Merrick Garland just protected the integrity of this investigation

[malaise]

from the ReTHUG vultures who are circling to protect the Slobfather.
Please proceed AG.
Yes we really want indictments urgently but we understand what you’re doing.
ReTHUGs cannot fire A Special Prosecutor. This is no Mueller operation and all your work to date is now safe from the Kevin McCarthy and Jim Jordan vultures.

[spanone]

1. K&R

[snowybirdie]

2. Seems to be

A lot of consternation here this afternoon. Glad to see a thoughtful description of what's going on. Happy weekend all.

[lame54]

3. So, you're saying this is going to take more than another 2 years?

[malaise]

7. Not at all

You will notice ReTHUGs are very upset at this announcement.

As the experts are pointing out, if he had no plan of following through, this appointment would never have been made. He has merely depoliticized the investigations.

[lame54]

26. They can't fire Garland so why the failsafe?

[ancianita]

61. This is to keep the INTEGRITY of the DOJ's suit clear. The House can impede Garland, now,

but it can't impede the Special Counsel. That's the failsafe.

[lame54]

83. Forgive my ignorance but...

I've read over and over on this board that the new house can kill the J6 comm but not touch the DOJ

Now I dont know what to think

As far as INTEGRITY
They're going to accuse the special counsel of everything they would have accused the DOJ of anyways
It's just noise - ignore it

[ancianita]

85. Not a problem.

We have discussed all that. And we KNOW that the Jan 6 Committee has turned over all its evidence to the DOJ.

After all the noise before and after Jan 3 convenes the 118th Congress, the DOJ will go on.

They'll run their mouths and Garland will run Main Justice and Smith will run the suit.

Right. We should all ignore all the Republicans' no-integrity noise.

[wnylib]

31. Thank you for pointing this out.

I an not a legal expert and I have no legal background.

But I could see the points that you have just made when I heard about the announcement. I just spent time on another thread trying to point out the value of this move to people who are indignant over "the delay."

[malaise]

33. Like everyone else I just want this criminal indicted

but I understand the situation.
The Slobfather jumped into the race to screw up the works with the help of a ReTHUG led House.

[BlackSkimmer]

39. But you said tfg would be indicted in September, remember?

Then I saw you saying something about Friday after Thanksgiving.

So, with the new prosecutor, would you like to readjust your predictions?

[malaise]

43. I'll say something when you show up on any thread by a DUer

and acknowledge that he/she was right - but that's not your modus operandi.
You run from those faster than Usain Bolt.
I thought we'd have indictments by now but I can wait. He will be indicted.

[BlackSkimmer]

57. Lol, you're not one who has been right, have you?

And I certainly have congratulated those who are right. I’d be happy to congratulate you if you were. Can you name one?

I dislike predictions here, because because they are so rarely correct.

You have predicted, if I remember correctly: Jimmy Carter’s imminent death, tfg dropping out of the 2016 race, tfg resigning, tfg dying, tfg diseases, tfg never finishing his term, Mueller finishing tfg, numerous republicans “going down”, and I’ll leave all the hurricane predictions out of this lol.

I’m waiting for your latest: that the Russian/Ukrainian war will be “suspended during FIFA World Cup.” Still banking on that?

Come on, man, admit when you get it wrong. When you consistently make wrong predictions, it’s kind of like that old story about the boy and the wolf, ya know?

[malaise]

67. ROFL

Ma taught me never to toot my own horn - see yah!

[fightforfreedom]

69. So true.

[Ray Bruns]

71. Repugs are always upset. They were going to scream if Garland appointed Jesus Christ.

This is nothing but another delay.

[TreasonousBastard]

10. What if if does?

[lame54]

27. If we lose the Whitehouse we lose the investigation

[fightforfreedom]

4. Thank you.

This does not slow down the investigations. It protects them.

[FeelingBlue]

5. I, for one,

am so proud of Merrick Garland, I feel like crying. What a brilliant man and a true patriot. So inspiring.

[wnylib]

36. +1,000,000

[uponit7771]

6. Love you like a play cousin but there will be **NOTHING** Americans can do to protect the integrity

... of the 13423 investigations against Trump in the eyes of MAGA.

They don't want what America is selling

[malaise]

73. LOL

LOL
This not for them- this is for the 66% of sane folks who prevented them from a massive mid-term win.

[uponit7771]

87. +1

[panader0]

8. That's what I think too. Of course, tfg will see this as politically motivated anyway.

But Jack Smith is NOT a part of the administration like Garland. Others here have said they think a SP
should have been appointed earlier, perhaps true, but as Garland said, tfg's announcement to run
played a part in this to be done asap.

[Sneederbunk]

9. Delay, delay, delay!

[H2O Man]

13. Might you consider

identifying what delay you think this represents?

[Sneederbunk]

17. Might you consider the prosecution of Trump and company?

[H2O Man]

20. Oh, I do so

frequently. I know enough, for exammple, about Jack Smith to know that this is a good thing.

I thought it was unlikely you could name a single "delay" that you claim -- without any evidence to support your claim. I thank you for confirming that.

[lostnfound]

21. How do you know enough about Jack Smith?

I lost my mind over this report that he was specifically criticized for rapidly closing investigations into several politicians including Tom Delay almost immediately upon taking the new role at Public Integrity.

Tom Delay crimed all day long from brushing his teeth in the morning to counting his gold at night.

But if you have different thoughts about him I’m all ears.

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/21/us/politics/21justice.html?searchResultPosition=1

[H2O Man]

25. Good question.

Two things ..... first, I've long followed the careers of numerous federal prosecutors and judges. This may suggest I live a boring life, I know, but it is something I find fascinating. It does not, I'll admit, make that section of my library particularly interesting to anyone else. Indeed, as my children tell me, the things I find fascinating are of zero interest to the vast majority of people. I prefer to consider a person's career, including both good and bad, and especially how they operate in a team context.

Second, I also find the international courts to be of great interest. Jack has had two cycles of serving in that capacity. Both were impressive, at least to me.

I agree that Delay was slime. From what I know of Jack's experience in his role at Public Integrity, group decisions were based largely on if the amount of evidence on hand was believed to meet the high threshhold necessary to indict.

[malaise]

37. Thanks for this

[H2O Man]

46. Mid-February.

We'll all be happy then, I suspect.

[malaise]

49. Would love it earlier

but I can wait

[H2O Man]

51. Me, too.

But I've thought for some time it will be mid-February.

[Treefrog]

78. I am making a note of this.

My money is on nope.

[Mr.Bill]

79. You sure he would do it that close

to Ground Hog Day?

[ancianita]

65. Well said. Thank you for your 'boring' service. People need this kind of attention paid

to good DOJ prosecutors.

[H2O Man]

70. I wish that

federal trials were televised. I love watching talented lawyers at work. I think that most people here will be satisfied with Jack Smith's work in 2023. I understand those who have been disappointed with the outcomes of other investigations. But the DOJ policy when Mr. Mueller was looking into Trump restricted the prosecution of a sitting president. Trump is in a much higher risk now.

Mr. Mueller did make clear that, because of the DOJ policy, it needed to be Congress taking action. Obviously, the republican party would not allow any meaningful look at the facts that the Mueller Report documented. I'd add that Mr. Mueller did prosecute a significant number of people.

Patrick Fitzgerald did a great job of prosecuting Lewis Libby, but Libby would not turn over. Hence, Mr. Fitzgerald said that Congress needed to investigate Cheney.

[ancianita]

75. I do, too.

But we'll definitely see RW media lay out every minute of the Republican drama.

Corporate media want this kind of horse race coverage that validates the corporate capture of government agenda.

I take heart that we have one powerful member: besides the old guard leadership of Pelosi & Clyburn --
Danny Goldman, former prosecutor from the Southern District of NY, and Lead Counsel in the House's impeachment hearings. Don't think he won't be watching what House bagmen do over the next two years. He'll be letting Pelosi and new Speaker Hakeem Jeffries know what they're up to.

Beyond that, the reality we need to accept is the Republican bag man leadership's job. It's to...
-- pack campaign bs stuff away, and start their content cycle;
-- start their budget bill hostage dramas to enrich their owner/donors;
-- spread congressional drama and FUD about Democratic issues;
-- create impeachment/investigation drama against Democrats and the DOJ in Congress.

That's all they exist to do. They have chosen that.
They're not about governing for the people, just about capturing governmental powers/money for their owner/donors.

Toward that end, Rule of law is their ruse.

Behind the corporate capture of this government are the dark money oligarchs who don't want democracy.
Between them and us is
-- their owned filter of our TVs, and MSM digital media,
-- their political bag men, messengers paid to validate that stuff above.

As you exemplify here, we all need to just stay calm and clear, and not let the fascist bullshit get us down.

[MiHale]

92. Thank you, boring is good ...

peoples anxiety levels would plummet if they were boring for a day.
Only my opinion.

[H2O Man]

93. Thanks!

[lostnfound]

95. I appreciated this response, but son and I got COVID which interrupted coherent thought

For a week.. now, better, mostly.
I wonder have you seen many prosecutions under him? It did not surprise me to see that there were multiple GOP congressmen under investigation whose cases got dropped because that seems to be the norm I’ve come to expect. I prefer not to be so cynical.

[wnylib]

40. A prosecutor who has personal knowledge of

Jack Smith's experience and qualifications, as well as of the prosecutorial process, said in an NPR interview that a grand jury has already been examining evidence and is up to par on it. The groundwork has been laid in the Garland investigation. So the special prosecutor should be able to get familiar with the case with minimal delay.

[H2O Man]

42. Right.

[fightforfreedom]

72. That's what I have trying to explain to people. Some people won't listen.

Everything is already in place. Smith basically just has to be briefed. That should not take very long. The evidence, the prosecutors, investigators, are all in place.

[wnylib]

82. Some people don't want to believe

that there is no delay, no ditching of the cases against Trump, or that Garland doesn't have the will or intention to follow through.

I can't know their reasons for sure, but a few possibilities come to mind. Some people use hard fast skepticism to protect themselves from believing anything. Some are just negatively oriented and are genuinely disappointed with good news or with hope that robs them of their identification with negativity. Some are clinically depressed and see the worst side of everything.

A few might be trolls in Dem clothing, pushing views they want us to take.

Some genuinely don't see the upside of this appointment.

I just heard a news broadcast that mentioned the intention of R's in the House to flood the Biden administration with subpoenas in order to obstruct their ability to operate. Garland's name was specifically brought up as a target. That would interfere with Garland's investigations and preparations for indictments. But, not if the cases are being handled by a special prosecutor.

[H2O Man]

11. Recommended.

Thank you for understanding and explaining this to those who don't get it.

[yorkster]

12. Thank you, Malaise.

"protected the integrity of this investigation" really grabbed my attention.
Well said.

[SoCalDavidS]

14. Laurence Tribe & Glenn Kirschner Disagree With You

They were both adamant that a Special Prosecutor would be a HUGE mistake.

[wnylib]

45. And yet, even they can be mistaken, too.

I am confident that Garland knows what he is doing.

[LakeArenal]

62. Yes. !!

[wnylib]

64. Tribe tweeted that Smith is a good choice.

[Cha]

16. Excellent POINTS.. TY! nt

[lostnfound]

18. Gave it to a man experienced in sweeping Republican scandals under the rug

Some of the worst corrupt GOP politicians at the time all let off the hook although Delay ended up prosecuted in Texas
https://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/21/us/politics/21justice.html?searchResultPosition=1

[wnylib]

47. Can't read the link.

[BumRushDaShow]

94. Here is a no paywall version

No paywall

Since this article from December 20, 2010 about investigations of a pile of (mostly GOP) congressmen is getting flung around, here is more context from it that isn't being mentioned -

Justice Dept. Is Criticized as Corruption Cases Close

By Charlie Savage

Dec. 20, 2010

(snip)

Mr. Smith took over the section six months ago. Before that, he helped prosecute police officers in the Abner Louima police brutality case in New York and investigated war crimes for the International Criminal Court. One partial explanation behind the flurry of closings was the timing of Mr. Smith’s arrival. One of his first steps, he said, was to review every open case and push for a conclusion one way or the other, saying it was not fair to let inquiries linger unnecessarily.

Mr. Breuer said, “There is no question that if we thought a case was not going where it needed to, because the facts were what they were and it was too old, that we should make the tough decision and move on.” Both officials also said that whether the subject of an investigation was a member of Congress made no difference to their evaluations of cases.

That assertion drew some skepticism. “I don’t think there is any question that the decision to charge a sitting member of Congress is going to get far more scrutiny and it’s going to be agonized over by a lot more people,” said Peter Zeidenberg, a former public integrity prosecutor.

Mr. Zeidenberg also said prosecuting lawmakers had become more difficult in recent years because of federal court rulings. They narrowed what counts as “honest services fraud” or an “official act” for the purposes of a bribery charge, and banned certain searches that could expose legislative information protected by the Constitution’s “speech and debate” clause, he said.

(snip)

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/21/us/politics/21justice.html

Sort of sounds like when he was assigned to that section, he went in with an approach of "Shit or get off the pot".

[wnylib]

48. Here's Smith's background. Pretty impressive.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Smith_(lawyer)

[brer cat]

19. K&R

[Fiendish Thingy]

22. Instead of comparing Smith to Meuller, he should be compared to Durham

While Durham’s investigation only produced a single charge against a single defendant, he was unimpeded in his prosecution by the change in administrations, or any other factors because of the way his SC orders were written.

[spanone]

29. ⇧⇧⇧⇧⇧THIS⇧⇧⇧⇧⇧

[malaise]

38. Correct

[Just A Box Of Rain]

23. This is a cause for celebrations.

[JCMach1]

24. No, put it out to pasture on the back 40...

[BlackSkimmer]

60. Yup. nt

[mcar]

28. Kick!

[calimary]

30. Well, I hope you're right.

[ET Awful]

32. Exactly my thoughts. He will continue after control of the House changes

regardless of what Republicans do to thwart or dissolve the committe.

Would I like to see immediate indictments? Sure.

Would I like to insure that investigation continues regardless of a change of House control? Even more sure.

[Emile]

35. Merrick Garland just blew smoke out of his ass!

Justice delayed

[Ray Bruns]

74. Agreed. He needs to shit or get off the pot.

[Emile]

86. LOL

[BlackSkimmer]

41. Bookmarked.

I’ve got an awful lot of bookmarks “in the bank.”

[Lucinda]

50. ❤️ ✿❧🌿❧✿ ❤️

[LakeArenal]

52. I agree. so, thanks for taking the dubbing for support of Garland.

[malaise]

55. Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaah

[BlackSkimmer]

58. "Dubbing?"

Do you mean “drubbing?”

Oh dear.

[ancianita]

53. Yes he did.

[jerseyjim]

54. And, they want to investigate Biden for...

no reason other than to have revenge. How dare we investigate their criminal president.

[malaise]

56. Hard to process

and they insist they are the law and order party

[Silent3]

59. Years from now, when the pursuit of justice is abandoned, we'll cherish that "integrity" so much!

Odd how "integrity" and "responsibility shifting" and "ass-covering" often look so much alike.

[Earth Bound Misfit]

63. You are correct.

[Treefrog]

66. I am confused why he did not do this at the start?

I think it was even discussed here, was it not?

[wryter2000]

76. I'm not sure logic is permitted here

Outrage is the preferred approach

[iemanja]

77. Can't they defund him?

Or not reauthorize funding?

[wishstar]

81. Repub House cannot defund or undermine SC the way they could have done oversight of Garland alone

Appointment of SC over these 2 investigations secures its budget and prevents House oversight from subjecting Garland and FBI investigators to demands to testify about the Jan 6 and Mar a Lago probes.

House can still delve into DOJ's prosecutions and convictions of the Jan 6 Insurrectionists though since those cases of people present at Capitol are excluded from SC assignment according to Garland today.

[Evolve Dammit]

80. Lots of former DOJ folks disagree. Neal K., Jill WB, etc. I hope you're right.

[LexVegas]

84. ...

Link to tweet

?t=ts5v8QRSWNE3Bb_5ebGzmg&s=19

[nightwing1240]

88. Let's see how we all feel in about 6 months from now

A lot of time has already been wasted. Forgive me for being cynical regarding AG Garland but I'll believe it when I see it and the see it is indictment of tRump.

[Marius25]

89. I'm not sure how this will change anything

Republicans will still go after the investigation, Garland, and the Special Counsel.

[Emile]

90. and Republicans will continue to call Democrats are weak on crime.

[malthaussen]

91. DJT shoul already be indicted in the documents case.

I fail to see how doing so would have compromised the J6 investigation. So in this I disagree with Mr Garland's strategy.

I still can't help thinking in the back of my mind that Mr Garland hopes Mr Trump will skip the country, thus rendering any investigation moot. His desire to keep the DoJ "apolitical" ends up putting politics over justice, IMO. By keeping it "apolitical," he makes it political. It is a vain hope that any investigation of this magnitude, and featuring people in these positions, could ever be "apolitical," just as it is a vain hope that any subsequent trial (should one occur) can be impartial. In short, I think Mr Garland is being unrealistic.

The Special Prosecutor is an okay move. But again, I note how DoJ carefully waited until after the elections to make the appointment. Justice is clearly taking a back seat to politics, and moreover, it seems the politics are generally favoring the GOP and not the Democrats (to say nothing of serving the country). Again, I think the DoJ and I evaluate things differently. Which is, of course, why they get the big bucks.

-- Mal