What's Merrick Garland Going to Do?

@snood,

The part I like is when he tells everyone if they don't like him to ignore him. That he ignores them. Then he pops up and insults everyone.

That is classic trolling. You're right: ignoring him is what will work.

0 Replies

@glitterbag,

He thinks he's complex, when what it is, is he has a messiah complex.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

1. In the South Street Baptist case you had a concerted conspiracy to keep killers from coming to justice. The killers were known members of a White Supremacist group.

2. Kyle Rittenhouse was 17 year old kid who received a fair trial which didn't go as some people hoped.

It is ridiculous to compare these two trials. You are turning the South Street Baptist case into just another political disagreement.

The Attorney General shouldn't be in the business of retrying political trials that don't go the desired way.

This was the last on topic post.

0 Replies

Re: What’s Garland going to do about Trump and the others responsible for 1/6…
The pattern we’ve settled into seems to be-

We are silent about the matter, until some “new” evidence surfaces, that’s supposed to be definitive proof that Trump committed a crime.

Then we have a few moments of some people saying “See? The DOJ is closing in! This looks bad for Trump!” and others saying “Big whoop. Add that to the mountain of evidence we already have. Wake me when there’s an indictment.”

Then we turn our attention elsewhere, until the next flurry of significant-sounding hoopla over another “blockbuster” show of proof against Trump.

Rinse, lather, repeat.

I think it all serves to keep us in a sort of a semi-consciousness as time marches us right up to the midterm elections, with Merrick Garland still having Not. Done. ****. about the people who instigated, planned, and cheered on the debacle of 1/6.

And after the midterms, there’s a real good chance that everyone is so beaten down by the whole process of waiting on Merrick Godot that we’re willing to just forget that we ever thought the DOJ was going to do a goddamn thing.

I barely have the energy left to tack on my standard disclaimer “I hope I’m wrong”.

0 Replies

Listen - hear that?
It’s everyone staying silent about the injustice of Trump and company getting away with trying to overthrow our system of election.

Get used to that silence, because as the months pass and it dawns on everyone that not only is Garland not going to do anything, he also doesn’t want people to notice he’s not doing anything.

…and from the way it looks, everyone will be just fine complying.

1 Reply

@snood,

Not directly connected to Garland but the problems with the Manhattan DA's investigation begun by Vance and now run by Alvin Bragg are sort of troubling. How do they prove what Trump "knew" at any particular time? Trump was cagey enough to keep himself out of direct responsibility for anything and not leave a paper trail.

0 Replies

I don’t like the pronouncements you hear every so often, about how “history will not judge so-and-so kindly” when describing some public person who’s behaved badly. I think they are pretty meaningless homilies, because I don’t think the real bad actors give a **** about legacies.

But I’m going to add my one meaningless homily. Maybe not as meaningless as the others, because I don’t think Garland is a bad person at core.

If Merrick Garland takes no action against Trump and the others really behind 1/6, he will rightfully go down in history as the most feckless, most cowardly person to ever hold the title of Attorney General of the United States. Not the worst, or most evil one
because we had Bill Barr. But the most timid and useless. Because he will have been tasked with enforcing federal law against a ******* ATTEMPTED COUP, and done NOTHING.

0 Replies

Garland says the Jan. 6 investigation won't end until everyone is held to account
https://www.npr.org/2022/03/10/1085016383/garland-says-the-jan-6-investigation-wont-end-until-everyone-is-held-to-account

"We are not avoiding cases that are political or cases that are controversial or sensitive," the attorney general said in an exclusive interview with NPR. "What we are avoiding is making decisions on a political basis, on a partisan basis."

"We begin with the cases that are right in front of us with the overt actions and then we build from there," Garland said. "And that is a process that we will continue to build until we hold everyone accountable who committed criminal acts with respect to January 6."

0 Replies

Roger Stone's potential Jan. 6 swan song -- and what it means for Trump
On Wednesday, Joshua James, the leader of the Alabama Chapter of Oath Keepers, pleaded guilty to seditious conspiracy and obstruction of Congress for trying to prevent the peaceful transfer of power after the 2020 election. The Oath Keepers — a group of anti-government extremists — were among those who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. As part of his guilty plea, James agreed to cooperate with prosecutors, including providing testimony to a grand jury.

--snip--

After the Jan. 6 protest turned into a bloody riot, however, Stone evidently panicked. As a violent mob ransacked the Capitol, he packed his bags and reportedly told an aide, “I really want to get out of here” adding that he thought the riot would be “really bad for the movement.”

After the riot, he lobbied Trump to enact the “Stone Plan” — a blanket pardon to shield himself and Trump’s allies in Congress from prosecution for any efforts to overturn the election more generally. Stone had good reason to think Trump would offer such a pardon. After all, Trump pardoned him after he was indicted (and convicted) on charges of lying to Congress, witness tampering and obstruction of justice. What’s one more pardon between friends?

But according to The Washington Post, White House counsel Pat Cipollone “thwarted” the Stone Plan, prompting Stone to write to an associate: “See you in prison.”

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/roger-stone-s-potential-jan-6-swan-song-and-what-it-means-for-trump/ar-AAUS9bm?ocid=msedgntp

Stone is absolutely in the crosshairs of the DOJ right now and when he goes down, he will flip in a second to try and avoid dying in prison. He will give over everything and everyone.

0 Replies

This guy actually makes a much better, more cogent case than I do with all my pissed-off blathering, about why Garland isn't going to do a damn thing about indicting Trump. Such a good argument it's depressing.

Read the whole article - it's not too long. I excerpted a telling part:

Quote:

Every competent prosecutor knows why Garland and the Department of Justice have not indicted Trump. I’m going to say it out loud.

If Trump were charged, it’s unlikely he would negotiate a plea deal. Instead, he would go to trial and make every step of the process a platform to cast himself as a victim of a vindictive Biden administration. He would use the renewed attention to spew lies about the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election. And he would raise money, lots of money, to fund his anticipated 2024 presidential campaign.

But most important, despite a mountain of evidence that would convict most people many times over, Trump would not be convicted. Criminal convictions require a unanimous verdict. On a 12-person jury, there are going to be Trump supporters.

The Republican National Committee recently proclaimed that the people responsible for the violent attack on the U.S. Capitol were engaged in “legitimate political discourse.” Members of Congress, right-leaning media, and much of the Republican base consider the Capitol rioters patriots.

And so, it is a near certainty that at least one juror would accept the widely held Republican position that any prosecution of Trump is political persecution. That would all but ensure a hung jury in any case brought against him. Such a circumstance would have ramifications far beyond the prosecution of Trump.

https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-real-reason-feds-trump-20220310-fhbuuviedva35a27c3fvokdive-story.html

0 Replies

I am REALLY curious where those people on A2K stand now.
I mean the ones who have held all along that Garland, or the committee, or a state AG, or SOMEONE was going to eventually come up with some indictments and prosecutions of Trump and other fat cats responsible for 1/6.

As the evidence keeps piling up and the silence from the DOJ keeps resounding, those true believers in A2K seem to have fallen silent, as well.

C’mon guys, be bold - fess up. Do you STILL think that justice is coming?

Are you going to admit that you see now that our justice system is more feckless than you imagined, or are you going to just do like the DOJ seems to be doing, and lay low until no one’s talking about it anymore?

0 Replies

I’m tempted to ask the same question in every thread I’m in. But decided I’d better just keep my frustration at being ignored confined to the one thread that’s at least supposed to be on this topic.

All you guys who’ve been serenely surveying the proceedings…

Hightor, RealMusic, BillW, and the rest…
Do you STILL think justice is coming in the form of some super secret plan being played close to Merrick Garland’s chest?

1 Reply

@snood,

Quote:

Do you STILL think...

As this was addressed to me, among others, I want to object to your framing the question this way. "Do I STILL think" implies that I thought this in the past. I'm pretty certain that I never expressed that belief. I did suggest that there were people who made this assumption but I didn't say I was one of them.

0 Replies

Well, I’m not sure that’s totally honest, but it’s certainly a perfectly noncommittal stance to take.

I’m so naïve that I can’t help being disappointed that no one on A2K will admit to advising everyone to withhold judgement and wait patiently on Merrick Garland. They may even ultimately prove to be right, and we start seeing indictments of big fish. But they definitely do not have courage of conviction.

I have to remember to try not to bite through my own tongue when these same people come out saying “I told you so” NO MATTER WHAT THE OUTCOME. The opportunity to be able to say that is the only impetus I can find for all the lukewarm, fence-riding, both-sides, politician’s pap that I can manage to get out of folks right now.

Whatever. So, here’s my current vein of discussion for you to avoid:
Merrick Garland failed to act on the list of 10 obstruction charges in the Mueller report, until the statute of limitations ran on them.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/where-justice-department-trump-obstruction-offenses

The latest reason I’ve heard to justify keeping faith in our DOJ is that Garland is waiting on the 1/6 Committee Report before he takes action.

What reason do we have to believe that Garland will do anything more with this report than he did with the Mueller report?

1 Reply

@snood,

Quote:

Well, I’m not sure that’s totally honest...

I'm pretty sure it is.

However, it would not surprise me if Trump avoids indictment on many of the charges which may be brought against him, both state and federal. It would also not surprise me if some of the charges stick and he faces some semblance of justice. I think the Georgia case is one of the strongest. I'll be disappointed if he never goes to trial and disgusted if he ends up in court but is found "not guilty". But I doubt my ire would match yours. I think we all have our particular political issues which are especially infuriating. I find myself more incensed about systemic injustice than over the fate of any individual.

When someone on this thread stated that Jan 6 prosecutions should not be "political", this was my response:

Quote:

Doesn't that run the risk of insulating controversial and potentially illegal actions by political operatives from prosecution? If someone is serving a political function within an administration he can commit crimes with impunity?

0 Replies

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8v0DdSVI4Y&feature=youtu.be

0 Replies

Quote:

Justice delayed is justice denied.

- William E. Gladstone

1 Reply

A few minutes of Glenn Kirshner on probable cause

0 Replies

@snood,

Gladstone, despite being a Liberal prime minister, with statues all over Birmingham, inherited a fortune from his families slave trading and made sure he received a lot of compensation when slavery was abolished.

Unlike the slaves.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

Gladstone, despite being a Liberal prime minister, with statues all over Birmingham, inherited a fortune from his families slave trading and made sure he received a lot of compensation when slavery was abolished.

Unlike the slaves.

Doesn’t make what he said untrue.

1 Reply

What's Merrick Garland Going to Do?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know