For any left who still defend Merrick Garland (for unknown reasons) - once the Tangerine pardons all of the J6 losers

[Lemons UK]

what exactly will the great Merrick Garland have accomplished?

[Fiendish Thingy]

1. Why do you let the Roberts court off scot-free?

Why no scorn for the actual villains of this story?

[BannonsLiver]

6. Doesn't that sort of go without saying?

Who here is trying to make the case the Robert’s court isn’t horrible? We do have a couple people who passionately defend an ineffectual AG, however.

But I’ll clear it up for you: they’re both garbage.

[Fiendish Thingy]

10. Here's some more clarity:

Regardless of who was AG, the Roberts court would have prevented Trump from going to trial before the election.

[BannonsLiver]

13. Here again, nobody was defending the Robert's court.

Many were defending garland. Foolishly. Your procedural excuse making aside he did not acquit himself well as AG.

[Fiendish Thingy]

19. How would you know?

If the outcome (no trial before the election) was predestined by the Roberts court, what could Garland have done differently to “acquit” himself?

Pick your preferred AG, and the outcome (no trial before the election) would have been the same. Nobody could have changed that outcome.

To scapegoat Garland is to immunize the Roberts court from its well deserved scorn.

[Emile]

21. Scapegoating Garland is that what we're calling it now?

[Fiendish Thingy]

24. What else would you call blaming someone who is not the villain of the story? Nt

[Emile]

26. Years ago, did you tell us to have patience?

[brush]

28. Please stop. Garland's first orger of business upon taking office should've...

been immediately prosecuting the chief insurrectionist who tried to overthrow the government. And he himself shouild've lead it, no two years to wait to appoint a special counsel.

If that had happened trump would've been prosecuted and jailed long before the corrupt SCOTUS 6 got involved with their 'official act' immunity crapola.

We all saw trump's insurrection and dereliction of duty on live national TV so there is no doubt to his guilt on the J6 case.

And then there's also the MAL document theft case.

trump is so guilty of multiple crimes it's sickening to me that he's still walking free. Yet because Merrick the Meek didn't do his job, trump begins his second term in two weeks.

[Crunchy Frog]

9. We already expect the villains to be villains.

We have a reasonable expectation that the people who are allegedly on our side will be trying to do the right thing.

[Autumn]

30. It's not the Supreme Courts job to enforce the law or seek punishment for those who break the law

as trump did. We know who the villain in this travesty of justice is. Garland.

The mission statement of the Department of Justice (DOJ) is to:

Uphold the rule of law
Keep the country safe
Protect civil rights
Enforce federal law
Defend the interests of the United States
Ensure public safety
Prevent and control crime
Seek just punishment for those guilty of unlawful behavior
Ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans

The Supreme Court interprets the meaning of laws, decides if they apply to specific facts, and rules on how to apply them.

Judicial review
The Supreme Court uses judicial review to declare laws or executive acts unconstitutional.

Protecting civil rights
The Supreme Court protects civil rights and liberties by striking down laws that violate the Constitution.

Ensuring equal justice
The Supreme Court ensures that all Americans receive equal justice under the law.

Guardian of the Constitution
The Supreme Court acts as the guardian and interpreter of the Constitution.

Resolving disputes
The Supreme Court resolves disputes between states and presides over cases involving treaties.

[Fiendish Thingy]

54. So, if a court obstructs Garland in his duties, it's Garland's Failure?

That’s some pretzel logic right there.

[Autumn]

66. The supreme court didn't obstruct Garlands duties. Talk about pretzel. Are you okay?

On July 1, 2024, the Court ruled in a 6–3 decision that presidents have absolute immunity for acts committed as president within their core constitutional purview, at least presumptive immunity for official acts within the outer perimeter of their official responsibility, and no immunity for unofficial acts.

Him stealing classified documents was not an official act.

[Fiendish Thingy]

67. So, Aileen Cannon didnt obstruct Trump's prosecution?

And those court delays leading up to the immunity ruling were meant to help DOJ?

Did you pay attention to the impact all the delays had on the ability to schedule a trial before the election?

Regardless of who was AG, the pro-Trump courts would have ensured that the outcome would have been the same:

No Trump trial before the election.

Any claim to the contrary is a fantasy existing purely to justify the scapegoating of Garland and absolving the courts from the scorn they deserve as the actual villains of this story.

[Autumn]

68. She had nothing to do with immunity. She could have been removed had the trial started earlier.

You can't convince me otherwise. You defending him to me is a waste of time. Be productive and find someone else to convince that Garland did the right thing. Have a nice day.

[Fiendish Thingy]

70. I am challenging misinformation, not trying to convince anyone

In the post truth era, that is a fool’s errand.

People will believe what feels “truthy” to them, as it requires the least amount of effort.

I only respond so that posts containing false information don’t go unchallenged, just in case someone cares to examine verifiable facts rather than hot takes.

[unblock]

2. Little about that matters now that Donnie is being returned to power

Fault now lies with the Supreme Court and congress and our institutions generally for failing to enforce the 14th amendment and leaving us with a tyrant in the Oval Office.

Garland was certainly a part of that by not going after more key players in the insurrection, Donnie himself in particular, though it's not at all clear that was a winnable case in practice even though we all know what happened.

But the supremes could have upheld Colorado refusing to put him on the ballot, e.g., which may have had a broader impact, and may have led to challenges in the electoral vote counting had he won anyway. Institutionally, we rolled over at that point.

FWIW, many of the j6ers have fully served their time already. So a good number have been punished. On the other hand, most probably think it was worth it now that they won by getting him back in power, albeit 4 years later than they were hoping.

Not a defense of garland, just noting that he's just one part of a collective failure.

[rampartd]

3. even if they have served their time

a pardon allows them to vote and open carry their firearms. two things i was hoping they would lose forever.

[unblock]

16. Any pardon of j6ers would be far worse for the signal it sends

Magats will become even more violent if they feel they have formal approval.

[rampartd]

20. absolutely true

and exactly the signal that trump is sending them.

"these are my people. they are not here to shoot me" trump

[bdamomma]

58. I agree

they will feel more emboldened to do more violence on law abiding citizens. Buckle up.

[brush]

29. We all saw chief insurrectionist trump's guilt on national TV.

We all saw his dereliction of duty to protect and defend the Constitution and the nation.

He's guilty as fuck. Whaddya mean you don't know if it was a winnable case?

[unblock]

38. Guess I don't have the faith in our institutions that I used to....

Sure, 50 years ago, it would have been an open and shut slam dunk home run.

Today?

Apparently judge merchan, who has taken no crap from Donnie, is going to sentence him to nothing. At least a jury found him guilty, so on paper he didn't get away with it. Or did he?

[brush]

45. He got away with everything using the appeal game...

him and his lawyers know putting a president in jail is a DOJ practice, not a Constitutional rule.

At least the judge is going through with the sentencing and TSF will be a convicted and SENTENCED felon on his inauguration day. Unless the appeal I'm sure his attorneys are working on as we speak halts the sentencing.

IMO it all goes back to Merrick the Meek not prosecuting the chief insurrectionist who tried to overthrow the government as his first order of business, long before the corrupt SCOTUS 6 got involved with this 'official act' bullshit immunity ruling.

Garland should've prosecuted and jailed trump long before that.

But as you said, our institutions don't seem to work like they used to.

[LeftInTX]

49. I have heard the judge is in the New York case, is gonna give him an "unconditional discharge"

Judge in Trump's hush money case expected to sentence him to 'unconditional discharge'

The judge in Donald Trump's New York criminal hush money case indicated Friday that he intends to sentence the president-elect to an "unconditional discharge" out of respect for the presidential immunity doctrine.

Judge Juan Merchan ordered Trump to appear, either in person or virtually, for sentencing on Jan. 10, which is 10 days before Trump's presidential inauguration.

Merchan, in his ruling Friday, called an unconditional discharge the "most viable solution to ensure finality and allow Defendant to pursue his appellate options."
https://abcnews.go.com/US/judge-trumps-hush-money-case-expected-sentence-unconditional/story?id=116706931

I don't know exactly what that means.....I think it means, he would still have "record" and that's all. No penalty.

So, there is plenty of blame to go around. It isn't "just Garland's fault".

The senate could have convicted him in 2021, but they didn't.
Congress could have ousted him today based on the 14th amendment, but they didn't
The Supreme Court could have ruled differently in the immunity case etc etc etc....

[brush]

51. Too bad. I was hoping for something stiffer from the judge...

Last edited Mon Jan 6, 2025, 08:10 PM - Edit history (1)

although I think we all suspected he wasn't going to put tump in jail. At least trump will have a record, which TSF seems to be ashamed of. Think of that, the liar whose been stiffing vendors, lying cheating, even from his brother's inheritance, grifting and committing crimes all his adult like, doesn't want to be know as having a criminal record.

The judge could've given him a slap on the wrist, two day house arrest before the inauguration...but no.

I imagine the pressure on the judge must have been tremendous to make this case disappear. And I'm sure threats were pouring in towards the judge and his family.

[LeftInTX]

55. He could have given him a hefty fine, that would be fair. But with a d/c no fine.

I still don't know whether he will have a record.

[bigtree]

4. what does Garland have to do with the election?

...the one which effectively ended his prosecutions?

This is nonsense, given that there's no law or anything preventing a convicted felon from running for president and getting elected and serving, even from jail.

The disconnect here is stunning though, complaining about the prosecutions Garland was actually responsible for, as if he was responsible for the judges who deliberately and calculatingly delayed the trials until we voted.

Why does anyone believe some timetable from DOJ would be enough to withstand the deliberate manipulation of appeals by successive courts packed with republican and Trump appointed judges and justices?

Are we just ignoring what the Supreme Court maga majority did, arbitrarily and deliberately thwarting the trials?

Why should we believe ANYTHING DOJ did had ANY influence on that collective scheming and scheduling to prevent accountability on any of the multi-felony indictments the man Garland appointed on his own volition brought forward, delivered by the DOJ with more than enough time to convict without the interference from the courts?

This also ignores the fact that it was Jack Smith who was charged with prosecuting Trump, not Garland's team, after taking charge of over 20 Garland prosecutors and integrating on the fly into what was described as a 'fast moving investigation' which had already gathered more evidence than Mueller at the point he was appointed.

Almost all of the evidence in the indictments was not only collected by Garland's team, it was successfully defended in myriad successive appeals courts against challenges by the perps which took years in most cases.

For instance, ALL of the records from phones seized by DOJ cited in the indictments were subpoenaed and collected in 2021 by Garland's prosecutors, like Giuliani's, Meadows', Clark's, Eastman's, and would not be made available by the courts to present to the grand juries until years later.

Moreover, most of those convictions were plea deals which would be undone by any pardon, opening the perps to the charges withheld in their deals with DOJ.

Question really is, what will republicans who elected Trump and support him do when he releases violent criminals convicted of assaulting police officers?

[totodeinhere]

11. I agree with most of your comment.

But not this. "Moreover, most of those convictions were plea deals which would be undone by any pardon, opening the perps to the charges withheld in their deals with DOJ."

Trump would have the power to issue blanket pardons which cover both previous convictions and future convictions in federal court. At least that is my reading of it.

[eppur_se_muova]

17. Hmmmm ... could charges be brought in DC local court ? Unlikely, I know ...

but if it makes the LEADERS of the Insurrection miserable, maybe it's worth looking into.

[totodeinhere]

22. That is a jurisdiction issue and I'm sorry I don't have information about that.

But you are right. He could not pardon them for state or local charges.

[tritsofme]

50. My understanding is that the president's pardon power includes DC crimes.

They are not a state, they are a federal district, giving the president power he wouldn’t have in any other state court.

[Oopsie Daisy]

12. Thank you.

[Kaleva]

5. Biden's opinion is the only one that matters on this

He picked Garland and kept him in the job.

You could call the WH, soon, and ask the question there

[Intractable]

27. Joe Biden says he made a mistake in choosing Merrick Garland, documented in the Guardian.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/dec/28/joe-biden-regrets-dropping-out-re-election

The US president has reportedly also said he made a mistake in choosing Merrick Garland as attorney general – reflecting that Garland, a former US appeals court judge, was slow to prosecute Donald Trump for his role in the 6 January 2021 insurrection while presiding over a justice department that aggressively prosecuted Biden’s son Hunter.

[Kaleva]

33. That isn't a direct quote

Irregardless, Biden saw fit to keep Garland as AG

[Intractable]

36. It has been widely publicized and not refuted.

https://www.google.com/search?&q=Biden+expressed+regret+over+merrick+garland

It would have been very bad publicity for Biden to replace Garland midterm. (A point that is quite obvious to most of us.)

Also, these regrets were expressed late into Biden's admin. This was said largely in hindsight.

[Kaleva]

40. If democracy was truly on the line, should Biden have been concerned about publicity?

[Intractable]

48. Every move Biden makes is under tremendous scrutiny.

Removing Garland would have cast more doubt on the DOJ and undermined the many convictions they achieved.

I think you are offering vaccuous, strawman arguments composed as throw-away lines, here and elsewhere on this thread.

[Kaleva]

60. So, Biden keeping Garland on as AG was the best choice for this nation then

If that's your claim, I don't have an argument with that.

[Intractable]

62. Again, Biden made these comments at the end of his administration.

Biden's are words of regret.

Garland sucked. Just like your arguments.

[Kaleva]

63. He is reported to have made comnents

We haven't heard directly from him. Regardless, in the end, he kept Garland as AG.

Biden is the only person in the country who had the authority to deal with Garland. Nobody here can. As Biden chose to keep him, all we can do is accept reality

[Intractable]

64. "all we can do is accept reality"

Unquestionably, that it true. But, we can learn from our mistakes.

Beginning with the reality that Biden regrets Garland, as reported -- and not refuted -- in many publications.

[Kaleva]

65. Biden will soon be out of the picture

There isn't much he can do with what he may have learned from his mistakes . As for us, we have to accept Biden's decisions.

I don't think there's anything we here can learn from this.

[canetoad]

7. Sour, Lemons?

[wanderer54]

8. The Jack Smith Report

Has he released the Jack Smith Report?

[Lemons UK]

14. That would be PARTISAN!!!!

[Think. Again.]

31. garland is working hard on that, very secretly.

[2naSalit]

15. Wasting...

Shitload of time and taxpayer funds.

[ancianita]

23. Yeah sure, on this kind of stuff...

Justice Department Announces Distribution of Over $1B to Compensate Victims of State Sponsored Terrorism -- January 6, 2025

Two Indian Chemical Companies and a Senior Executive Indicted for Distributing Fentanyl Precursor Chemicals -- January 6, 2025

Man Sentenced for Insider Trading Scheme -- January 6, 2025

Athira Pharma Inc. Agrees to Pay $4M to Settle False Claims Act Allegations Related to Scientific Research Misconduct Athira Pharma Inc. Agrees to Pay $4M to Settle False Claims Act Allegations Related to Scientific Research Misconduct -- January 6, 2025

Justice Department Reaches Agreement with Nevada to Ensure Children with Behavioral Health Disabilities Can Live in Their Homes and Communities January 3, 2025

Government Contractor Agrees to Pay $1M to Resolve False Claims Act Allegations for Submitting Fraudulent Bids on Prime Vendor Contracts -- January 3, 2025

Justice Department Reaches Proposed Consent Decree with Fulton County, Georgia, and Fulton County Sheriff’s Office to Resolve Claims that Conditions Inside the Fulton County Jail Violate the Constitution and Other Federal Laws -- January 3, 2025
--
Booz Allen Agrees to Pay $15.875M to Settle False Claims Act Allegations -- January 3, 2025

Pennsylvania Man Who Traveled to Lebanon and Syria with Goal of Joining Hizballah Indicted on Terrorism Offense and for Lying to FBI -- January 2, 2025

27153 adjudications in 45 months on the job.

https://www.justice.gov/news

[Emile]

34. You left out Hunter Biden's conviction.

Was that deliberately?

[ancianita]

46. You'll find it in the link among all the other cases I left out.

No, not deliberately. It didn't even occur to me. Why do you ask?
Are you insinuating some false equivalence about one case offsetting all the other 27,000+ cases? Just wondering.

[Emile]

47. Just curious.

[Emile]

18. We just have to exercise patience.

[ancianita]

25. That would be me.

As of today, 27,153 adjudications in only 45 months on the job.

Say what you haterade drinkers imagine the man himself to be lol. But.

The Garland DOJ itself -- biggest law firm in human history -- has done a massive, monumental job using our tax money to claw billions upon billions back in corporate fraud while enforcing both domestic and international justice.

Need scapegoats? Look to the maga 6 justice deniers on the SCOTUS.

https://www.justice.gov/news

[Think. Again.]

32. He put THAT MANY lesser cases in front of protecting our Democracy????

Wow, garland really is evil.

[Kaleva]

35. Would you consider Biden to be a facilitator of evil then?

Since he selected Garland and kept him in that position

[Think. Again.]

37. or Biden's mom for birthing him?

Or his grandmother for birthng her?

[Kaleva]

41. Isn't Biden Garland's superior?

[Think. Again.]

44. Nope, Biden has always been very clear he would not interfere with DOJ business.

[Emile]

39. I heard a bale of straw is expensive this time of year.

[Kaleva]

42. So the buck doesn't stop with Biden?

[Emile]

43. So you blame President Biden?

Back at you!

[Kaleva]

59. No. Biden decided to keep Garland and I support Biden

I trust Biden's judgement. You may or may not.

[Emile]

61. Biden said he would not interfere with DOJ business.

Therefore I BLAME GARLAND!

[gab13by13]

52. There is a huge flaw to Garland defenders

Saying it wouldn’t have mattered if Garland had acted immediately is so flawed, even preposterous.
Trump had lousy lawyers the first 2 years.
Garland allowed the National Archives to investigate Trump’s stolen documents. The NA had to go to Garland to ask for help.
When those documents were found at Mar-el-Loco Trump should have been arrested. Lash Patel and Mark Meadows should have been arrested for helping steal the documents.

No way in hell would the Supreme Court have intervened under those circumstances.
We can pretend nothing would have changed but that’s just playing pretend.

[Mike Nelson]

53. Most Democrats...

... have a tendency to "try to be fair" and take a "non-partisan" approach when assuming jobs where they are serving people of all political sides. Biden has often shown this quality, going back decades. Garland believed he was picked to show his strength in this area. Republicans have much, much less of this "let's try to be fair" quality. We really should consider evening it up.

[republianmushroom]

56. 47 months and counting, thank you Merrick the Meek.

for saving the convicted felons orange ass.

[VBNMW]

57. The strategy was to run against Drumpf

The Biden camp thought, like the Hillary camp, that an obvious clown would be easy to beat. One was wrong about that; the other only won because of just how bad a job a combo of Drumpf and COVID did to the public’s recent memory.

Drumpf started running for office before he lost and planted the seeds of DOJ mistrust, and the media ran with it.

Biden should have fired Garland the Federalist top contributor on DAY 1. But keeping him on was a favor for not getting on the USSC. That's how you lose.
They let Drumpf, an insurrectionist, keep his secret service detail on the taxpayers’ dime. The people you expect votes from don't like to see these sad triangulations to lose.

Don't tell the public he's a threat and not treat him as one every single damn day. Otherwise, it seems performative. Trying to separate MAGA from Republicans. Again, an idiotic plan which didn't work. Could have fired DeJoy, didn't. I can hear the whining now of how we can't behave the way THEY do! How's that working out?

People don't get up for WEAKNESS.

Biden should have fired Garland on DAY 1. Garland did his job as given to him, run out the clock so Biden could beat Drumpf at the ballot box AGAIN. It was the stupidest plan that was always going to fail.

[ThePartyThatListens]

69. Serious times calls for serious measures

Whoever doesn't have the stomach to do what needs to be done at this time should be considered the enemy.

To answer the question, Garland accomplished nothing.