There was some controversy when Obama nominated him for Supreme Court- some Libs felt he was really conservative. I guess we see that Obama had poor judgement. Biden needs to kick this old douche to the curb. He sucks . And damn. Lisa Monaco looked abjectly miserable at the press conference last week. I think she knows he's full of shit.
|by Anonymous||reply 1||June 17, 2021 4:47 AM
He was not Obama’s first choice; he was the candidate that Obama thought McConnell would approve.
|by Anonymous||reply 2||June 17, 2021 4:53 AM
Oh so he was obamas bend over and present hole candidate. Now it makes more sense. Now it makes even more sense to replace him before it gets ugly or more harm is done.
|by Anonymous||reply 3||June 17, 2021 8:25 AM
What is it with Dems hiring all these textbook jellyfish? The GOP can basically elect anyone short of Satan himself and it’s fine, and we put Mr Whipple focusing on who squeezed the Charmin in the AG role.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||June 17, 2021 8:34 AM
They will nominate me, R4.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||June 17, 2021 10:34 AM
Now that Biden is hitting his stride, he needs to replace all the fail-safe Obama era appointees. Let's say a gentle push, by year end?
|by Anonymous||reply 6||June 17, 2021 10:03 PM
"The principle that no one is above the law is not self-enforcing. Justice can only be served if law enforcement agencies are willing to pursue justice against anyone who violates the law--regardless of the office they hold. There is no greater threat to the rule of law than failing to hold accountable the most powerful among us," he wrote before adding, "Neither Mueller nor Barr made a final decision as to whether Trump should be prosecuted for obstruction of justice because DOJ policy precluded that outcome as long as he was president. Now that Trump is no longer president, the department needs to decide whether he will be prosecuted, and Attorney General Merrick Garland should let the American people know how that decision will be made. "
|by Anonymous||reply 7||June 18, 2021 3:32 PM
He is a milquetoast that is what I see when I see Merrick Garland. What a queenie name too.
|by Anonymous||reply 8||June 18, 2021 3:44 PM
Are we seeing a Sinema/Manchin situation here? Because I'm convinced they're both compromised or "controlled opposition". Is Garland on the Pee Anthology?
|by Anonymous||reply 9||June 18, 2021 4:35 PM
AG should've been (should be) Sally Yates.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||June 18, 2021 5:01 PM
Agreed. Poetic Justice has been served. Now it's time for action and yes, I do believe Garland sympathizes with the Republicans.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||June 18, 2021 5:03 PM
Not sure I agree that Garland wasn’t his first choice. Obama is a pretty conservative Democrat.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||June 18, 2021 5:03 PM
I feel like this is Obama 2.0 where we don’t want to ruffle feathers and let bygones be bygones in the name of normalcy— and in the spirit of bipartisanship—while these motherfuckers plan to nothing but obstruct and grift.
We need the political version of this, not this useless DC bureaucrat who thinks it’s business as usual. Stop fucking around.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||June 19, 2021 10:17 PM
I wonder if Garland is being threatened by someone.....
|by Anonymous||reply 14||June 19, 2021 10:19 PM
He needs to be replaced right away. Fire his ass.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||June 23, 2021 9:01 AM
Merrick Garland is the best thing that ever happened to Trump.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||June 23, 2021 9:43 AM
Milquetoast is the best description for Garland. But so is Biden and Schumer. Can we get rid of Garland and replace him with Sally Yates? Can we please replace Schumer with Amy Klobuchar? But you see, Biden himself is also a milquetoast and probably a closet sexist because of White Male Privilege and believes females can’t be tough and are too emotional.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||June 23, 2021 11:38 AM
Apparently Garland spent like 25 years just hearing administrative law cases which is why he’s such a poindexter AG. He’s not really the man for this job at this time.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||June 23, 2021 11:54 AM
So why did he get the job?
|by Anonymous||reply 19||June 27, 2021 4:57 PM
Bill Clinton was right when he observed about Americans "When Americans are feeling insecure, they prefer wrong and strong, rather than weak and right." He said that in the context of speaking about America's wars with foriegn countries.
Now, America is at war with itself.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||June 27, 2021 5:11 PM
“probably a closet sexist because of White Male Privilege “
Perfect example of the kind of crappy knee jerk thinking that gets Republicans elected.
|by Anonymous||reply 21||June 27, 2021 5:22 PM
Will Garland and DOJ investigate the federal law fraud coming out of the Weisselberg indictment?
|by Anonymous||reply 22||July 1, 2021 9:45 PM
Does he still have his job. Please tell me he’s gone.
|by Anonymous||reply 23||July 13, 2021 11:35 PM
Pretty hilarious to see what utter duds people like Garland and Mueller really are. They probably play golf with Kavanaugh and Grover Norquist.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||July 14, 2021 12:10 AM
How polite Democrats are...giving him two weeks to hand it over. Just fucking take it now.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||July 14, 2021 12:29 AM
On Monday night, there was a brief moment of serious consternation at the news that the Department of Justice (DOJ), under Attorney General Merrick Garland, had declined to prosecute former Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross for lying to Congress after the department's Inspector General forwarded a serious referral presenting evidence that Ross had lied. The next day, the Associated Press, which published the report, issued a correction to say that it was actually the William Barr Justice Department that had issued the declination, not Garland which was a welcome relief for those who have been growing more and more concerned about whether there will be any real accountability for the Trump administration's lawlessness.
|by Anonymous||reply 26||July 21, 2021 4:21 PM
Thank you for not spelling it “rouge”, OP.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||July 21, 2021 4:30 PM
he's actually gone vogue, r27.
|by Anonymous||reply 28||July 23, 2021 9:38 PM
It's about the Separation of Powers. Congress has limited direct access to Executive Branch materials without a subpoena. And even then, a lot of it remains up to the discretion of the individual cabinet department.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||July 23, 2021 9:41 PM
Yet, R26, Ross remains uncharged.
|by Anonymous||reply 31||July 23, 2021 10:31 PM
He's a sheep in sheep's clothing.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||July 23, 2021 10:33 PM
Oh, all Hispanics look rogue-ish
|by Anonymous||reply 33||July 23, 2021 10:34 PM
Why did they choose him in the first place?
|by Anonymous||reply 34||July 23, 2021 10:38 PM
[quote]How polite Democrats are...giving him two weeks to hand it over. Just fucking take it now.
Democrats are the officials politely asking Warden Norton to please, pretty please come out of his office with his hands up, knowing full well that demon has no interest in doing the right thing, even when the jig is up. Like, "Bitch you DO know he will shoot you AND your mama dead in the face rather than surrender, right?"
|by Anonymous||reply 35||July 23, 2021 10:48 PM
What a bunch of wimps to begin with.
A changing of the guard is much needed.
Garland is textbook example of a pencil pushing limp wristed wimp who you can do anything to...
|by Anonymous||reply 36||July 24, 2021 8:43 AM
A new development from Merricks DOJ.
|by Anonymous||reply 37||July 27, 2021 1:45 PM
It's been over a month since OP's article. Did I miss news that the memo has been turned over, or is Garland still refusing to do so? Does congress have any power to force him to hand it over?
|by Anonymous||reply 39||July 27, 2021 11:31 PM
It's common for prosecutors to target low-level offenders first in wide-ranging cases in hopes of turning up evidence against higher-level defendants, and journalist Marcy Wheeler tweeted out a theory she's developed about the Justice Department strategy against those who plotted and carried out the U.S. Capitol riot: “DOJ seems to be prioritizing trespasser arrests based off video they want to get from them,"
|by Anonymous||reply 40||August 25, 2021 4:08 PM
"Trump is still walking around, free as a bird, even as the people he compelled to storm the U.S. Capitol are being sent to prison at a steady clip. Considering how much public evidence there is for Trump's criminality, it's hard not to conclude that the Department of Justice's failure to prosecute is less about the law and more about politics. Specifically, there's reason to fear that Attorney General Merrick Garland worries that Republicans will seize on any legitimate prosecution of Trump as an excuse to launch a thousand illegitimate prosecutions against Democrats the next time they control the DOJ."
I guess Merrick has not gone rogue. He's playing politics - badly. The Dem way. Ok keep him. I'm fed up and tired. I give up.
|by Anonymous||reply 41||August 31, 2021 8:56 PM
The exchange, one of a dozen times that Weisenheimer blocked former officials from answering committee questions, underscores the tension facing the Biden DOJ and Attorney General Merrick Garland. Although congressional Democrats have largely hailed Garland’s willingness to make witnesses available, the interviews show that the Biden administration will still move to protect Executive Branch interests.
And that tension may sharpen as House and Senate investigators begin to delve more deeply into the Trump White House’s role in orchestrating efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
|by Anonymous||reply 42||October 8, 2021 4:30 PM
He is certainly not compromised or working undercover for the GOP, but I think this administration made a very bad call early on to focus on the future and not look back and examine what happened under Trump. My gut says that came from Biden, not Garland. And there’s an overwhelming amount of work right now, with the same employee resource crunch in government that’s hitting other workplaces, so it’s easy for Garland to just keep his eyes on the present. To me it’s a huge mistake and betrayal of our country’s future not to expose the corruption that happened.
R24 I don’t think Garland is one of those, but plenty of liberal/moderate establishment types do golf with Kavanaugh.
|by Anonymous||reply 43||October 8, 2021 4:45 PM
I don’t think it came fromBiden he has been vehemently opposed to interfering with investigations
|by Anonymous||reply 45||October 8, 2021 4:54 PM
A sheep in sheep's clothing.
|by Anonymous||reply 46||October 9, 2021 3:06 PM
Get me Sally Yates! Special Prosecutor, Sally Yates!
|by Anonymous||reply 47||October 10, 2021 10:46 AM
[quote] [R24] I don’t think Garland is one of those, but plenty of liberal/moderate establishment types do golf with Kavanaugh.
The "good ole boy network" continues to destroy the country.
|by Anonymous||reply 48||October 11, 2021 6:21 PM
Obama was a pussy. He only wanted this guy because he was ONCE AGAIN trying to kiss the ass of the repugs. When they told him he didn't get a pick, he went and hid under a rock. PUSSY
I remember when he nominated gwb appointee james comey on as head of the FBI. That was stupid obama just wanting to reach across the aisle like a PUSSY
Garland knows that biden just wants to move past Jan 6th. Biden doesn't have it in him to fight a paper bag
I have never seen such weakness as I have with top democrats. They are fucking USELESS. Even my 8 and 10 yr old niece and nephew are tougher than the democrats. My niece and nephew can at least get their point across. That's something the democrats have never been able to do
|by Anonymous||reply 49||October 11, 2021 8:03 PM
I've said this r49 and I was called a racist.
|by Anonymous||reply 50||October 11, 2021 10:44 PM
Trump will get away with everything. Democrats are not going to prosecute any top official, I just don't see it. All of these are together behind the scenes. They're playing the public against each other.
And the media is part of this grand conspiracy. Washington & the media are working together to keep the public upset and divided and people don't even realize it. Politics is nothing but political theater. This is just one big show for the public, while Washington the media and big money rape the country.
This is one big game!
It's a big club & you're not apart of it.
|by Anonymous||reply 52||October 12, 2021 1:50 AM
I think Joe wants his people to make it look like they needed to be convinced. He's very politically savvy that way.
He's going to get everything he wants. Just have patience.
And the Deplorables are not going to vote in 2022. They hardly ever voted before Trump, and he's not on the ballot that year. Hell, a lot of them didn't even bother to vote in 2020.
|by Anonymous||reply 53||October 12, 2021 2:04 AM
The instant DOJ announced it would defend Trump against E. Jean Carroll I knew all hope was lost. If Garland thinks rape is in the scope of a president’s job, then he thinks insurrection is in the job description.
|by Anonymous||reply 54||October 12, 2021 2:06 AM
[quote] Obama was a pussy. He only wanted this guy because he was ONCE AGAIN trying to kiss the ass of the repugs. When they told him he didn't get a pick, he went and hid under a rock. PUSSY I remember when he nominated gwb appointee james comey on as head of the FBI. That was stupid obama just wanting to reach across the aisle like a PUSSY Garland knows that biden just wants to move past Jan 6th. Biden doesn't have it in him to fight a paper bag I have never seen such weakness as I have with top democrats. They are fucking USELESS. Even my 8 and 10 yr old niece and nephew are tougher than the democrats. My niece and nephew can at least get their point across. That's something the democrats have never been able to do
[quote] I've said this [R49] and I was called a racist.
[quote] But Obama was a pussy
You may or may not be a "racist" but you are definitely an idiot. Republicans controlled the senate and the senate has to approve the nominee. President Obama chose a Democrat who, under normal circumstances, a Republican controlled senate would have confirmed. McConnell wouldn't even give Garland a hearing, much less confirm him. What would have been the point of choosing a more liberal Democrat? There would have been no point at all.
The President cannot stop the senate from blocking nominees. Why do you believe that you are smarter or tougher than a man who beat all the odds and became the first black president. What have you done in your life, that is comparable?
|by Anonymous||reply 55||October 12, 2021 3:44 AM
You're a Republican lite wuss too r55 with tired ideas that produced nothing but defeat for the people but wins for the corporations. .
|by Anonymous||reply 56||October 12, 2021 8:23 AM
[quote] McConnell wouldn't even give Garland a hearing, much less confirm him. What would have been the point of choosing a more liberal Democrat? There would have been no point at all.
Obama could have sued Mcconnell. But he didn't give a fuck. He was tired of being the president and couldn't wait to leave office
|by Anonymous||reply 57||October 12, 2021 9:48 AM
[quote]The President cannot stop the senate from blocking nominees. Why do you believe that you are smarter or tougher than a man who beat all the odds and became the first black president. What have you done in your life, that is comparable?
I've done pretty well with my life. I wouldn't have been a dumb ass like Obama and picked james comey. How'd that work out? I wouldn't have tried to reach across the aisle to the repugs. How'd that work out?
He got Obamacare passed and gay marriage, but NOTHING ELSE
The republicans are vile, but damn they have a plan for EVERYTHING. They think outside the box too. The dems can't think of one damned thing. The dems are trying to play catch up from the republican actions of 2020. The dems should have been passing things left and right. And yes, there's sinema and manchin. Workplaces all over the country have problem employees and manage to get rid of them or work around them. But the dems can't think outside the box
The dems are too stupid to realize that the next republican president will make sure we don't ever have another democratic president.
|by Anonymous||reply 58||October 12, 2021 9:59 AM
^ The SC "passed" gay marriage. Obama had nothing to do with that ruling as he wasn't on the court.
|by Anonymous||reply 59||October 12, 2021 1:12 PM
Lord the Obama hate on here is really mind boggling. Obama was the first black POTUS; he had a lot on his back. First and foremost he had to get reelected; he COULD NOT be a one termer. He also could not be as radical as many wanted him to be as he was not afforded such a luxury like the other white POTUSes. Even in something as revolutionary and universally beneficial as Obamacare, the white trash teabaggers who would benefit out of it made it into such a horrible act communism, that he lost midterms because his own party failed to show up and vote in midterms. Even after all that, under him gay marriage passed yet bitches like r59 are unashamedly claiming he had nothing to do with it. SMH. Mind boggling...
|by Anonymous||reply 60||October 12, 2021 1:41 PM
I think Merrick Garland has gone to sleep.
|by Anonymous||reply 61||October 12, 2021 3:50 PM
[Quote] Obama was the first black POTUS; he had a lot on his back. First and foremost he had to get reelected;
Um, why? Is that a rule?
|by Anonymous||reply 62||October 12, 2021 3:56 PM
[quote]Obama was the first black POTUS; he had a lot on his back. First and foremost he had to get reelected;
He did get re-elected. Then he did nothing. Those 4 yrs were a waste.
|by Anonymous||reply 63||October 12, 2021 7:00 PM
R55, Obama did have options. He was just unwilling to use them. He was always a hair's breadth from impeachment with the House and Senate under Republican control. Thus, he was not going to push the envelope.
Garland has not gone rogue. He prosecuted Timothy McVeigh for the 1995 Oklahoma City Bombing, so he's not unfamiliar with terrorists who are white US citizens. He has been a judge for a long time, however, and it takes awhile to get back into a leadership role. I think there was also a lot of rot internally in DOJ that needed addressing in terms of Trump employees being buried in the organization. And DOJ had/has policy changes that need to be made, of which some are challenging. You don't want a sitting President to be able to strong arm DOJ attorneys into political activity.
I think if the Jan 6 Select Committee refers those defying subpoenas for criminal prosecution, those subpoenas will be enforced. DOJ did a nice job challenging the Texas abortion law. That decision, so full of detail and analysis, will make it hard for the Supreme Court to do what it did last time. I would love to see the Committee ultimately subpoena Trump. I think Garland would enforce that as well, if asked to do so.
|by Anonymous||reply 65||October 12, 2021 11:57 PM
Some have forgotten what the acronym ACA is. It is the AFFORDABLE Care Act. Sorry hon, but that affordable part is long gone.
|by Anonymous||reply 66||October 13, 2021 7:54 AM
Obama had both Senate and House with DP majorities after the 2008 elections.
|by Anonymous||reply 67||October 13, 2021 9:44 AM
[QUOTE] I think if the Jan 6 Select Committee refers those defying subpoenas for criminal prosecution, those subpoenas will be enforced. DOJ did a nice job challenging the Texas abortion law.
DOJ is also defending TRUMP against E. Jean Carroll. So it’s defending a rapist — because he used to be president. Therefore I doubt it will help the committee.
|by Anonymous||reply 68||October 13, 2021 10:07 AM
Merrick Garland won't even indict Matt Gaetz. That would have been an easy one to do. Robert Mueller 2.0.
Outside of Pete Buttigieg and one or two others, the Biden cabinet is weak.
|by Anonymous||reply 69||October 13, 2021 10:25 AM
Please release the unredacted Mueller Report!!!. How much do I have to plead…or pay!…or who do I have to fuck for Chris sakes!
The single GOOD thought I have for Merrick Garland is if he could be re-assigned to the Supreme Court with Sally Yates taking over the DOJ. Then, if Garland would kick the bucket the next day so that we could retain a fighting chance!
I shouldn’t have to imagine such things.
|by Anonymous||reply 70||October 13, 2021 11:26 AM
"I would have wiped the floor with every last one of you motherfuckers."
|by Anonymous||reply 71||October 13, 2021 2:42 PM
The Dems are cumrags they have at a year before they lose the House. Yet here they are Aunt Pitty Patting their power away. Been there done that.
|by Anonymous||reply 72||October 13, 2021 3:27 PM
R63 he was a lame duck president in his second term with McConnell not compromising one bit with anything he wanted to do. His first term he tried to pass Obamacare but the press ran with the tea party narrative.
I do feel Obama was naive where he gave the American people too much credit in that he thought his election gave him a mandate and he thought they were smart enough to realize what he wanted to do for the country, so he wore a laissez faire attitude, thinking the ACA would pass with the two branches of government. Apparently you have to spoon feed Americans with how you want to help them. Democratic voters fell hook line and sinker for the so-called liberal media and the Tea Party's narrative that we couldn't afford the ACA and that senior citizens would be killed. They didn't show up to vote for midterms.
I do recall that black woman telling Obama at a town hall meeting barely a year into his presidency that she felt she was making excuses for him in front of her conservative, white coworkers. That wasn't fair of her but it showed how the media turned on him and how quick the Democrats were to abandon him, expecting change overnight from the first "black" POTUS.
|by Anonymous||reply 73||October 13, 2021 3:54 PM
[quote] Apparently Garland spent like 25 years just hearing administrative law cases which is why he’s such a poindexter AG. He’s not really the man for this job at this time.
That's a ridiculously untrue statement. Apparently you don't know who this man is.
When I started practicing in DC Garland was an Asst US Attorney (our local prosecutors) and he continued to handle criminal cases when he went to Main Justice and while on the bench. He has tons of experience in criminal law at all levels.
|by Anonymous||reply 74||October 13, 2021 5:04 PM
[Quote] Obama was naive where he gave the American people too much credit in that he thought his election gave him a mandate and he thought they were smart enough to realize what he wanted to do for the country,
No, not naive. Inexperienced. Hubris. Just black. White liberals voted for him because he was black so that they could tell everyone and themselves they were not racist. Which, if you ask me, is racist.
|by Anonymous||reply 75||October 13, 2021 5:09 PM
[quote]Democratic voters fell hook line and sinker for the so-called liberal media and the Tea Party's narrative that we couldn't afford the ACA and that senior citizens would be killed. They didn't show up to vote for midterms.
I saw it more as disappointment with the watered-down, no-public-option ACA we ended up with.
|by Anonymous||reply 76||October 13, 2021 5:14 PM
Disappointment r76? I was outraged! The public option was not even put on the table! With Obama airily saying oh it would not have passed and neoliberals going along with that.
He didn't want to fight for it. He had no balls, just talk. He was not a leader, rallying forces, winning people over, knocking heads, changing people's minds, threatening, negotiating like LBJ. He was s right wing Reagan Democrat.
|by Anonymous||reply 77||October 13, 2021 5:24 PM
"We'll just make everybody buy insurance instead! Isn't that great?"
I was furious that he didn't start out at single-payer and negotiate from there.
|by Anonymous||reply 78||October 13, 2021 5:28 PM
R77 you're looking at ca. 2010 with AOC colored glasses.
|by Anonymous||reply 79||October 14, 2021 1:45 AM
Yes, R78. He was simply too inexperienced and not very brave. Which is why I was furious the superdelegates shoved Hillary aside.
But he was stunning.
|by Anonymous||reply 80||October 14, 2021 2:35 AM
This type of truth paralysis also occurs when both parties get caught with their hands in the proverbial cookie jar. Just keep this in the back of your mind when seemingly easy/obvious slam-dunks do not materialize The so-called truth may implicate a powerful Dem or two.
|by Anonymous||reply 81||October 14, 2021 11:13 AM
R80. I will pat my own back when I heard all that bullshit roll off Obama’s tongue during his campaign. I stuck with Hills all the way. When Obama claimed he liked Reagan’s trickle down financial policy, it should have put a nail in his coffin, but it didn’t. Go figure. I realized McCain was going to lose the very moment he announced Sarah Palin as his running mate. I mean, WTF?
|by Anonymous||reply 82||October 14, 2021 11:22 AM
Some of you bitches are truly delusional. You think America is radically liberal when just this past January people ( who almost half the country and agrees with ) tried to overthrow via insurrection a centrist liberal leader to put their bigoted conservative leader back in power. And that orange leader has not even been arrested or charged (and hardly will) while most of the insurrectionists have only gotten a slaps on their wrists. Yet you wanted Obama to be that great far left savior and thought Hillary would've been any better? 🤣🤣🤣🤣
|by Anonymous||reply 83||October 14, 2021 3:29 PM
R83 I was with Hillary all the way too, in 2008 as well as in 2016.
I liked Obama too but I thought and still do, he'd do/ have done a better job, right-wing though he was, if he was veep under Hillary for 8 years first.
It was/is hard to tell what effect Obama would have had on a Hillary presidency since he was an unknown and had virtually no resume to judge him by. But he did have the gift of the gab and could relate to crowds one could see.
I think Hillary is an amazing woman. One of the great women America has produced. I also thought she was a bit too corporatist at home and hawkish abroad.
Her love of the country is undeniable however even though the country had moved so far to the right by then.
I don't know if this makes sense to you but even though she had become too center right, I felt she was the best candidate for POTUS could produce at that time. It probably speaks to the immense disappointment in the country that I was feeling at the time after 8 years of W and Cheney.
Her moment is past though. But I think she is of great value as an elder statesman for the country still.
|by Anonymous||reply 84||October 14, 2021 3:48 PM
Sorry I meant r82 not r83.
|by Anonymous||reply 85||October 14, 2021 3:49 PM
"... they're sending a message to Bannon and the other witnesses they're targeting this this investigation that if you don't comply, they will try to force you. But it's a lengthy process. It's ultimately up to the attorney general whether to actually prosecute."
That would be Merrick.
|by Anonymous||reply 86||October 15, 2021 7:29 AM
You are referring to Mr. Sock Puppet. Good luck with that…
|by Anonymous||reply 87||October 15, 2021 11:40 AM
Meanwhile, Trump has been ordered by a judge in the Bronx to sit for a videotaped deposition. I wonder which top-drawer attorneys will be there to hold his hand for this?
|by Anonymous||reply 88||October 15, 2021 12:32 PM
"Should Garland fail to quickly initiate a contempt prosecution against Bannon once it gets to his doorstep, it will be a signal that Trump loyalists will continue to have impunity in breaking the law. It could also be an invitation for them to commit more crimes against the democratic process in the future."
|by Anonymous||reply 89||October 15, 2021 2:20 PM
I know everyone wants to see "punishment" but there are laws, regulations and a process that have to be followed.
What may seem like some slam dunk case against a hated individual may be incredibly complex and in fact be nothing more than a house of sand when it comes to actually finding activity that meets the essential elements of a crime. Sad thing is that many people who commit or play with crimes have advisors who can keep them from going over that line into criminality. Of course one can only hope that someone like the Ex who seems to listen to no one did not listen to those advisors.
Also if the government is working on a large and complex conspiracy case that can take a long time in normal times and we still have US attorneys and Justice people still working from home a certain number of days each week. Despite techie things that slows things down. We still have less than the usual number of grand juries sitting. The system is not back up to speed and even if it were this kind of case would still take time.
Patience. There are many people working on it who would love to see a reckoning. But they also don't want to end up with egg on their faces and refuel support for the Ex with some poorly constructed case that any half way intelligent and fair judge would throw out.
|by Anonymous||reply 90||October 15, 2021 5:04 PM
R90. Is that you, Adam Schiff? Is your tail neatly tucked between your legs and (presumptively) protecting what you consider a scrotum?
|by Anonymous||reply 92||October 16, 2021 9:32 AM
Adam Schiff is a righteous man he would never let Bannon escape justice
|by Anonymous||reply 93||October 16, 2021 3:50 PM
. "When he came in under subpoena, he brought 25 questions written out for him by the White House by people who were the subject of the investigation, and he said these are the only questions I am going to answer and I've already answered them and the answer is no, and the Republicans were more than content with that. But things are not the same for Steve Bannon."
"The Republicans would not press these subpoenas and the witnesses knew they had attorney general in Bill Barr who would never hold them in contempt, would never prosecute them for violating the law because, after all, Bill Barr had been held in contempt," Schiff added.
"Now we have a Justice Department that is independent, Merrick Garland believes in the rule of law, that no one is above the law. If witnesses do not show up, we will hold them in contempt, we will vote them in contempt in the House, and we'll refer them for prosecution.
That will be a sign that our democracy is recovering that the Justice Department is upholding a principle that no one is above the law."
|by Anonymous||reply 94||October 17, 2021 1:49 AM
Welp, righteous one r94. I am waiting….and still waiting…and waiting…waiting……..(died I’d waiting too long).
I bid one, Adieur.
|by Anonymous||reply 95||October 18, 2021 11:59 AM
Merrick Garland was an Obama pick for the Supreme Court that Mitch McConnell suggested would be agreeable to Republicans as he is a Republican. Obama put him up for nomination and Mitch the bitch wouldn't even give Garland a tryout much less proceed to a hearing for nomination. Mitch is such a weasel! But Merrick Garland is just as bad. What a pussy. He doesn't want to make Mitchie or any of the republicans mad at him and Joe Biden needs to grow a brain cell and replace his (Garlands) grandma wrinkled ass fast.
|by Anonymous||reply 96||October 19, 2021 3:05 AM
Merrick?….Merrick?….(crickets…….crickets….). Merrick? Please pick up on Red line. Merrick? Merrick?
Check his pulse please.
Merrick? Line one, two or three….please pick up. Merrick? It’s Joe. Merrick?…..please pick up…..
|by Anonymous||reply 97||October 19, 2021 12:14 PM
Douchebags be silent, okay?
|by Anonymous||reply 99||October 20, 2021 5:43 PM
Michael Cohen has a felony on his record and spent time in prison for paying at the direction of President Trump hush money to Stormy Daniels and another woman," Cohen explained.
"I believe it's pretty well known that Trump was 'Individual 1' as described in the indictment."
"He couldn't be indicted because of Department of Justice policy, you don't indict a sitting president," the lawmaker continued.
"He's no longer a sitting president. Do you believe that not looking into and indicting 'Individual 1' -- equally if not more guilty than Michael Cohen -- is not an abuse of equal protection under the law and an abrogation of the idea that the rule of law is principle."
|by Anonymous||reply 100||October 21, 2021 5:46 PM
Merrick reply ^^ . Note he says all is equally protected not equally prosecuted under the law.
Weasel. Fire his ass to save the country.
|by Anonymous||reply 101||October 21, 2021 5:50 PM
His head looks like one of those Southern hillbilly apple dolls they make in the backwoods of West Virginia. Swallwell said today on Ari Melber the most complaints his office receives are about Merrick Garland but of course, Eric was cautious in his criticism but he left me feeling like the Democrats will be surprised-pleasantly-if he chooses to prosecute walking festering postulant boil on the balls of humanity, Steve K. Bannon.
|by Anonymous||reply 102||October 23, 2021 5:38 AM
[quote] The single GOOD thought I have for Merrick Garland is if he could be re-assigned to the Supreme Court
I think he'd probably side with the repugs almost as often as he sided with the dems
He's bad news
|by Anonymous||reply 103||October 23, 2021 7:58 AM
[quote]He's going to get everything he wants. Just have patience.
Why does this sound familiar?
|by Anonymous||reply 106||October 23, 2021 3:29 PM