Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

getagrip_already

(17,515 posts)
Tue Dec 10, 2024, 09:57 PM Tuesday

Garland failed us again.....

Dont even bother to defend him.

Barr's doj violated multiple laws and fbi policicies in wiretapping members of congress and their staffs.

Garland knew, and did nothing to prosecute or even investigate it.

No IG investigation. No new policies. Nobody fired.

That about says it all. F him.

69 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Garland failed us again..... (Original Post) getagrip_already Tuesday OP
But he would have made a great supreme Court Justice JanMichael Tuesday #1
What is wrong with these people? Bluethroughu Tuesday #3
I am beginning to suspect this was common practice in the old days. Baitball Blogger Tuesday #5
I can only speak to the 1990's - my time in Washington TBF Wednesday #43
They are human. And they are easily lured by money/power and/or threatened with blackmail/extortion. erronis Wednesday #24
Not just the lure of bribes and pay offs Farmer-Rick Wednesday #34
They have no fight in them ThePartyThatListens Thursday #68
I'm not so sure. He seems to prefer sitting on the fence and never rocking a boat. Lonestarblue Wednesday #38
Institutions always cover their own asses rather than expose themselves, RockRaven Tuesday #2
But needed edhopper Tuesday #4
he was literally in court when voters effectively cut his prosecutions short bigtree Tuesday #6
Really? getagrip_already Tuesday #11
The DOJ has been slow walking the Paxton Sewa Tuesday #18
Source? tia uponit7771 Wednesday #40
Literally? Which court. What case? quakerboy Wednesday #55
Garland's prosecutor, Tom Windom, was presenting the government's responses to immunity claims before Judge Chutkan bigtree Thursday #56
so, too little too late, and not literally at all. quakerboy Thursday #57
weird that you say nothing about the judges and judges who actually delayed the cases bigtree Thursday #58
Absolutely. Thank you. ancianita Thursday #60
He's a professorial weenie guy. Pipe and elbow patches Klarkashton Tuesday #7
Hes a republican. Whalt would you expect... n/t slightlv Tuesday #9
I've seen that mentioned a few times, but I can't find any confirmation in various bios and articles LauraInLA Wednesday #32
No, I've just seen it when articles have been written about him. slightlv Wednesday #39
Thanks; I'll keep looking and report ugh it's kind of moot. I found articles about Obama picking him as LauraInLA Wednesday #45
He's actually a registered independent, with a bunch of milquetoast do-nothing centrist views that only serve to aid the Karasu Wednesday #49
Times like this when I wish Tish James or Alvin Bragg were AG Jit423 Tuesday #8
Maybe Garland was concerned he'd have to do some similar wiretapping. Silent Type Tuesday #10
If it was simililarly illegal.... getagrip_already Tuesday #12
To catch crooks like trump, Gaetz, and a host of government crimes. But you have a point. Silent Type Tuesday #15
GARLAND is such a weak broke d*ck, it is just so dis appointed NotHardly Tuesday #13
You don't know how the DOJ historically works. ancianita Tuesday #14
Protecting, because the one sitting does not want to be investigated when he leaves. status que republianmushroom Wednesday #28
"They can but they don't" Farmer-Rick Wednesday #36
It's about ancianita Wednesday #46
If the system doesn't work, it most definitely Farmer-Rick Thursday #59
Thanks for your post. I'll think on it. ancianita Thursday #64
link to story? LymphocyteLover Tuesday #16
Would Biden have picked Garland if he weren't Obama's SC pick? LisaM Tuesday #17
Obama had to pick someone he thought Republicans would confirm MadameButterfly Wednesday #21
No, he didn't. I think maybe be thought we owed Garland something. LisaM Wednesday #22
Doug Jones was an obvious excellent choice but MadameButterfly Wednesday #41
Garland is a Republican, if he was working for Trump how would his behavior be different? Ranting Randy Wednesday #19
Post removed Post removed Wednesday #23
Nothing different. He went after Dems and let the coup keep going. onecaliberal Wednesday #52
why was this removed? Grasswire2 Wednesday #54
This message was self-deleted by its author LudwigPastorius Wednesday #20
Nothing, but protecting an ex-president and DOJ. the legacy of Merrick the Meek. republianmushroom Wednesday #25
Absolutely Rebl2 Thursday #61
Where's the full Jack Smith report ... Escape Wednesday #26
Were is Mueller's report un-redacted ? republianmushroom Wednesday #29
Guess we just have to be patient... Escape Wednesday #35
Oh Rebl2 Thursday #62
No. He didn't AKwannabe Wednesday #27
He's the worst Beckett Wednesday #30
His spine is a mushy wet noodle Cthulu on call Wednesday #31
Yep Rebl2 Thursday #63
Can he be held liable for... 2naSalit Wednesday #33
so you want to bring a suit against him for not prosecuting Trump bigtree Thursday #65
Um... 2naSalit Thursday #66
it's untrue that he 'pissed away three years' bigtree Thursday #67
"Garland knew, and did nothing to prosecute or even investigate it" uncledad Wednesday #37
Biden appointed him and could have fired him any time MichMan Wednesday #42
A Picture of A Duck??? BurnDoubt Wednesday #44
Garland nowforever Wednesday #47
Caspar Milquetoast on tranquilizers. nt Xipe Totec Wednesday #48
Stupid "gotcha" appointment HereForTheParty Wednesday #50
at some point it just isn't failure Skittles Wednesday #51
☝🏾☝🏾☝🏾THIS !!!☝🏾☝🏾☝🏾 uponit7771 Thursday #69
Garland did exactly what he was tasked to do Picaro Wednesday #53

Bluethroughu

(5,896 posts)
3. What is wrong with these people?
Tue Dec 10, 2024, 10:02 PM
Tuesday

There seems to be an awful lot of people working in our government to do nefarious things or cover for those doing it.

TBF

(34,664 posts)
43. I can only speak to the 1990's - my time in Washington
Wed Dec 11, 2024, 03:48 PM
Wednesday

working in law firms I didn't see a lot of illegal things, but definitely things that would give you pause. When you live in Washington awhile you notice that the long-term government workers really know a lot, as do the Senators who keep getting reelected. The folks that are in those roles know how to get things done and cut deals. And there are quite a few lawyers going back and forth between private industry and public service jobs. Folks live near each other, send their kids to the same schools, no matter which party they are. So, yes, a lot of "meeting before the meeting" type stuff did happen. I think in the old days there was also a lot more negotiation and talking going on just in general. I haven't been there for quite some time, so I don't know how it is now. There seems to be so much more animosity between the 2 parties, but maybe that's just a show for constituents back home.

erronis

(17,095 posts)
24. They are human. And they are easily lured by money/power and/or threatened with blackmail/extortion.
Wed Dec 11, 2024, 11:46 AM
Wednesday

There are a few people serving in government who have absolute integrity. Too few.

Farmer-Rick

(11,525 posts)
34. Not just the lure of bribes and pay offs
Wed Dec 11, 2024, 01:34 PM
Wednesday

But the nonstop, direct and threatening propaganda put out continually by Russian agents. I imagine they target people in power particularly. It isn't even mildly controlled. Putin is having a grand old time running hog wild on our social media, emails and corporate news.

68. They have no fight in them
Thu Dec 12, 2024, 06:24 PM
Thursday

And fighting is exactly what the doctor ordered for this time.

A new gen needs to take over.

I believe that's in the process of happening.

At least I HOPE so.

Lonestarblue

(11,961 posts)
38. I'm not so sure. He seems to prefer sitting on the fence and never rocking a boat.
Wed Dec 11, 2024, 01:44 PM
Wednesday

However, at least he would not have taken bribes like Thomas and Alito.

RockRaven

(16,478 posts)
2. Institutions always cover their own asses rather than expose themselves,
Tue Dec 10, 2024, 10:02 PM
Tuesday

even after leadership changes. Government, non-government, they all do it.

bigtree

(90,272 posts)
6. he was literally in court when voters effectively cut his prosecutions short
Tue Dec 10, 2024, 10:16 PM
Tuesday

...but no 'fuck the judges' or 'fuck the perps with their bullshit appeals' or 'fuck the Supreme Court maga majority'?

You're blaming the people who were actively prosecuting Trump, instead of the ones who actually delayed his prosecution until the election.

Weird flex.

getagrip_already

(17,515 posts)
11. Really?
Tue Dec 10, 2024, 10:41 PM
Tuesday

Name the case?

I call bs.

There was no case he was following along the lines of this issue.

There was no internal review. Nobody was fired. Nobody was prosecuted.

Sewa

(1,348 posts)
18. The DOJ has been slow walking the Paxton
Tue Dec 10, 2024, 11:40 PM
Tuesday

Investigators for 4 yrs and it will disappear when Trump takes over.

Try to defend that 🤮

quakerboy

(14,186 posts)
55. Literally? Which court. What case?
Wed Dec 11, 2024, 10:23 PM
Wednesday

I cant seem to find any evidence of garland being in any court on Nov 5 or 6th of this year.

That said.. 2024 was too late. If he'd literally been in court in late 2021, delays and appeals would be relatively dealt with by now. Instead the most relevant didnt even start till 2023, when it became clear he was running again. The timing, ironically, appears entirely political, and it seems pretty clear Garland would not have filed charges on him if Trump had done the traditional thing and quietly walked away from politics.

bigtree

(90,272 posts)
56. Garland's prosecutor, Tom Windom, was presenting the government's responses to immunity claims before Judge Chutkan
Thu Dec 12, 2024, 12:35 AM
Thursday

...the same prosecutor who Merrick Garland tasked in the Fall of 2021 to investigate the WH finances.

He was one of the last prosecutors to argue before the judge IN COURT before voters effectively ended the case which was days before adjudication to proceed to trial.

...here:

Prosecutor Thomas Windom urged Chutkan to use the new indictment to handle all questions around immunity, including whether that covered Trump’s communications with then-Vice President Mike Pence or the former president’s outreach to private citizens.
https://rollcall.com/2024/09/05/judge-says-election-wont-affect-timeline-for-trump-prosecution/


___Thomas Windom, a little-known federal prosecutor who was representing the Special Counsel position today on the Trump protective order, is the man Deputy AG Lisa Monaco tasked in Fall 2021 to oversee key elements of the Justice Department’s investigation into efforts to overturn the 2020 election results - one of the first indications that Trump and his associates were under DOJ investigation.

NYT:

Mr. Windom, working under the close supervision of Garland’s top aides, had been leading investigators who have been methodically seeking information about the roles played by some of Mr. Trump’s top advisers, including Rudolph W. Giuliani, Jenna Ellis and John Eastman, with a mandate to go as high up the chain of command as evidence warrants."

"Mr. Windom’s second objective — mirroring one focus of the Jan. 6 committee — is a widening investigation into the group of lawyers close to Mr. Trump who helped to devise and promote the plan to create alternate slates of electors."

quakerboy

(14,186 posts)
57. so, too little too late, and not literally at all.
Thu Dec 12, 2024, 04:40 AM
Thursday

Garland is the worst member of the biden administration. Narrowly followed by Dejoy. Unfortunate stains on an otherwise remarkably decent presidency.

bigtree

(90,272 posts)
58. weird that you say nothing about the judges and judges who actually delayed the cases
Thu Dec 12, 2024, 09:00 AM
Thursday

Last edited Thu Dec 12, 2024, 11:49 AM - Edit history (1)

...and questioned my account of events, but didn't provide ONE receipt for the things you claimed.

The info I posted refutes all of what you claim.

Garland was investigating the Trump WH in the Fall of 2021. Not only that, he collected almost ALL of the evidence in the indictments and fought through his appointment of Smith until the end to make it available to the GRAND JURIES who the federal government relies on to make charging decisions, to the appeals courts, and to the judges who made decisions on whether to proceed on the indictments.

ALL of the evidence gathered since 2021 has gone through myriad appeals by perps and witnesses in several successive courts with dozens of often republican or Trump judges who set the dates of their hearings as far into the future as possible to keep trump out of court.

Weird that none of the blame here is being leveled at the actual ones who delayed the cases until the election, but at the people who fought to make it admissible in court.

As I posted, DOJ was ALREADY IN COURT when voters pulled the plug. And, in no universe is TWO historic multi-felony indictments 'too little'.

Divert to DeJoy on another thread. That's just bashing the Biden administration who you couldn't be bothered to capitalize here.

LauraInLA

(1,354 posts)
32. I've seen that mentioned a few times, but I can't find any confirmation in various bios and articles
Wed Dec 11, 2024, 01:29 PM
Wednesday

about Garland. Could you give me a source for his political registration?

slightlv

(4,407 posts)
39. No, I've just seen it when articles have been written about him.
Wed Dec 11, 2024, 01:46 PM
Wednesday

Since I *once* had a subscription to WP, I'm assuming those are the articles. I do remember seeing it multiple times, and in fact I want to remember that was one of the reasons Obama put him up for the SC. He thought he'd be able to get the okay on him, and not on one of our own party members. And then McTurtle just screwed everyone over, except the billionaires.

LauraInLA

(1,354 posts)
45. Thanks; I'll keep looking and report ugh it's kind of moot. I found articles about Obama picking him as
Wed Dec 11, 2024, 04:11 PM
Wednesday

a more conservative jurist, meaning he ruled more conservatively, not that he was an actual conservative.

Karasu

(333 posts)
49. He's actually a registered independent, with a bunch of milquetoast do-nothing centrist views that only serve to aid the
Wed Dec 11, 2024, 07:49 PM
Wednesday

right.

Jit423

(416 posts)
8. Times like this when I wish Tish James or Alvin Bragg were AG
Tue Dec 10, 2024, 10:20 PM
Tuesday

They have been tough on ALL criminals. Tish especially looks out for her state, NY and city NYC. You do the crime, she wants you to serve the time. She know how much Trump screwed over NY. Were politics in volved? Maybe but politics would not be involved if there had been no crime.

We need someone with guts like hers to lead the FBI and the Justice Department. IMHOP

ancianita

(38,833 posts)
14. You don't know how the DOJ historically works.
Tue Dec 10, 2024, 11:01 PM
Tuesday

AG's don't go after former AG's. They can but they don't.
Especially while they're trying to rebuild their current Dept of Justice and hire more competent Division enforcement teams to replace the political and incompetent ones Barr left behind when he suddenly resigned in December 2020.

The decision to investigate and prosecute a former AG has to be based on the strength of the evidence and whether a crime is believed to have been committed.
You act as if you knew there was evidence of Barr's criminality all along. You didn't. You don't.

Sure, investigating a former AG is legal, but pursuing charges against a former AG can be highly politicized due to the high profile nature of the position.

So now you decide the Biden administration should have endured a big political fight that Joe would have had on his hands right at the point of the Covid pandemic, all that while he had to hit the ground running to rebuild its supply chains covid broke, and an enduring economy.

Bitch slap Garland all you want, but your shoulda/woulda/coulda claims are nothing but weak hearsay hype.


republianmushroom

(18,070 posts)
28. Protecting, because the one sitting does not want to be investigated when he leaves. status que
Wed Dec 11, 2024, 12:32 PM
Wednesday

ancianita

(38,833 posts)
46. It's about
Wed Dec 11, 2024, 04:21 PM
Wednesday

DOJ norms that existed before Trump or Putin showed up. The fact that they are advantaged by systems in the country isn't the fault of the systems or those who make them work.

Any change our systems of enforcement should be because they improve justice for all, not because autocrats abuse them.

This too-late IG report isn't being used in such a way as to give timely notice to the DOJ's operations; what it seems to reveal is flaws in the IG system of timely information gathering so that flaws can be remedied in a timely way. I recall over the last 6 years that more than one IG hasn't done their job in a way that helps improve government. If Congress in 2022 revised the Inspector General Act of 1978, and the IG this time found no laws broken, criticism of the AG or the DOJ in this context are, once again, subjective and unfounded.

Farmer-Rick

(11,525 posts)
59. If the system doesn't work, it most definitely
Thu Dec 12, 2024, 09:01 AM
Thursday

Needs to be changed and fixed.

"The fact that they are advantaged by systems in the country isn't the fault of the systems." Yes it is the fault of the system. When you go to war you don't just use bows and arrows because that's what has allows been used by the system. You use the latest most up do date weapons available. You fix the system to allow for up to date weapons.

It doesn't matter how long the system has been in place. When it allows for criminals to run rampent and destroy the foundations of democracy, it has become a broken system. And is not up to the task of prosecuting crimes against our democracy.

"Any change our systems of enforcement should be because they improve justice for all, not because autocrats abuse them."

I can't believe you wrote that without being aware of how broken that statement really is.

If autocrats can abuse our system then there is NO Justice For All. There is merely a set of rules that allow autocrats more privileges and power than all the rest of us.

Your arguments are illogical. But let's face it, the system is going to change now without a doubt. The idiots of capitalism with the help of Russian tax dollars and espionage from Putin, have taken over the system. IG reports, slow walking prosecution of sedition and treason, ignoring blatant election violations, it's all going to be changed to suit the Nazis and Russians.

Then you can argue with them not to change it



ancianita

(38,833 posts)
64. Thanks for your post. I'll think on it.
Thu Dec 12, 2024, 11:17 AM
Thursday

The problem with fixing a "broken" system -- which it isn't, except at court scheduling, so-called 'due process' delays, and court enforcement levels -- is to assume that you can stop "rule of men" presidents (and their ideologically aligned legal teams) from eroding "rule of law" systems. If you know of anything they haven't thought of by now, and know how they can stopped, please share them.

LisaM

(28,729 posts)
17. Would Biden have picked Garland if he weren't Obama's SC pick?
Tue Dec 10, 2024, 11:30 PM
Tuesday

I don't think he would have. I think he would have found someone more forceful.

I think Garland was a very conservative choice for SCOTUS anyway, but he probably would have been fine there.

I am not saying I blame Obama, but I think Biden's sense of fair play led him to choose Garland and if we'd been lucky enough to have Biden for a second term, I think he would have chosen someone else.

MadameButterfly

(1,866 posts)
21. Obama had to pick someone he thought Republicans would confirm
Wed Dec 11, 2024, 03:39 AM
Wednesday

Biden didn't have to do that

LisaM

(28,729 posts)
22. No, he didn't. I think maybe be thought we owed Garland something.
Wed Dec 11, 2024, 06:51 AM
Wednesday

I think that he either trusted that it was a better pick than it was, or he was doing it in a kind of homage to Obama.

It also wasn't very evident at first that he was as poor a choice as he turned out to be. Why he slow walked some things and relentlessly picked on Hunter Biden will always be a mystery to me (well, unless he writes a book and something comes out). History won't look fondly on him now, and that's his own doing.

MadameButterfly

(1,866 posts)
41. Doug Jones was an obvious excellent choice but
Wed Dec 11, 2024, 03:45 PM
Wednesday

it would have inflamed the Right. Dems have to stop worrying about indignation and claims of unfairness on the Right since there is nothing we can ever do to please them. Though it may be a bit late to learn that lesson.

Response to Ranting Randy (Reply #19)

Response to getagrip_already (Original post)

republianmushroom

(18,070 posts)
25. Nothing, but protecting an ex-president and DOJ. the legacy of Merrick the Meek.
Wed Dec 11, 2024, 11:54 AM
Wednesday

To political.

46 months and counting

Escape

(66 posts)
26. Where's the full Jack Smith report ...
Wed Dec 11, 2024, 12:05 PM
Wednesday

we were all talking about a couple of weeks ago? Has it been released yet?

Escape

(66 posts)
35. Guess we just have to be patient...
Wed Dec 11, 2024, 01:35 PM
Wednesday

I am sure Merrick will get those items checked off his list well before Biden leaves office.

Beckett

(13 posts)
30. He's the worst
Wed Dec 11, 2024, 12:35 PM
Wednesday

Wish Biden had picked someone with a spine, energy, and fight. Now look where we are.

2naSalit

(93,203 posts)
33. Can he be held liable for...
Wed Dec 11, 2024, 01:34 PM
Wednesday

NOT doing his job to protect the Constitution?

I mean, he's as bad a Barr FFS.

bigtree

(90,272 posts)
65. so you want to bring a suit against him for not prosecuting Trump
Thu Dec 12, 2024, 11:53 AM
Thursday

...at the same time Trump's DOJ will be trying to hold him legally liable for prosecuting him?

This just gets more and more absurd with every projection and derision.

2naSalit

(93,203 posts)
66. Um...
Thu Dec 12, 2024, 04:43 PM
Thursday

Where did I say that?

Timelines are important. I am pissed that Garland pissed away at least three years fucking off and NOT DOING HIS JOB THAT WHOLE TIME seems like a violation of the oath he took to uphold and protect the Constitution.

bigtree

(90,272 posts)
67. it's untrue that he 'pissed away three years'
Thu Dec 12, 2024, 06:12 PM
Thursday

... and since it doesn't come with anything to back it up, it's supposition and not worth debating what's in your head.

It's demonstrably false on its face, and not worth the time it takes to show someone what DOJ actually did in those three years when they can just look themselves. You are either misinformed, or uninformed.

uncledad

(46 posts)
37. "Garland knew, and did nothing to prosecute or even investigate it"
Wed Dec 11, 2024, 01:42 PM
Wednesday

Yes, Garland and Blinken will go down as two of the worst cabinet heads in recent history. Garland completely bungled the Stump J6 investigation as well as all the bullshit Barr pulled while he was Ag. He also allowed a completely political prosecution of Hunter Biden to run wild. Blinken (with Biden's apparent blessing) did absolutely nothing to stop the genocide that is still taking place in Gaza, now Israel is grabbing land in Syria and still crickets. Those two fucked up Biden's legacy far more than the price of eggs!

BurnDoubt

(68 posts)
44. A Picture of A Duck???
Wed Dec 11, 2024, 03:53 PM
Wednesday

Remember when Rudy was running all over town bragging about how he was in the New York office of the FBi "every day"? I'm sure there is compromat on all the players, including Rudy. If you can find the handle, you can turn it. "Gene, Gene made a machine. Hank, Hank turned the crank. Art, Art ........".--- OR--- "Everybody's got something to hide... 'cept for me and my monkey". This is how History is made. And Sausage.

nowforever

(406 posts)
47. Garland
Wed Dec 11, 2024, 06:36 PM
Wednesday

Will be remembered as a judicious spineless AG and Biden's most critical error in judgement.

HereForTheParty

(247 posts)
50. Stupid "gotcha" appointment
Wed Dec 11, 2024, 08:04 PM
Wednesday

Only got put up to somehow get revenge on the MAGAts for denying him the Supreme Court. Joke was on us.

Picaro

(1,837 posts)
53. Garland did exactly what he was tasked to do
Wed Dec 11, 2024, 08:50 PM
Wednesday

If he’s an institutionalist he is tasked with preserving and defending the system.

He did that.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Garland failed us again.....