General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMueller She Wrote nails it.
https://bsky.app/profile/muellershewrote.bsky.social/post/3lbsehf5zqx2d
gab13by13
(25,409 posts)Native
(6,676 posts)I can't tell you how many times I've seen people lumping them together whenever they're ranting about Garland.
Hekate
(95,297 posts)bikes and bunnies
(99 posts)Garland was literally Biden's first and only choice for AG.
Isn't he therefore responsible for Garland's shortcomings?
What happened to "The Buck Stops Here?"
I voted for Biden. I would have voted for him again.
That doesn't mean I'm going to throw my critical thinking skills out the window.
Another fuck up: Not getting rid of DeJoy.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, "he couldn't have fired him directly." Got it.
But he could have been more aggressive in choosing postal board members who would have fired him.
Native
(6,676 posts)live love laugh
(14,556 posts)sheshe2
(88,153 posts)The U.S. Postal Service Board of Governors has sole authority to hire and fire the postmaster general, the highest position in the organization. Though pressure mounts from Democrats and watchdogs to remove DeJoy from his seat at the top of the agency, Biden lacks the power to do so.
Most decisions are settled by majority vote, and at least six members must be present for a quorum. There are nine governors in total. Both the Postmaster General and Deputy Postmaster General are voting members of the board, though they they are barred from voting on certain issues like pricing.
No more than five of the nine governors may be from the same party.
Removing the Postmaster General requires an absolute majority vote of the governors in office.
https://www.federaltimes.com/federal-oversight/2022/08/24/can-biden-fire-us-postmaster-general-louis-dejoy/
Scrivener7
(53,202 posts)republianmushroom
(18,179 posts)Mr.WeRP
(661 posts)thebigidea
(13,323 posts)Any comment that had the SLIGHTEST difference of opinion, no matter how polite or well-argued, would get slammed mercilessly. Or just deleted. I'm never going back to that blog and wasting time on the ramblings of an overseas blogger with ZERO relevant legal experience.
Celerity
(46,866 posts)on DU for not joining her fan club and/or calling out flaws with her also used association pathways to have a go at people they did not like.
Typical 'it is ok for me to do it, but others cannot do it to my sacred cow' gambits.
https://libertarianinstitute.org/author/marcy-wheeler/
https://theintercept.com/staff/marcy-wheeler/
https://newrepublic.com/article/135933/limits-obamas-drone-war-really
https://scotthorton.org/
https://www.antiwar.com/blog/author/marcy_wheeler/
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/16/obama-nsa-review-group-whitewash
KPN
(16,167 posts)Response to KPN (Reply #53)
Celerity This message was self-deleted by its author.
CrispyQ
(38,590 posts)Lots of long cut-and-paste answers, or rather scolding's, to anyone who dared criticize Garland.
Had Garland done his goddamn job, they'd be figuring out how to incarcerate the orange bastard instead of him running for president again. Garland dithered, now Rome burns.
Bluetus
(298 posts)Garland taking two years and enormous public pressure to START the cases was unforgivable. We knew the SCOTUS-6 were in the tank for Trump. We didn't expect Biden to appoint an AG that would also be in the tank for Trump.
brush
(58,042 posts)with the insurrection and giving trump immunity. As for Joe Biden, he has indicated that appointing Garland was a mistake.
republianmushroom
(18,179 posts)46 months and counting
In It to Win It
(9,766 posts)SCOTUS still would have sat on it and held it up no matter when they got it.
brush
(58,042 posts)their bias towards trump would be clearly evident if they overstepped the circuit court which could hardly go against the evidence of trump's guilt we all saw on TV.
Roberts himself, with his court/legacy already permeated with public corruption rumors...Thomas, Kavanaugh, Alito, Gorsuch, would certainly have hesitated to dispute the circuit court's ruling.
There's enough blame to go around, starting with Garland. We've got an authoritative regime staring us in the face and coming to power soon.
Montauk6
(8,768 posts)arthritisR_US
(7,632 posts)brush
(58,042 posts)arthritisR_US
(7,632 posts)brush
(58,042 posts)you are in trouble?
Celerity
(46,866 posts)90-percent
(6,909 posts)Late fifties? Maybe Wallace Wood?
-90% jimmy
arthritisR_US
(7,632 posts)MadameButterfly
(1,953 posts)for Hunter going to jail
Fiendish Thingy
(18,816 posts)Garland is not the villain of this story.
JT45242
(2,994 posts)Whether he be considered a lackey, a timid failure, or something else by later historians...
He is a villain in the story of THE VILLAIN, trump -- in much the same way that Chamberlain is A VILLAIN in the story of WW2
90-percent
(6,909 posts)TFG is giving America "dictatorship in our time", More history that rhymes.
-90% jimmy
MadameButterfly
(1,953 posts)Garland is giving America dictatorship in our time
or maybe "impartiality" in our time (which back-fired just like Chamberlain's peace)
FakeNoose
(36,011 posts)We all spent lot of time waiting for something to happen at DoJ.
MadameButterfly
(1,953 posts)wiwth presumably time to get the job done
Blue_Adept
(6,437 posts)Best ignored.
Native
(6,676 posts)happened. And we know who we have to thank for that.
paleotn
(19,532 posts)MadameButterfly
(1,953 posts)The immunity thing was a delay but not an end to the case. The election is what ended it.
KPN
(16,167 posts)There is growing distrust of what seemed like highly trusted sources and opinion leaders -- especially among the younger ranks as a result of this election. A lot of it extends to the Democratic Party as a whole.
Words are just words. It's action and/or lack of real action that ultimately count.
Seems to me like our party better be open to a massive make-over -- that is, if it's not already too late.
This is just a feeling I have based on what I hear from my kids, nieces, nephews, their spouses and friends since November 5.
My fear is that entrenched leadership will either continue to pay lip service or paint the disgruntled and restless as "populists".
mcar
(43,621 posts)onecaliberal
(36,332 posts)Garland protected Trump and the other republicans in Congress. Period.
MadameButterfly
(1,953 posts)he thought a Republican Senate would confirm him. Biden didn't have to make the same compromise.
Mr.WeRP
(661 posts)Them and emptwheel have proven they know nothing.
Ponietz
(3,322 posts)Its still Mueller time for the gullible it seems.
czarjak
(12,530 posts)Clinton's correct. Again! Dems aren't perfect. Repugs are what they are. The Party Of The Rich. Period.
kiri
(897 posts)Biden/Garland were in potent offices, had power and authority and resources. Backed by the people.
Leo et al. did not.
The Garland failure was monumental. Leo et al. simply took advantage of the opportunity Biden gave them, gift-wrapped.
paleotn
(19,532 posts)Garland should have gone after Trump in 2021. Had he done so, the cases would be over before we got into the 2024 election. And we'd now know that insurrection isn't a goddamn "official act" as president, so scratch the SCOTUS bit. Garland dithered, now Rome burns.
Godot51
(311 posts)When the deck is stacked against you in a game of chance one can fold their hand, accept the loss and play on, or leave the table and the game.
Leaving the game is basically what Garland Mueller did in a game that was not a game of chance. It was a game for the rights of the people against a future fascism.
Real life is not a game. If he had been a good, righteous man, he should have slogged on against the odds. His job was "justice". He failed at this.
He shares a great deal of the responsibility since he folded in the face of difficult odds and basically gave up the game. Both moves were nothing but bad.
I'd say he left the game when he shouldn't have.
Cha
(305,861 posts)HootieMcBoob
(3,826 posts)Fitzmas never arrives.
Native
(6,676 posts)Bluetus
(298 posts)If it were me, I'd stop linking my own persona to Mueller. It is like wearing a T-Shirt that says "I am the most gullible person in the universe".
Not a good look for a person who wants to be taken seriously as some kind of pundit.