lindell's phone
Seized Mike Roman's phone
Seized Scott Perry's phone
Got Kash Patel's testimony
Appointed Windom
Appointed Cooney
Subpoenaed the fraudulent electors
Subpoenaed 7 state's election officials
Subpoenaed Sidney's PAC
Subpoenaed Rudy
Opened IG probe into Clark
Opened IG probe into DoJ response to 1/6
Negotiated subpoena for Meadows
Battled the 11th circuit for classified docs
Subpoenaed trump for classified docs
Subpoenaed trump for surveillance video
Executed a search warrant on trump
Convicted Bannon of contempt
Indicted Navarro for contempt
Subpoenaed the speakers from 1/6
Subpoenaed the organizers of 1/6
Secured seditious conspiracy convictions
Subpoenaed records for any member of congress involved in 1/6
Subpoenaed info on Jenna Ellis
Secured testimony from Mark Short
Secured testimony from Jacob Engel
Secured testimony from Philbin
Secured testimony from Cippollone
Subpoenaed info on trump's PACs
Won privilege battles for Short, Engel, and the Pats
Negotiated for Pence's subpoena
Seized the phone records of Meadows
Secured the 1/6 committee transcripts
Subpoenaed 7 secretaries of state
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1647043510544273408.html

...try refuting this (I know you won't, at least not with any proof)

December 11, 2022:

Smith takes over a staff that’s already nearly twice the size of Robert Mueller’s team of lawyers who worked on the Russia probe.  A team of 20 prosecutors investigating January 6 and the effort to overturn the 2020 election are in the process of moving to work under Smith, according to multiple people familiar with the team.

Smith will also take on national security investigators already working the probe into the potential mishandling of federal records taken to Mar-a-Lago after Trump left the White House.

Together, the twin investigations have already established more evidence than what Mueller started with, including from a year-long financial probe that’s largely flown under the radar.

“Mueller was starting virtually from scratch, whereas Jack Smith is seemingly integrating on the fly into an active, fast-moving investigation,” said Elie Honig, a former federal prosecutor and senior CNN legal analyst.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/11/politics/jack-smith-special-counsel-high-profile-moves-trump-criminal-investigations/index.html

"including from a year-long financial probe that’s largely flown under the radar."


...that's just what's in the public record. DOJ secrecy rules (correctly) prevent us from definitively knowing or saying just what they did in the early days of the investigation. The absence of that information may well be an open invitation for Garland critics to speculate the worst of his actions and intentions, but it's still bunk without that inside knowledge, which is essentially the bulk of the case, and not available in anything we read in the news.

[Orrex]

40. Please repost that after the election.

[bigtree]

44. don't tell us how awful it is for the Trump DOJ to politicize a Biden investigation

...then complain that the Biden administration AG refused to.

Tell us all how charges, or even a conviction, prevents Trump from running or being elected.

Waiting.

[Orrex]

59. You can ALWAYS spot the cheerleaders

They assign objections to the people who disagree with them, and then demand that those people answer the objections.

Absolutely nothing in your post has anything to do with anything I have asserted anywhere at any time. Maybe you'd care to try again, but this time based in reality?

Waiting.

[Scrivener7]

45. Don't miss the fact that all those words tell us Garland actually only got testimonies from 5 people, all one or two

levels away from anyone who planned the coup, in a year and a half.

FIVE. In a year and a half. In response to an attempted coup.

They keep trotting out that list. It doesn't mean what they think it means.

[bigtree]

48. we all know Scrivener7 isn't part of the DOJ or any Trump investigation

...and has zero knowledge of the details of the investigations to make such a definitive claim about who turned on Trump.

But here it is, anyway. The claims have as much credibility as any other claim made about what DOJ actually got in the way of information from the people that they convicted. It comes with zero receipts, and that's because the poster has zero relevant information about the investigation to support the claims about who turned and what they provided DOJ.

If they did, they'd post it.

Scrivener7 is also making an argument that only witness testimony represents evidence that can be used against Trump, and that normal investigative practices of following leads and cooroborating claims with other evidence gathered is just something you see on tv.

It's understandable, because Scrivener7 has no actual details about the state of the investigations, or the nature of any witness or other evidence in those dual investigations on which to base the claims made.

Since that's still secret, it provides opportunities to demagogue the AG, but it shouldn't be surprising that they claims don't comport with what's actually been reported.

___The investigation began in earnest last year (2022), around the time federal law enforcement officials with the Justice Department’s Inspector General’s Office searched the home of Jeffrey Clark, a former DOJ official whom Trump considered making the acting attorney general despite his lack of any experience in criminal law. Court documents revealed that agents were at Clark’s home investigating potential charges of making false statements, criminal conspiracy and obstruction of justice.

Federal agents also seized phones from four key promoters of Trump’s stolen election claims: MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, who had his phone seized in a Hardee’s drive-thru; John Eastman, the Trump-aligned lawyer who pushed the discredited theory that Pence had the power to refuse to certify the election; Boris Epshteyn, a longtime Trump adviser who was part of Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani’s legal efforts to overturn the election results; and Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., who helped connect the White House with Clark.

In September 2022, before Smith took over the investigation, the Justice Department issued about 40 subpoenas, including to former New York City Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik, who also worked with Giuliani’s legal team, and Epshteyn, who recently met with the special counsel for two days, ABC News reported, citing sources familiar with the matter. Epshteyn did not respond to a request for comment on his reported appearance.

After Smith took over in November, his team subpoenaed officials in Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona and Pennsylvania, asking them for communications with or involving Trump, his campaign and 19 Trump associates, including Eastman, Giuliani, Justin Clark, Sidney Powell and Jenna Ellis.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/dozens-witnesses-testified-jan-6-focused-grand-jury-probes-trump-rcna91171

...so, while you're busy trying to discredit a sliver of the investigation that you can demagogue because neither prosecution is making those details public right now, there's reams of proof that the anti-Garland effort is based on fiction and contrived animus.

MY receipts:

Politico: Prosecutors eyed obstruction charges months before Jack Smith took over Trump case
A newly unsealed court document underscores the Justice Department’s long pursuit of evidence to support the obstruction allegations now lodged against Trump.

A newly unsealed court document underscores the Justice Department’s long pursuit of evidence to support the obstruction allegations now lodged against Trump.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/12/19/obstruction-charges-jack-smith-trump-case-00132500


or this one:

"It is not unusual for FBI agents and Justice Department prosecutors to disagree during an investigation about how aggressively to pursue witnesses or other evidence. Often, those disagreements are temporary flare-ups that are debated, decided and resolved in due course."

"The idea of closing the probe was not something that was discussed or considered by FBI leadership and would not have been approved, a senior law enforcement official said."

or this one:

This July 26, 2022 article by Carol D. Leonnig, the same person who claimed there wasn't attention at DOJ on the Trump WH, including the president, should give pause in accepting the claims that DOJ was negligent in the early days of Garland's time in office.

Justice Department investigators in April (2022) received phone records of key officials and aides in the Trump administration, including his former chief of staff, Mark Meadows, according to two people familiar with the matter. That effort is another indicator of how expansive the Jan. 6 probe had become, well before the high-profile, televised House hearings in June and July on the subject.

The Washington Post and other news organizations have previously written that the Justice Department is examining the conduct of Eastman, Giuliani and others in Trump’s orbit. But the degree of prosecutors’ interest in Trump’s actions has not been previously reported, nor has the review of senior Trump aides’ phone records.

...or, consider this:

(@MuellerSheWrote) Before Jack Smith was appointed, Merrick Garland:

Seized John Eastman's phone
Seized Jeffrey Clark's phone
Seized Scott Perry's emails
Seized Eastman's emails
Seized Epshteyn's phone
Seized Mike Lindell's phone
Seized Mike Roman's phone
Seized Scott Perry's phone
Got Kash Patel's testimony
Appointed Windom
Appointed Cooney
Subpoenaed the fraudulent electors
Subpoenaed 7 state's election officials
Subpoenaed Sidney's PAC
Subpoenaed Rudy
Opened IG probe into Clark
Opened IG probe into DoJ response to 1/6
Negotiated subpoena for Meadows
Battled the 11th circuit for classified docs
Subpoenaed trump for classified docs
Subpoenaed trump for surveillance video
Executed a search warrant on trump
Convicted Bannon of contempt
Indicted Navarro for contempt
Subpoenaed the speakers from 1/6
Subpoenaed the organizers of 1/6
Secured seditious conspiracy convictions
Subpoenaed records for any member of congress involved in 1/6
Subpoenaed info on Jenna Ellis
Secured testimony from Mark Short
Secured testimony from Jacob Engel
Secured testimony from Philbin
Secured testimony from Cippollone
Subpoenaed info on trump's PACs
Won privilege battles for Short, Engel, and the Pats
Negotiated for Pence's subpoena
Seized the phone records of Meadows
Secured the 1/6 committee transcripts
Subpoenaed 7 secretaries of state
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1647043510544273408.html

...try refuting this (I know you won't, at least not with any proof)

December 11, 2022:

Smith takes over a staff that’s already nearly twice the size of Robert Mueller’s team of lawyers who worked on the Russia probe.  A team of 20 prosecutors investigating January 6 and the effort to overturn the 2020 election are in the process of moving to work under Smith, according to multiple people familiar with the team.

Smith will also take on national security investigators already working the probe into the potential mishandling of federal records taken to Mar-a-Lago after Trump left the White House.

Together, the twin investigations have already established more evidence than what Mueller started with, including from a year-long financial probe that’s largely flown under the radar.

“Mueller was starting virtually from scratch, whereas Jack Smith is seemingly integrating on the fly into an active, fast-moving investigation,” said Elie Honig, a former federal prosecutor and senior CNN legal analyst.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/11/politics/jack-smith-special-counsel-high-profile-moves-trump-criminal-investigations/index.html

"including from a year-long financial probe that’s largely flown under the radar."


...but, but, but, ONLY FIVE!

[Scrivener7]

51. Yep. According to YOUR list, five.

[bigtree]

55. that we know of

...and you have zero knowledge of what they provided or how DOJ or the SC used that information.

But go on and tell us all about it.

[WA-03 Democrat]

53. Your admiration of Mercy Wheeler is well noted

But really Merrick just played another role in allowing Trump to be above the law.

Seized John Eastman's phone
Seized Jeffrey Clark's phone
Seized Scott Perry's emails
Seized Eastman's emails
Seized Epshteyn's phone
Seized Mike Lindell's phone
Seized Mike Roman's phone
Seized Scott Perry's phone

And the DOJ did not find anything to bring one charge?
Which one of these people do you think are not part of planning the insurrection?

They got the guy who smoked a joint in Wyden's office though!!

[bigtree]

54. you may have missed the fact that Jack Smith has pared down the charges

...to help streamline the prosecution, instead of indicting the co-conspirators he listed right now.

That fact allows the demagoguery that he's unconcerned with those crimes, but that move accomodates the effort to try Trump before the election, as opposed to a prosecution like Ga. with the ability to bundle them in a RICO-like process that isn't available in federal prosecutions of this nature.

There were at least 20 prosecutors working on this before Smith was appointed.

The hubris from people who think they know better, or care more about prosecutions than those folks is stunning, but you do you.

I'm convinced DU prosecutors would leave important charges on the floor and bring a piffle into court providing Trump with an early aquittal, but your expertise might just be better than the dozens of cream of the crop prosecutors at DOJ and under the SC.

I mean, with all of the proof and evidence you've provided here for this one point you're making, I imagine everything you have on Trump that you've gleaned from news reports that would be admissible in court would be just enough to fit into a matchbox.

[WA-03 Democrat]

58. Thanks for letting me do me!

It's about results and there are not any. Trump has a tee time this weekend.
There is no law and we should stop kidding ourselves that there is one.
There is only power.
If Trump wins then he will kill people just like me.
The hubris is coming from multiple directions it seems like.

[boston bean]

66. Is big tree a member of the DOJ?

[Goodheart]

62. Here's your proof:

Date that trump refused to accept his election loss, and ostensibly began scheming to overthrow it: November 4, 2020

Date of insurrection: January 6, 2021

Date Merrick Garland was confirmed as Attorney General: March 10, 2021

Date Merrick Garland appointed Jack Smith as Special Counsel: November 18, 2022

NO LESS THAN TWENTY FULL MONTHS after Garland took office, when it was obvious on January 6 2021 to the entire world that trump had incited an insurrection.

I'm "amazed" how you think that's anything other than dereliction of duty.

[boston bean]

65. How about the records case? You cannot deny there was a long delay

With that case.

Diddled for over 18 months. A slam fucking dunk this guy stole documents.

Yet, here we are. Nothing will ever happen before an election.

[EarthFirst]

42. I'm sure it will all come out in the book tour that he should have acted sooner...

[Scrivener7]

43. Wait! You mean all those who smugly sneered "It's not a Law & Order episode!" were NOT wise seers?

You mean Garland going after the MAGATs who chartered buses from Peoria to raise hell at the Capitol, while he ignored the planners of the attempted coup was NOT the way to make the planners roll over and confess?

Damn, Skippy! You're rocking my world here!

[Blues Heron]

47. good ole milquetoast merrick has gone sour, past the expiry date, starting to really stink.

[Mad_Machine76]

49. I think it's really hard to say whether or not he moved "too slow"

We haven't really ever had something like this happen before in our country and I expect that he took a slow and methodical approach to this being that it involves a former President.

[Emile]

50. He could lock him up until his trial, but no. . .

[Demsrule86]

56. I don't think Garland would have done anything without the Congressional Committe to

invest January 6th putting all that evidence in front of the American people.

[Hotler]

67. +1 nt

[republianmushroom]

60. Yup, agree, "unfortunately".

and Garland admitted to a lot of hand wringing.

[live love laugh]

61. Blah blah blah

[lees1975]

69. K & R