0
   

Stop Telling Me What Great Things Merrick Garland is Doing Behind the Scenes

 
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Aug, 2022 01:30 pm
I’m going to go ahead and give Garland credit for a pretty crafty move. He signals that he wants for the search warrant to be made available for public viewing to show that the accusations that the FBI was doing anything illegal are BS.

That puts all the pressure on Trump and his people to either release the warrant for viewing, or explain why he won’t.
snood
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Aug, 2022 02:50 pm
@snood,
Wow - even more to the point, the filing that Garland made today gives Trump until 3pm tomorrow to either release all the contents of the affidavit and warrant, or officially refuse to.

I gotta say, these actions by Garland are encouraging.

Let me reiterate - if Garland and the DOJ do ultimately indict and prosecute Donald Trump, I will gladly and with gusto chow down on any and all portions of crow that anyone wants to serve me.
Like I’ve said all along, this is one subject about which I won’t mind one bit if I’m proven 100% wrong.
0 Replies
 
Region Philbis
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Aug, 2022 06:34 am

activated...

https://iili.io/UpnDQf.jpg

snood
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Aug, 2022 05:33 am
@Region Philbis,
You know why I think the "****" is NEVER going to "hit the fan" for Trump?

Allan Weisselberg.

This man - a CLOSE confidant and lawyer of Trump, has been helping Trump defraud and evade the law since 1973.

He pleaded GUILTY TO FIFTEEN FELONIES ranging from grand larceny to tax fraud to falsifying business records.

He made a deal that got him 100 days in a cushy country club prison.
FIFTEEN. FELONIES. ONE HUNDRED DAYS.

I think this is a good indication of the kind of "justice" that is going to befall Donald Trump.

I've noticed a lot of you have been lowering your expectations about what's likely to happen with Trump. Starting with the Mueller investigation up until today, the predictions about the net tightening or the shoe falling or the **** fanning or whatever have tamed considerably. Now the worst anyone is willing to predict is that Trump will be fined and banned from running for federal office.

Which means...what? Hell, if we're honest, we know Trump didn't ******* want to be president in the first place. And all "paying fines" means to Trump is another ten years stalling the courts.

Garland and the AGs in New York and Georgia got my hopes up a little, but in the quiet moments when I look at the whole picture, the truth comes out the same.

Trump is going to get away with everything. The stealing and hiding of top secret documents. The "do me a favor" quid pro quo with Zelensky. The election tampering (find me 11,000 votes). The conspiring and incitement of insurrection. Just add it to all the other **** he's gotten away with all his life.

And know that as long as we live, when we start talking about rule of law, or law enforcement, or justice, we will know that American justice will forever be defined at least in part for how they failed to deal with the most corrupt person to ever foul the oval office.


0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Sep, 2022 09:10 pm
Trump loses in classified documents appeal.

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals rules against Trump over classified documents.

New Ruling: DOJ keeps access to seized classified documents.


Sep 21, 2022


0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Sep, 2022 09:29 pm
Appeals court rules DOJ can regain access to sensitive documents seized in Trump search.


Published Sep 21, 2022


Quote:
Washington — A federal appeals court on Wednesday granted a request from the Justice Department to allow its investigators to regain access to the roughly 100 documents bearing classification markings that were seized by the FBI during its search at former President Donald Trump's Florida residence.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit agreed to put on hold a lower court's order that kept the subset of sensitive records off-limits for the Justice Department to use for investigative purposes, pending the review of the materials by an independent arbiter known as a special master.

In its 29-page opinion, the panel said it agreed with the Justice Department that the federal district court in South Florida likely erred in blocking investigators' use of the classified records and then requiring them to submit the sensitive documents to the outside arbiter for review.

"For our part, we cannot discern why [Trump] would have an individual interest in or need for any of the one-hundred documents with classification markings," Judges Robin Rosenbaum, Britt Grant and Andrew Brasher said. "Classified documents are marked to show they are classified, for instance, with their classification level."

The former president, the judges continued, "has not even attempted to show that he has a need to know the information contained in the classified documents." The judges also said there is no evidence in the record before them that the roughly 100 documents at issue were declassified.

"In any event, at least for these purposes, the declassification argument is a red herring because declassifying an official document would not change its content or render it personal," the three-judge panel wrote. "So even if we assumed that [Trump] did declassify some or all of the documents, that would not explain why he has a personal interest in them."

Grant and Brasher were appointed to the 11th Circuit by Trump, while Rosenbaum was tapped by former President Barack Obama.

Federal prosecutors asked the 11th Circuit to step in last week after U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, appointed by Trump in 2020, denied their request to restore access to the batch of records marked classified, which were among the 11,000 documents seized in the Aug. 8 search.

In their appeal to the Atlanta-based court, Justice Department lawyers argued Cannon's order "hamstrings" its criminal probe and irreparably harms the government by blocking "critical steps of an ongoing criminal investigation and compelling disclosure of highly sensitive records," including to Trump's lawyers. They also warned Cannon's temporary ban keeping investigators from using the materials for investigative purposes "impedes the government's efforts to protect the nation's security."

The former president's legal team urged the 11th Circuit to turn down the Justice Department's request to regain access to the sensitive documents, reiterating its characterization of the court fight as a "document storage dispute that has spiraled out of control." The federal probe into Trump, his lawyers James Trusty and Christopher Kise told the court, is "unprecedented and misguided."

The former president's lawyers also repeated their argument that the Justice Department has not proven that the documents at the crux of its request to the 11th Circuit are classified.

In a late-night filing with the 11th Circuit on Tuesday, federal prosecutors pushed back on Trump's efforts to raise questions about the materials' classification status, writing that the former president has "never actually represented — much less offered evidence — that he declassified any of the relevant records." They also pointed to a detailed list of property retrieved from Mar-a-Lago in the Aug. 8 search that shows federal agents took 33 items from a storage room and desks in Trump's office that contained 103 documents marked "confidential," "secret" or "top secret."

While Justice Department lawyers and Trump battle over access to the roughly 100 documents with classified markings, proceedings for the review of the materials retrieved from Mar-a-Lago by the outside arbiter have begun.

Cannon tapped Raymond Dearie, a veteran federal judge who is semi-retired from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, to serve as the special master last week, and the Justice Department did not try to stop his appointment as part of its request for the 11th Circuit to issue a stay on the document freeze.

Dearie, who was put forth as a candidate for the role by the former president, held his first meeting with the federal prosecutors and Trump's attorneys on Tuesday about how his vetting of the seized materials will proceed. During the 40-minute hearing in New York, Dearie appeared skeptical of Trump's objection to his request that the former president disclose information about whether the seized materials had been declassified.



https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/appeals-court-rules-doj-can-regain-access-to-sensitive-documents-seized-in-trump-search/ar-AA126p68
0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  2  
Reply Wed 12 Oct, 2022 11:22 pm
Published October 12, 2022


snood
 
  2  
Reply Thu 13 Oct, 2022 12:25 am
@Real Music,
I really don’t get it. They’re reporting on a snitch inside Maralago who says she witnessed boxes of documents, as if this “discovery” is some spectacular, fatal legal blow to Trump.
Meanwhile, we’ve all known for months now that the FBI found boxes of documents at Maralago.

It’s like we’re on a hamster wheel and at regular intervals someone just shouts “this time Trump’s had it!”, and we scurry on in hopes of getting the hamster treat - Trump in handcuffs.

I want my goddam treat, and I want OFF this sickassed wheel.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Nov, 2022 04:49 pm
I’m curious. How many among you at A2K are still expecting Merrick Garland and the DOJ to take any (and I do mean any - from a harsh language reprimand to an indictment) action against Donald Trump?

I think they’re just trying to ride it out until we all just basically go to sleep on it, and then try to quietly make some innocuous statement that they decided not to pursue any actions late on some Friday evening.
jcboy
 
  2  
Reply Sat 19 Nov, 2022 09:29 am
@snood,
I'm hoping that's not the case. I actually think this is a good move by Garland, using an independent arbitrator help's counter tRumps actuations of a witch hunt, not that it will stop him still spitting out his pacifier.

Hoping Barr is right.

Bill Barr says ‘increasingly likely’ Trump will be ‘legitimately’ indicted on criminal charges
snood
 
  2  
Reply Sat 19 Nov, 2022 10:08 am
@jcboy,
Here’s the thing though jcb,
It makes zero sense for Garland to make this move to a special counsel if the main explanation for doing it is to assuage people from suspecting and accusing of partisanship.

Because we already know that they will raise suspicions about, and accuse anyone in charge of prosecuting Trump.

Nope, I think Garland jumped at Trump’s announcement of candidacy as his big chance to step aside, hand off the hot potato to some earnest fall guy, and get out from under the pressure.

He should have indicted Trump MONTHS ago. Now, we’re in a period of time where it’s easy to make excuses not to pull the trigger. First it was too close to midterms. Now it’s too soon after Trump announcing he’s running. Very soon we’ll be in the middle of an active presidential campaign. Surely can’t indict someone during a campaign! Before we know it, it will just seem like too big of a national inconvenience to bother prosecuting Trump.

And the asshole will escape accountability again.
hightor
 
  2  
Reply Sat 19 Nov, 2022 01:16 pm
@snood,
The House Republicans are talking about "investigating" Garland so it might make tactical sense to shift the investigation over to someone else who'll have more independence and not be stuck in hearings getting grilled by Gym Jordan and the rest of those fools.
snood
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Nov, 2022 01:52 pm
@hightor,
It’s kinda weird to me that on this forum I’m forever pushing back against people telling me that they think the system is probably working as intended.

These people (Garland and others) that we are depending on to pursue justice against an ex-president for an attempted coup and theft of top secret government documents - they’re just human beings.

Do you ever consider that Garland’s motives may be less than 100% completely good faith, good for the nation, good for mankind and the rule of law?


hightor
 
  2  
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2022 05:58 am
@snood,
Quote:
Do you ever consider that Garland’s motives may be less than 100% completely good faith, good for the nation, good for mankind and the rule of law?

Sure; I'm generally pretty cynical about US politics. But I don't question Garland's motives as much as I question whether our institutions can handle hyper-politicized investigations. The Constitution wasn't designed to deal with this level of partisanship. The Mueller investigation showed this clearly. Mueller ran a tight, well-disciplined crew with a minimum of leaking or grandstanding, while facing enormous criticism from Trump and his cohorts. Then, upon completion, it was turned over to Trump's attorney general who kept it under wraps while publicly downplaying the results and refusing to act on Mueller's findings, taking political advantage of the special counsel's inability to indict a sitting president for obstruction of justice. A more independent, principled AG could have used the report more effectively – but that would have been seen as rejected by half the country as "politicizing" the Justice Department. I don't think the framers ever imagined a scenario like this. In fact I'm sure of it.

This podcast was helpful for me in putting the problem in perspective:
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/21/podcasts/the-daily/special-counsel-trump-garland.html#commentsContainer
snood
 
  2  
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2022 06:18 am
@hightor,
I think you captured the sick politics that characterized the Mueller investigation’s immediate aftermath with Barr.

I think for a white, putatively rich, ex-president who flaunts all laws, rules, regulations, and traditions as brazenly as Trump, it would take a truly exceptional person or group of people to pursue, induct and convict him. Not exceptional in the way we keep seeing these appointed special prosecutors getting praised. I mean with exceptional intestinal fortitude.

To me it’s like the difference between all those armed and armored cops who twiddled their thumbs in Uvalde and the combat vet who subdued the murderer in Colorado Springs. A willingness to do what is needed, regardless of self, safety, or the opinion of others.

But anyway, as to my main “point” about all those who have been tasked with prosecuting Trump, it wasn’t about their intentions. My point was to comment on how willing everyone seems to buy into the promise that whoever is appointed to the job must be qualified to do it. All the breathless hype about what a rock solid prosecutor Jack Smith is just triggers my cynicism.
hightor
 
  2  
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2022 07:06 am
@snood,

Quote:
All the breathless hype about what a rock solid prosecutor Jack Smith is just triggers my cynicism.

I'd say that's "infotainment" more than anything else. Special prosecutors, twenty-four hour news cycles, two year long election campaigns, slick ads funded by various issue groups — they seem to have a need to create heroes and villains. People tune in and want to hear about media stars. Let's turn Jack Smith – or Mueller or Ken Starr – into an easily recognized commodity that we can use as an attention-getting lead and suck in the biggest possible $hare of viewers.
snood
 
  2  
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2022 09:01 am
@hightor,
I think this particular strain of hero worship may be related to the everyday “if it bleeds it leads”, or the average “build em up to tear em down” that keeps the 24 hour news cycles filled with juicy tidbits, but I think it’s a bit more insidious.

Because this particular shiny thing - the next gallant government knight thing - plugs right into not just the public need for infotainment. But it also plugs into our need for order; for a force in the world that sorts out right and wrong; for justice. So they’re still selling us something yes, but when they sell these guys to us it leeches away something deeper than just good taste - our sense of security - especially when these “heroes” keep coming up empty and letting the bad guy get away.

0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 09:38:27