Let's put someone in there who will get the job done!  Get the varmints who have scurried from the drain'ed swamp.

I'm starting to wonder about him.  

I don’t think the executive branch likes to put actions of the executive branch under the microscope regardless of who is in office. Remember when a bunch of people thought Obama’s DOJ was going to bring members of the Bush administration up on charges of war crimes? That turned into a whole lot of nothing. Meet the new boss

 

**would love to be wrong

Not sure why y’all thought a moderate would go full guns blazing here. As Saw said it’s still an executive branch office. Now maybe if Congress actually makes a criminal referral then the DOJ will face a lot of pressure and could cave. Until then expecting the DOJ to make a move on a former president is folly 

15 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Not sure why y’all thought a moderate would go full guns blazing here. As Saw said it’s still an executive branch office. Now maybe if Congress actually makes a criminal referral then the DOJ will face a lot of pressure and could cave. Until then expecting the DOJ to make a move on a former president is folly 

Well, first off, a top-down investigation really is kind of rare.  AGs are dependent on the FBI and the local USAs to investigate and indict.

If it's something the AG is barking about, then it is probably  more political theater than a serious investigation, and the serious investigating will go on locally, anyway.  One exception being Special Counsel appointments.

I don't think Garland is the type to bluster and BS ahead of any investigation or prosecution.  That doesn't mean he doesn't have people on it.

Yes, a criminal referral from congress might help.  But the USA in D DC I am sure is striving to make a case through all the lower-level prosecutions.  But they do have to get through all the Jenna Ryans first.

32 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Not sure why y’all thought a moderate would go full guns blazing here.

I think that is fair.  But one would think that the events of Jan. 6 might have moved the bar just a tad.

30 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Not sure why y’all thought a moderate would go full guns blazing here. As Saw said it’s still an executive branch office. Now maybe if Congress actually makes a criminal referral then the DOJ will face a lot of pressure and could cave. Until then expecting the DOJ to make a move on a former president is folly 

Moderate meaning cautious, que no? It’s my opinion that moderates are angry at the delay in DOJ action on the politicians, and those in the military, involved in the 1/6 attack. I know I am.

Biden and his entire administration are acting like a bunch of fucking pussies. Trump and his squad are just gonna refuse to cooperate and everyone stands around shrugging their shoulders like "what can we do". It's a fucking joke.

Is he worried about re-election chances, lulz. 

I’m willing to give him the space to conduct the necessary investigations in such a manner that he won’t be accused of caving to political pressure. Ultimately, I think those of us who want to see Trump and his conspirators brought to justice won’t be disappointed.

12 minutes ago, Blotto said:

Biden and his entire administration are acting like a bunch of fucking pussies. Trump and his squad are just gonna refuse to cooperate and everyone stands around shrugging their shoulders like "what can we do". It's a fucking joke.

Is he worried about re-election chances, lulz. 

Well, the congress is not the Biden Administration.

And, we have no idea what's going on internally at DOJ.  Once a grand jury is convened on this shit, there's no such thing as "cooperation."  You get indicted.

Unlike Trump, a real administration doesn't go around yelling about their political enemies.  If they have done crimes, they get prosecuted and no one usually knows the difference until indictments are filed.

Edited December 28, 20214 yr by TwiceHorn

36 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, the congress is not the Biden Administration.

And, we have no idea what's going on internally at DOJ.  Once a grand jury is convened on this shit, there's no such thing as "cooperation."  You get indicted.

Unlike Trump, a real administration doesn't go around yelling about their political enemies.  If they have done crimes, they get prosecuted and no one usually knows the difference until indictments are filed.

Without disagreeing, grand juries ought already be doing their thing. After failing the people when tasked with evaluating the constitutionality of Rumpian acts, such as diverting funds allocated by Congress, (which the political hacks allowed to continue,) the Justice Department needs to reassure the people it is able to meet its obligations.

*Merrick

I'm sure some people are getting talked to off the record. Sternly and whatnot.

1 hour ago, Willfully Horn said:

Without disagreeing, grand juries ought already be doing their thing. After failing the people when tasked with evaluating the constitutionality of Rumpian acts, such as diverting funds allocated by Congress, (which the political hacks allowed to continue,) the Justice Department needs to reassure the people it is able to meet its obligations.

Well, I am sure that the grand juries in DC that are indicting the insurrectionists have some bigger fish in their sights.

Grand juries are secret, you know.

And, unlike the congress, the DOJ is going to make pretty sure they convict when they indict.

As alluded to previously, during the Trump administration, with Mueller, the impeachments, and all, we got sort of accustomed to public investigations.   That's not the way this stuff goes down, normally.

There’s plenty of excellent reasons to keep grand jury investigations secret. And I agree with @Satchel, though a little room to operate is stretching into more than enough room to operate.

2 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

*Merrick

Merrimac and Minataur

1 hour ago, tantric superman said:

Merrimac and Minataur

Monitor.

 

I'm very much less than impressed with Garland's DOJ so far. There's keeping things appropriately secret, and there's not communicating at all with the American people about the investigations into a fucking coup attempt, and Garland's DOJ has been nearly completely silent. I'm not sure we've ever had an AG who communicated so little to the American people. 

Shoulda been Doug Jones, damnit.

16 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Shoulda been Doug Jones, damnit.

That I can agree with

3 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

That I can agree with

I don’t think he would have been anymore forthcoming. Bill Barr’s mugging before the TV cameras should not be the standard for the AG.

22 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

I'm very much less than impressed with Garland's DOJ so far. There's keeping things appropriately secret, and there's not communicating at all with the American people about the investigations into a fucking coup attempt, and Garland's DOJ has been nearly completely silent. I'm not sure we've ever had an AG who communicated so little to the American people. 

Who does he think he is? Robert Mueller?

5 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Who does he think he is? Robert Mueller?

With respect to both Mueller and Garland (and anyone else charged with exposing this nonsense), why is it so fucking hard?  We ALL see what happened and what is happening.  I'm not asking for every single malfeasance to be prosecuted (god knows how long that would even take), but at the VERY least, why can't we hold the big players responsible?  I honestly don't understand.  If they can get away with this, we are truly already an oligarchy.

22 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

Shoulda been Doug Jones, damnit.

who?  Doug Jones!

and yep, Merrick like the dog food.  that's all our boys eat.

Do any of you really think a grand jury that could be seated without a significant number of Trumpers on it?

44 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

If they can get away with this, we are truly already an oligarchy.

On 12/27/2021 at 11:29 PM, tantric superman said:

Vregania and Minataur

ffiy cb speling is pourtant.

1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

With respect to both Mueller and Garland (and anyone else charged with exposing this nonsense), why is it so fucking hard?  We ALL see what happened and what is happening.  I'm not asking for every single malfeasance to be prosecuted (god knows how long that would even take), but at the VERY least, why can't we hold the big players responsible?  I honestly don't understand.  If they can get away with this, we are truly already an oligarchy.

Feels like all those months just knowing that Mueller was documenting mountains of evidence and keeping all those sealed indictments dry until the big moment. And then *popcorn fart*, in no small part due to Barr's actions to take over the narrative. LIke the coaching search where the AD is supposedly throwing up smoke screens and misdirection, only to hire someone with a .500 record. Certainly different circumstances, but we've seen this movie.

Edited December 29, 20214 yr by retread

1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

With respect to both Mueller and Garland (and anyone else charged with exposing this nonsense), why is it so fucking hard?  We ALL see what happened and what is happening.  I'm not asking for every single malfeasance to be prosecuted (god knows how long that would even take), but at the VERY least, why can't we hold the big players responsible?  I honestly don't understand.  If they can get away with this, we are truly already an oligarchy.

In A Very Stable Genius by Philip Rucker and Carol Leonnig, in the chapter about “The Report,” they discuss Bill Barr’s mischaracterization of Mueller’s findings to the American people. Members of Mueller’s team, describing his reaction, said “he looked as if he’d been slapped.”

It later goes on to say:

Quote

What had once been Trump’s defiant mantra of “No collusion! No obstruction!” instantly became a rallying cry for his reelection, lines he and his surrogates repeated on every media platform. Never mind what the Mueller team actually had found. Trump was winning the spin war.

Mueller had himself to blame for the mischaracterization of his work, in that he was a by-the-book creature of bureaucratic norms miscast for the Trump era, a period of profound polarization, fraying institutions, and news delivered like an IV to the public, in fits and spurts.

“We’re the Twitter society,” said Frank Figliuzzi, a former Mueller colleague at the FBI. “We’re the digital streaming society. We’re the scan-the-headlines-to-get-some-news society. That’s not Mueller. That’s not a four-hundred-page report. Somebody’s got to show their face on a TV screen and scream and yell. What many of us have asked is, in the age of Trump, as steadfast as Mueller’s been to the principles of democracy that got us here, has Mueller served us well with this style? The answer is no.”

Mueller got played. He assumed the other side was playing by the same rules he was. But the game had passed him by. Among other things, he never should’ve agreed to let Trump respond to questions in writing, his answers carefully crafted by his lawyers. And he should’ve stated in his report that charges were warranted and would’ve been brought against anyone who wasn’t the sitting president. 

27 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

And he should’ve stated in his report that charges were warranted and would’ve been brought against anyone who wasn’t the sitting president. 

Worse, his own report contradicts itself, and his testimony asserted things not in the report.

merit?

26 minutes ago, elfenix said:

merit?

Just letting that slide I guess. 

4 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

With respect to both Mueller and Garland (and anyone else charged with exposing this nonsense), why is it so fucking hard?  We ALL see what happened and what is happening.  I'm not asking for every single malfeasance to be prosecuted (god knows how long that would even take), but at the VERY least, why can't we hold the big players responsible?  I honestly don't understand.  If they can get away with this, we are truly already an oligarchy.

Seeing what happened, or what you think happened is not evidence, particularly for those who aren't on video, meaning the higher-ups like Trump.  "Knowing damn well" what Trump and other did is not a substitute for evidence when you have to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.

It hasn't been a year yet since the insurrection.  Criminal investigations take time.

Just because it's not happening before your 24-hour-news-cycle eyes doesn't mean it's not happening.

I think you can be reasonably assured that if the DOJ brings charges against Trump or his top men, that they aren't going to be a wet fart like the impeachments.  If they take a shot at the "king" they will not miss, or not by much.

Garland doesn't need to talk about this to the public.  The DOJ has brought 700 fucking prosecutions.   Seven.  Fucking.  Hundred.  That's the most massive prosecution of our time, maybe in our history.

And you had better believe that federal prosecutors are extremely skilled at investigation by prosecution, that is, getting little guys to roll over on progressively bigger guys.

Also, I'm pretty sure making some sort of statement about January 6 beyond what he has said, is viewed by the OAG as vulnerable to being accused of being partisan political, and that is the absolute last thing they want.  They're going to do their talking by indictment.

Edited December 29, 20214 yr by TwiceHorn

55 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Seeing what happened, or what you think happened is not evidence, particularly for those who aren't on video, meaning the higher-ups like Trump.  "Knowing damn well" what Trump and other did is not a substitute for evidence when you have to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.

It hasn't been a year yet since the insurrection.  Criminal investigations take time.

Just because it's not happening before your 24-hour-news-cycle eyes doesn't mean it's not happening.

I think you can be reasonably assured that if the DOJ brings charges against Trump or his top men, that they aren't going to be a wet fart like the impeachments.  If they take a shot at the "king" they will not miss, or not by much.

Garland doesn't need to talk about this to the public.  The DOJ has brought 700 fucking prosecutions.   Seven.  Fucking.  Hundred.  That's the most massive prosecution of our time, maybe in our history.

And you had better believe that federal prosecutors are extremely skilled at investigation by prosecution, that is, getting little guys to roll over on progressively bigger guys.

Also, I'm pretty sure making some sort of statement about January 6 beyond what he has said, is viewed by the OAG as vulnerable to being accused of being partisan political, and that is the absolute last thing they want.  They're going to do their talking by indictment.

This makes a whole lotta sense

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Just because it's not happening one year later doesn't mean it's not happening

Fifm

A question. Some of the crimes we saw happen carry a punishment that includes a ban from holding office, and there apparently is a DOJ policy of no public statements on investigations when elections draw near. Any thoughts on whether there effectively is an expiration date, or even a pause, on indictments in these cases, and if so, when that might be?

Edited December 29, 20214 yr by Willfully Horn

21 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

Fifm

A question. Some of the crimes we saw happen carry a punishment that includes a ban from holding office, and there apparently is a DOJ policy of no public statements on investigations when elections draw near. Any thoughts on whether there effectively is an expiration date, or even a pause, on indictments in these cases, and if so, when that might be?

That policy is just a policy and carries not legal weight. Just ask James Comey

3 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

That policy is just a policy and carries not legal weight. Just ask James Comey

Who, more than anyone else, is responsible for Trump’s election.

4 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

That policy is just a policy and carries not legal weight. Just ask James Comey

Yeah, I was going to say the policy was to protect Republican candidates, but my concern is that MG is a moderate. Which I take to mean cautious and unwilling to get too close to any line.

It's not apples to apples by any means but the longer this drags out, the more we start to seem like Q-Nuts, saying any day now there will be a thousand indictments unsealed and mass arrests of the high and mighty. Of course in this case it has to do with those people encouraging sedition on TV, and not sacrificing babies in pizza parlor sex dungeons, but I don't like the feeling of being in this similar state of anticipation for an Uncloudy Day that may very well never come....Meanwhile we grasp at tea leaves (to boldly mix metaphors) to keep our morale up while these seditionists continue to operate openly in DC. 

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Seeing what happened, or what you think happened is not evidence, particularly for those who aren't on video, meaning the higher-ups like Trump.  "Knowing damn well" what Trump and other did is not a substitute for evidence when you have to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.

It hasn't been a year yet since the insurrection.  Criminal investigations take time.

Just because it's not happening before your 24-hour-news-cycle eyes doesn't mean it's not happening.

I think you can be reasonably assured that if the DOJ brings charges against Trump or his top men, that they aren't going to be a wet fart like the impeachments.  If they take a shot at the "king" they will not miss, or not by much.

Garland doesn't need to talk about this to the public.  The DOJ has brought 700 fucking prosecutions.   Seven.  Fucking.  Hundred.  That's the most massive prosecution of our time, maybe in our history.

And you had better believe that federal prosecutors are extremely skilled at investigation by prosecution, that is, getting little guys to roll over on progressively bigger guys.

Also, I'm pretty sure making some sort of statement about January 6 beyond what he has said, is viewed by the OAG as vulnerable to being accused of being partisan political, and that is the absolute last thing they want.  They're going to do their talking by indictment.

31 minutes ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

It's not apples to apples by any means but the longer this drags out, the more we start to seem like Q-Nuts, saying any day now there will be a thousand indictments unsealed and mass arrests of the high and mighty. Of course in this case it has to do with those people encouraging sedition on TV, and not sacrificing babies in pizza parlor sex dungeons, but I don't like the feeling of being in this similar state of anticipation for an Uncloudy Day that may very well never come....Meanwhile we grasp at tea leaves (to boldly mix metaphors) to keep our morale up while these seditionists continue to operate openly in DC. 

Pizza Parlor Sex Dungeon is my new band name.

10 minutes ago, RDCanecutter said:

Pizza Parlor Sex Dungeon is my new band name.

Can my new band Comet Ping Pong and Pedophilia, LLC open for you guys?  We rock, hard.

3 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Can my new band Comet Ping Pong and Pedophilia, LLC open for you guys?  We rock, hard.

I think all our fans will be there, so long as the concert is 501 feet away from a school.

Wait 'til you hear our single, "Your Serve, Little Boy".

51 minutes ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

It's not apples to apples by any means but the longer this drags out, the more we start to seem like Q-Nuts, saying any day now there will be a thousand indictments unsealed and mass arrests of the high and mighty. Of course in this case it has to do with those people encouraging sedition on TV, and not sacrificing babies in pizza parlor sex dungeons, but I don't like the feeling of being in this similar state of anticipation for an Uncloudy Day that may very well never come....Meanwhile we grasp at tea leaves (to boldly mix metaphors) to keep our morale up while these seditionists continue to operate openly in DC. 

This.

It ain't happening, it never was happening.  Our laws are purposefully written with GAPING holes for the wealthy and powerful to waltz right through.  We foolishly counted on some sort of "gentlemen's agreement" that the gaping hole would not be overly abused.

That gaping hole has now been abused more than South Austin's mom's.  It will only get worse.

Personally, I’m waiting for Brisket to get so despondent that he comes back around to a cheerful, jovial version of himself. 

2 hours ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

It's not apples to apples by any means but the longer this drags out, the more we start to seem like Q-Nuts, saying any day now there will be a thousand indictments unsealed and mass arrests of the high and mighty. Of course in this case it has to do with those people encouraging sedition on TV, and not sacrificing babies in pizza parlor sex dungeons, but I don't like the feeling of being in this similar state of anticipation for an Uncloudy Day that may very well never come....Meanwhile we grasp at tea leaves (to boldly mix metaphors) to keep our morale up while these seditionists continue to operate openly in DC. 

You all are Q-nuts.  Different.  But same.  And neither you or the Q-nuts can reach self-diagnosis of your insanity.  But your post did get close.  

2 hours ago, Satchel said:

Who, more than anyone else, is responsible for Trump’s election.

Hillary Clinton 

14 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

You all are Q-nuts.  Different.  But same.  And neither you or the Q-nuts can reach self-diagnosis of your insanity.  But your post did get close.  

You’re saying the Capitol wasn’t attacked by a mob instigated by a President while he also lied about a stolen election? 
 

Are you just lobbing insults?