General Discussion

aggiesal

(9,997 posts)

37. That's a long response ...

Wed Jan 15, 2025, 03:39 PM

Jan 2025

I understand that he's just stating facts.
So was I.
All of the facts, stated by Smith, occurred after the Jan. 6th Committee embarrassed Garland into doing something more substantive, over 1.5+ years after the Jan. 6th attack. When in my opinion, Garland should have started the day he got sworn in as Attorney General (Assign Smith immediately, not 1.5+ years later).

The DOJ likes to work from the bottom up, which takes a long time to reach the top. It's a tried and true method and effective. But this investigation should have started at the top and worked its way down, to make sure Trump didn't try to hide or implement his delay strategy, long before any election season started.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

2 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

UniqueUserName VBNMW

41 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Jack Smith comes to Merrick Garland's defense [View all] bigtree Jan 2025 OP

Interesting mr715 Jan 2025 #1

Yeah, it's a shame garland waited until he got the J6 committee stuff. Think. Again. Jan 2025 #2

I don't know. While I appreciate Smith's defense of Garland, I still despise the way he handled the whole thing, after SWBTATTReg Jan 2025 #3

I didn't see it as "defending" garland.... Think. Again. Jan 2025 #4

Well, good. I don't think Garland deserves any defending, and IMHO, he's going to be defending his calls for years and SWBTATTReg Jan 2025 #6

Yeah, I guess he thought he was more clever than... Think. Again. Jan 2025 #7

He should have realized, DENVERPOPS Jan 2025 #16

the 'small fry' bigtree Jan 2025 #8

Here we go again. William769 Jan 2025 #30

if he had chosen Timewas Jan 2025 #5

you must have forgotten that the maga majority on the SC is at the end of any series of certain appeals bigtree Jan 2025 #10

He did nothing Timewas Jan 2025 #12

revisionism bigtree Jan 2025 #13

Walk us through exactly how a trial could have been "forced" to happen before the election Fiendish Thingy Jan 2025 #19

As if he "should have chosen," huh? ancianita Jan 2025 #22

Smith joins Mueller, Fitzgerald, Hur, etc. Silent Type Jan 2025 #9

all different prosecutions bigtree Jan 2025 #11

K&R Joinfortmill Jan 2025 #14

I think what it shows is the weakness in our justice system, that the processes can be dragged out ad nauseum. What is Evolve Dammit Jan 2025 #15

A LOT of cases in our justice system take years if defendants can afford counsel that ancianita Jan 2025 #23

Best justice for those who can afford it. I guess that is a huge point. Evolve Dammit Jan 2025 #25

So...? What do you think? ancianita Jan 2025 #28

I will continue to complain about cases that should have been brought that didn't happen. Especially when the stakes Evolve Dammit Jan 2025 #36

How's that working out for you so far? ancianita Jan 2025 #41

TY for this -- I so appreciate fact-based commentary Hekate Jan 2025 #17

Don't care. Iggo Jan 2025 #18

Smith can cover for Garland all he wants, and I haven't read the article at the link ... aggiesal Jan 2025 #20

it's stating the facts of the investigation bigtree Jan 2025 #34

That's a long response ... aggiesal Jan 2025 #37

that's proven false by what I posted, and what's in the report bigtree Jan 2025 #39

Of course he would. Jack Smith is a prosecutor who tells the truth. ancianita Jan 2025 #21

I have eyes edhopper Jan 2025 #24

lol bigtree Jan 2025 #31

Why would other articles edhopper Jan 2025 #35

this is a discussion board, not a news site. bigtree Jan 2025 #38

You see your democracy almost destroyed and don't go after the ones in charge for the longest time? GreenWave Jan 2025 #26

Garland's DOJ began investigating the Trump WH in 2021 bigtree Jan 2025 #40

My thoughts, looking back. bluestarone Jan 2025 #27

Thank you sir! William769 Jan 2025 #29

This message was self-deleted by its author BannonsLiver Jan 2025 #33

LMAO BannonsLiver Jan 2025 #32