this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2025
499 points (96.5% liked)

politics

19948 readers
3597 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 42 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (2 children)

Fuck Merrick Garland he was Republican challenge that they thought Obama won't dare to nominate. When he did they still blocked him.

If he didn't delay investigation into trump while being AG, perhaps he would be in jail right now.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

And then Biden, for some god awful reason, picked him as AG to slow walk any judicial proceedings against the felon Trump.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 15 hours ago

Biden hired him to slow walk the trump investigations so he could run as second worst again in 2024.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

Yeah, he selected him to make DOJ impartial, except it doesn't look like anyone cared.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 19 hours ago

Yeah, he selected him to make DOJ appear impartial, except it doesn't look like anyone cared.

And the reality is, not only did no one care, it actually made the department partial to not prosecuting Trump for his many, many crimes, because according to these moronic, selfish, short-sighted, anti-American Republicans, it's not a crime when the president does it. Nixon toooootally should have finished his term without resigning, I'm sure no one would have convicted him :))))

[–] [email protected] 6 points 19 hours ago

Typical brain-dead maneuver from establishment Dems.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

Bullshit. He didn't delay jack shit.

I don't know why this myth gets perpetuated by people who clearly were not paying attention.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Didn't he wait until 2023 or at least until mid 2022 before he started anything?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)
  • He walks into his office late January, 2021.
  • They immediately begin what is literally the largest criminal investigation and prosecution in the DOJ's history, going after Jan 6th insurrectionists.
  • They continue getting confessions, plea deals, and building a bottom-up investigation that builds corroborating evidence

These under the constraints of:

  • Federal judges including SCOTUS stacked with Trump-appointed corrupt judges.
  • Garland going up against an organized crime syndicate with an entire party and propaganda apparatus and effectively unlimited money to put up in defense.
  • A jury pool almost impossible to be untainted while Defense need only convince 1 idiot on the jury.
  • By 2022, the Congressional Jan 6th hearings went all the way through summer and into October. If you're Garland, you observe and gather more evidence because why not? Just keep strengthening the case. You'll need it.
  • Garland hands off to Jack Smith literally the day after Trump formally files to run for President again (again, to avoid technicalities on conflict of interest).
  • As late as 2023, Smith gets massive testimonies from the likes of Trump's Chief of Staff, Mark Meadows. Valuable enough to grant immunity.

It seems very obvious to me that this was a classic bottom-up case you see similar to RICO cases in white collar or organized crime syndicates. Garland had to ensure his case was extremely tight given the nature of going after a former President and the courts.

Let's instead blame:

  • The courts who were ones proven to actually obstruct.
  • The voters who many saw what happened and still chose to sit out or still vote for the felon.

I'd rather he have done it right and not get a verdict than rush it and Trump gets vindicated by a technicality or a Not Guilty.

I know a lot of people are frustrated, but using Garland or Smith as the scapegoat makes zero sense. Just because it didn't go as quickly as we as the general public and legal laypersons wished doesn't mean he delayed. There is no actual evidence he delayed anything. In fact I'll go so far as to say Garland did everything perfectly and it was pretty much an impossible feat given the cards stacked against him.