General Discussion

republianmushroom

(19,756 posts)

28. Respect Jack Smith to say he's wrong, but,

Thu Jan 16, 2025, 04:53 PM

Jan 2025

DOJ's 'fantastic' red carpet: The Trump case vs. the Reality Winner case - All In - MSNBC

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1017836953

A.G. Merrick Garland Resisted Investigating Trump’s Connection to January 6: Washington Post
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/06/garland-doj-resisted-investigating-trump-january-6

FBI resisted opening probe into Trump’s role in Jan. 6 for more than a year
In the DOJ’s investigation of Jan. 6, key Justice officials also quashed an early plan for a task force focused on people in Trump’s orbit
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2023/06/19/fbi-resisted-opening-probe-into-trumps-role-jan-6-more-than-year/

Why Did the DOJ Resist Investigating Donald Trump’s Role in January 6?
Why Did the DOJ Resist Investigating Donald Trump’s Role in January 6?

The lost year: How Merrick Garland’s Justice Department ran out of time prosecuting Trump for January 6
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/the-lost-year-how-merrick-garland-s-justice-department-ran-out-of-time-prosecuting-trump-for-january-6/ar-AA1x2a82

AG Garland reiterates 'no person' -- not even Trump -- is above the law over Jan. 6
https://www.goodmorningamerica.com/news/story/ag-garland-reiterates-person-trump-law-jan-87140695

The Jan. 6 committee gift-wrapped Trump for Merrick Garland. Is it enough?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2022/03/05/merrick-garland-prosecute-trump-select-committee/

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

Stargleamer WA-03 Democrat

44 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Charges Merrick Garland delayed or dragged his feet on the investigation are proven false in the Smith report [View all] bigtree Jan 2025 OP

So... who's sitting on Vol. 2 now? C_U_L8R Jan 2025 #1

Cannon, not Garland. You don't get to push Garland to violate the law because you won't suffer consequences Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2025 #4

garland admitted cannon does not have that authority. Think. Again. Jan 2025 #5

Yes, but until the courts rule against her, her ruling has temporary authority. Breaking it is breaking the law Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2025 #9

She does not have temporary authority... Think. Again. Jan 2025 #11

They are not in her court, but she has ruled. Until a judge is over-ruled, their rulings hold sway Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2025 #15

judges can't just go ruling on cases that are not in their courts. Think. Again. Jan 2025 #17

Correct. They can't. But they do. And until they are corrected, their rulings stay current and enforceable Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2025 #21

Yes, they can't. Think. Again. Jan 2025 #24

. Scrivener7 Jan 2025 #2

that's a problem bigtree Jan 2025 #8

. Scrivener7 Jan 2025 #10

again with the cartoon ass bigtree Jan 2025 #13

. Scrivener7 Jan 2025 #14

You have no argument or facts, so you show your ass to a fellow DU member. You can do better. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2025 #16

You're wasting your electrons. It has been conclusively established Ocelot II Jan 2025 #3

Still with this Garland defense? He failed spectacularly to. prosecute and jail trump. Now the traitor... brush Jan 2025 #6

it's more valid than the lies spread that Garland was inactive or delayed something. bigtree Jan 2025 #12

It's not complicated. Not immediately investigating, indicting, prosecuting and convicting trump first thing... brush Jan 2025 #20

it actually is complicated bigtree Jan 2025 #30

Nah, Garland failed horribly. Nothing complicated about that fact., on that trump takes over again in a few days... brush Jan 2025 #39

that's not true at all bigtree Jan 2025 #40

I say Garland failed horribly, you disagree. Let's leave it at that. brush Jan 2025 #41

It's not a defence, it is a more balanced perspective. Even Biden was disappointed in Garland Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2025 #18

You realize Smith just skipped over the first 2 years in his report, right? Think. Again. Jan 2025 #7

You don't cite the Smith report at all iemanja Jan 2025 #19

please post the quote from President Biden saying the appointment was a mistake bigtree Jan 2025 #29

Why cling to caring his water? iemanja Jan 2025 #32

why continue to criticize the AG with things clearly refuted by the report?. bigtree Jan 2025 #35

Naturally. As a rational adult, that's what I expected. No surprises there. Oopsie Daisy Jan 2025 #22

Well is this true or not: Stargleamer Jan 2025 #23

So there was "solid evidence" linking the rioters to Trump, but... Cowpunk Jan 2025 #25

reports dispute that. That financial investigation took place shortly after the arrests of rioters bigtree Jan 2025 #31

The problem with that is he didn't appoint the special counsel until a year later than he should have. JohnSJ Jan 2025 #26

Musk bought Twitter qazplm135 Jan 2025 #27

Respect Jack Smith to say he's wrong, but, republianmushroom Jan 2025 #28

you posted the Carol Leonning article which just lied about what the DOJ was doing bigtree Jan 2025 #33

imagine if Garland put this much effort into correcting misinformation! That might have helped. thebigidea Jan 2025 #34

no prosecutor discusses ongoing prosecutions in public bigtree Jan 2025 #36

Nor do they discuss cases that they don't want to prosecute for political reasons. republianmushroom Jan 2025 #37

we know that the AG doesn't just bring forward charges on his own will and whim bigtree Jan 2025 #38

We all so know trump committed more crimes than what he was indicted for. republianmushroom Jan 2025 #42

that's not the way law works bigtree Jan 2025 #43

I don't take legal advice or analysis I'm not paying for since it's generally worthless thebigidea Jan 2025 #44