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

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)
 

PTWB

(4,131 posts)
Wed Jan 5, 2022, 06:08 PM Jan 2022

Merrick Garland will NOT paint us with the same brush with which he paints the MAGA maggots. [View all]

I cannot believe I am seeing anyone defending the following quote:

“These acts and threats of violence are not associated with any one set of partisan or ideological views. But they are permeating so many parts of our national life that they risk becoming normalized and routine if we do not stop them. That is dangerous for peoples’ safety and democracy.” -- Merrick Garland, January 5th, 2022


Garland is correct that there are violent and dangerous people across the entire political spectrum. But I challenge anyone to support his claim that our democracy is being threatened by anyone other than right wing extremists.

Aside from that giant gaffe, the briefing was good. It could have been better and could have gone further. But it was good.

The problem that Garland has is this case is not a who dunnit. It isn’t a mystery. The whole world watched Trump incite the riot in real time. We saw it with our own eyes and we heard it with our own ears.

Until Trump is brought to justice there isn’t anything Garland can say or do that will suffice. That’s just the reality of the situation.

Prosecuting hundreds of MAGA maggots is all fine and good but if we let their king escape justice then we’ve failed.
65 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
See... PoliticAverse Jan 2022 #1
That is one of the posts to which I am referring. PTWB Jan 2022 #3
Couldn't he mean cilla4progress Jan 2022 #2
Yes. NurseJackie Jan 2022 #5
If he had simply said "ideologies" then yes. PTWB Jan 2022 #9
If he said that then my prediction has come true already. He aint gonna do jack shit Eliot Rosewater Jan 2022 #4
Stop. Just stop. NurseJackie Jan 2022 #7
Contextually Garland is technically correct uponit7771 Jan 2022 #8
I suspect you knew it way before Garland spoke. Beastly Boy Jan 2022 #25
He's technically correct uponit7771 Jan 2022 #6
No, he's completely incorrect. PTWB Jan 2022 #10
Contextually Garland is technically correct, there's 330 million people in this country and to claim uponit7771 Jan 2022 #11
You're missing half of his quote. PTWB Jan 2022 #12
He called out case involving the judge as example in his book. I can see that being TECHNICALLY... uponit7771 Jan 2022 #14
Crazy people have attacked Judges for as long as there have been Judges. PTWB Jan 2022 #16
Ah, well ... that wasn't a good example to your point BUT he didn't narrow the bad actions of uponit7771 Jan 2022 #19
Hannah Arendt would be proud wellst0nev0ter Jan 2022 #34
Garland wasn't talking about Democrats. He was talking about anarchists. lapucelle Jan 2022 #55
Since I live in Seattle and work in Portland maxsolomon Jan 2022 #56
The data set, methodology, and an explanation of the terminology lapucelle Jan 2022 #57
OK, I read it. It defines far-left violence very broadly. maxsolomon Jan 2022 #58
The study is about "terrorizing" rather than "confronting". lapucelle Jan 2022 #59
Right. They're saying Antifa counter-protesting at a Proud Boy rally is Terror. maxsolomon Jan 2022 #60
It's reasonable that demonstrators confronted by "counterprotestors" using or threatening to use lapucelle Jan 2022 #61
This message was self-deleted by its author lapucelle Jan 2022 #63
A google search of both the full name and the initials of CSIS do not show the 2016 piece lapucelle Jan 2022 #65
Why did Zack Exely make a special trip to Russia just before merging... Budi Jan 2022 #22
+a million Just_Vote_Dem Jan 2022 #38
I like to dig into this & put it out for discussion but honestly, that would.... Budi Jan 2022 #40
I understand Just_Vote_Dem Jan 2022 #41
I may think about this a bit & pm you Budi Jan 2022 #43
I try. You're welcome! n/t Just_Vote_Dem Jan 2022 #44
A Bernie Sanders supporter literally committed an act of terrorism against congress in 2017 mathematic Jan 2022 #64
Geez. Instead of worrying about parsing every word or inuedndo, can people just wait and see what JohnSJ Jan 2022 #13
Someone posted the text :Here sheshe2 Jan 2022 #26
......... JohnSJ Jan 2022 #50
Hey. sheshe2 Jan 2022 #51
Just wanted to say hi to you JohnSJ Jan 2022 #52
Statute of limitations passed for the Stormy Daniels payoff wellst0nev0ter Jan 2022 #36
I don't agree. We have to keep the pressure campaign on. ecstatic Jan 2022 #48
... cilla4progress Jan 2022 #15
This is Perfect.. we see it with Cha Jan 2022 #54
So we're talking about this and not the fact that DOJ has done nothing against the leaders of the dem4decades Jan 2022 #17
That's what Matt Miller just said BigmanPigman Jan 2022 #24
This was my impression. Scrivener7 Jan 2022 #45
Full context: EarlG Jan 2022 #18
Violence is a problem and Merrick is right to call it out. PTWB Jan 2022 #20
No, he did not. sheshe2 Jan 2022 #27
You can read the quote I'm referring to in the OP. PTWB Jan 2022 #28
Out of context. sheshe2 Jan 2022 #30
I watched the speech live. PTWB Jan 2022 #31
I watched it live as well. sheshe2 Jan 2022 #42
In this section of the speech EarlG Jan 2022 #29
That may be how he intended it. PTWB Jan 2022 #33
Fair enough EarlG Jan 2022 #39
People can Honestly have more than one take. MarcA Jan 2022 #46
Of course you can't think of a single case. Because you've narrowed the entire investigation down... Budi Jan 2022 #32
I haven't narrowed his investigation down to one statement. PTWB Jan 2022 #35
If you see right wing extremists as being identical in partisanship or ideology, you may have a case Beastly Boy Jan 2022 #21
If he had merely said ideology, he would skate. PTWB Jan 2022 #23
Your OP mentions "right wing extremism", no mention of partisanship. Beastly Boy Jan 2022 #37
I didn't hear bothsiderism. I heard: "If you think terrorists are all brown & black & non-Christian-- Hekate Jan 2022 #47
I didn't hear it that way when I listened to the entire speech. GoodRaisin Jan 2022 #49
I did not hear it Meowmee Jan 2022 #53
Nor did he. MineralMan Jan 2022 #62
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Merrick Garland will NOT ...