General Discussion

Intractable

(546 posts)

47. Honestly, you want to know what I think? Do you really?

Tue Nov 19, 2024, 11:06 AM

Tuesday

I think you have an obsession-to-a-fault with preserving Garland's reputation, and possibly that of the larger Democratic party establishment.

It has been evident from your posts since I joined a few months ago. You seem to have knee-jerk reactions to people speaking against Garland.

Whereas we should all support our Democratic figures, you are unwilling to look at that which has failed us.

Our principles failed us. Our procedures failed us. Our bureaucracy failed us. The established means have handed us great defeat before a highly villainous man.

Our individual players, Harris, Walz, Schumer, even Garland, all played by the rules, even admirably.

But, if you are unwilling to critically look at the DOJ, you will not be part of solving any problems. The criminals are now in charge -- those that were almost prosecuted by Garland's DOJ.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

83 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Garland lovers are still defending him. [View all] onecaliberal Tuesday OP

The rather pathetic arguments that the Attorney General of the United States RockRaven Tuesday #1

DOJ policy didn't stop Bobby Kennedy from going after Hoffa John Shaft Tuesday #15

He violated DOJ policy edhopper Tuesday #45

for whatever reason, they are addicted to him Skittles Tuesday #2

Had to change my position on him IzzaNuDay Tuesday #3

I have sure changed my opinion and i echo you Trueblue1968 Tuesday #4

Yes, the rightwing is done with him... Think. Again. Tuesday #5

He's served his purpose. Scrivener7 Tuesday #18

Extremely well... Think. Again. Tuesday #21

That's what Rebl2 Tuesday #43

thank you Skittles Tuesday #64

Milquetoast Merrick RJ_MacReady Tuesday #6

This message was self-deleted by its author RandiFan1290 Tuesday #7

I lost patience with him three and half years ago. Emile Tuesday #8

There is simply no excuse on the planet for the foot dragging & to let this go unaccounted for. CrispyQ Tuesday #27

I agree. There is no excuse for allowing that. yardwork Tuesday #56

Your post made me laugh Meowmee Tuesday #80

I don't hate him. Tommy Carcetti Tuesday #9

If Trump has an enemies-revenge list, and I believe he does, Garland is on it. Intractable Tuesday #11

Yes. Tommy Carcetti Tuesday #12

I dont hate him either, but the buck should have stopped there. Failed to defend the US. lostnfound Tuesday #13

He was not desirable as a judge either. He was just what Obama thought the Republicans would TheKentuckian Tuesday #14

Well we are seeing the results John Shaft Tuesday #17

Yes Meowmee Tuesday #82

Yes BigMin28 Tuesday #19

Before Mitch change the rule from 60 votes to simple majority for Supreme Court justices Walleye Tuesday #34

If he had done his job, we'd be in a very different world now. Scrivener7 Tuesday #20

After reading the article cited below, I think Garland is a symptom of a much deeper disease. Intractable Tuesday #10

Sarah Kendzior is a russian-paid troll bigtree Tuesday #23

I guess you didn't read the article. Intractable Tuesday #25

she's literally ragging on President Biden bigtree Tuesday #35

So you didn't read the article? Intractable Tuesday #37

I read the trolling of Democrats, yes. bigtree Tuesday #39

"I don't care what she wrote." Intractable Tuesday #41

you posted a known troll of Democrats trolling Democrats bigtree Tuesday #42

Honestly, you want to know what I think? Do you really? Intractable Tuesday #47

bullshit bigtree Tuesday #49

"Bring some facts to the discussion, " Intractable Tuesday #50

you dance around the facts like they don't exist bigtree Tuesday #53

I started to read this, but then realized you didn't read mine. Enough. Intractable Tuesday #57

oh, I read it. bigtree Tuesday #58

Your irrational love for Garland is evidenced by how easily triggered you are. Intractable Tuesday #59

derision is not an argument bigtree Tuesday #60

That's right. I'm glad you finally understand that subtely. Intractable Tuesday #61

you trolled my response with a known troll of Democrats bigtree Tuesday #62

I am not reading this. Garland is the hill you want to die on. Good bye. Intractable Tuesday #63

'I am not reading this.' bigtree Tuesday #65

I'm sure it's more accurate to say no one here is reading you. Intractable Tuesday #66

you mean I'm not in the cool kids club? bigtree Tuesday #68

Please stop humiliating yourself. Intractable Tuesday #69

first you say no one is reading this bigtree Tuesday #70

I'm sorry that you feel you must do this. You removed yourself from the cool kids by not knowing when to quit. Intractable Tuesday #72

you're repeating yourself bigtree Tuesday #76

Post removed Post removed Tuesday #79

For just one more time, I'd like to hear Garland say "No one is above the law." Intractable Tuesday #81

funny bigtree Wednesday #83

At long last still no sense of shame Ponietz Tuesday #46

The mechanism, I think, is the same as the Scrivener7 Tuesday #16

is there something about not enough Democrats caring to show up to defeat an already convicted criminal bigtree Tuesday #22

Voters witnessed justice denied and stayed home. Emile Tuesday #24

Where'd you get that info? Kaleva Tuesday #31

The critical thing is that Biden keeps him in place. polichick Tuesday #26

Yes. What we think doesn't matter Kaleva Tuesday #30

Biden has Garland's back covered Kaleva Tuesday #28

Post removed Post removed Tuesday #32

Garland's one accomplishment gab13by13 Tuesday #29

Not furious enough to replace him - which only he could do... polichick Tuesday #38

When we don't uphold the rule of law while in power the future is bleak Ponietz Tuesday #33

Were they miscalculations? gab13by13 Tuesday #36

I don't even know anymore Ponietz Tuesday #40

It was deliberate. His best friend is the same person purchasing the Supreme Court. onecaliberal Tuesday #78

I at Rebl2 Tuesday #44

I had that thought also when Biden selected her for VP. I wanted her for AG! Intractable Tuesday #48

Who can say it would be different if a criminal was prosecuted and put in prison instead of running for president? onecaliberal Tuesday #51

45 months and counting, republianmushroom Tuesday #52

As one says, like moths to a flame. No matter what , Garland will be defended whenever Autumn Tuesday #54

pleasantly surprised to see many former fans waking up Skittles Tuesday #67

When nobody in Congress was investigated for J6 a lot of us knew then he was going to do nothing Autumn Tuesday #71

now we will have a seditionist as president, who promises retribution Skittles Tuesday #73

Everybody in our party is going to be blamed at one time or another for him winning. I'm going to blame Autumn Tuesday #74

the media held VP Harris to impossible standards, while holding Trump to no standards at all Skittles Tuesday #75

I think Garlands most ardent defender here is an actual Garland family member. BannonsLiver Tuesday #55

I despise the way he talks and his actions bob4460 Tuesday #77