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

bigtree

(93,669 posts)
8. we failed to back him up with our votes
Wed Aug 20, 2025, 08:29 AM
Aug 2025

...electing an already convicted felon.

Charged and even convicted felons in jail can run for office and get elected and serve.

None of that is within Garland's control.

May the people who stayed home and let Trump in again be remembered for ending a prosecution that was IN COURT when we voted and would be over and done, but for the appeals, if voters had done the right thing.

At no time did Garland refuse to carry out ANY part of the prosecution, and that should be enough for people who appear to have no clue whatsoever what actually occurred in the prosecution; much less what Garland was doing.

I'd like to do the thing that people suggest for Trump and ask them simple details outside of the phony reports that Garland delayed something because of some internal squabble with some FBI agents reported. The bullshit, and incomplete report by Carol Leonning was spread far and wide by word of mouth until it became the BIG LIE that Garland had dragged his feet, basically diverting from the judges and justices who were the actual ones holding up evidence gathered and even dismissing one indictment.

But there aren't any damning articles from Leonning or other critics about the republican judges and justices who delayed the trial until we voted.

Not one fucking word - and I just find that insidiously tragic and weird that Garland took all of the heat for THEIR delays and dismissals of both evidence and charges already brought as the Supreme Court's maga majority did delaying their ruling which just made up law to shield Trump and give him immunity.

If you don't talk about any of that, you're just bashing over 20 prosecutors who worked all the way to the election to try and get Trump before a jury.

What a sham to blame the prosecutors and not mention the judges, justices, or the perps who parried countless ridiculous appeals against their friends on the court.

Wake up people. It's not the Garland prosecutors who are enemies of justice here, it's the republicans and their politically motivated judges and justices who delayed the case; who are STILL THERE making shitty rulings that favor Trump.

I think what's happening here is that people are either too afraid, or too out of their league to actually confront republicans and their compromised judges and call them out. They see Garland as a soft target.

But I partly blame the people like Palin's Nicolle Wallace and the whingers she brought on everyday to bash the people working to prosecute Trump and others as they stood firm against ALL of the challenges and appeals which Garland could have ended at any time if he was 'meek' or any of the other derogation reserved for the people working to hold Trump accountable.

Recommendations

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

Ben Wittes at Lawfare bigtree Aug 2025 #1
I have stated my opinion numerous times gab13by13 Aug 2025 #2
Right? Cosmocat Aug 2025 #15
A simple question: Chasstev365 Aug 2025 #3
you didn't figure in any republican judge or justice bigtree Aug 2025 #6
The long stretch of inactivity, and the long stretch that followed of minimal activity, Scrivener7 Aug 2025 #4
The case is: he failed, and he projected a meek quality that made him a natural scapegoat, who deserved it. Blues Heron Aug 2025 #5
we failed to back him up with our votes bigtree Aug 2025 #8
The last sentence makes sense to me. yardwork Aug 2025 #7
I guess no one is defending edhopper Aug 2025 #9
This boils down to "Garland was slow, but the Supreme Court might have blocked him anyway, and Republican voters muriel_volestrangler Aug 2025 #10
where, specifically are you claiming Garland was 'slow'? bigtree Aug 2025 #11
From the article: muriel_volestrangler Aug 2025 #12
'optimal speed' bigtree Aug 2025 #14
Fall 2021 - there's a delay of over 6 months. And a "slow-moving" strategy was the wrong one muriel_volestrangler Aug 2025 #17
jesus, do you know anything about prosecutions? bigtree Aug 2025 #18
Trump should have been the priority, not the rioters muriel_volestrangler Aug 2025 #19
Garland treated BOTH as a priority bigtree Aug 2025 #20
Apart from the failure to bring Trump to court before the 2024 election muriel_volestrangler Aug 2025 #21
Trump's indictment was actually IN COURT when we voted bigtree Aug 2025 #23
"In court" - meaning charges were listed, not that Trump was in court, with evidence being laid before a jury muriel_volestrangler Aug 2025 #28
there was a judge assigned, holding hearings in a courtroom who was approving all of the evidence bigtree Aug 2025 #29
A nice crock of baloney. lees1975 Aug 2025 #13
they moved as fast as the courts allowed bigtree Aug 2025 #16
Congress laid out the evidence in an investigation that was as complete as anything the DOJ had done lees1975 Aug 2025 #27
read the Smith report bigtree Aug 2025 #30
Imagine having "Defending Merrick Garland" be your political priority in 2025 thebigidea Aug 2025 #22
I'm more comfortable defending people who prosecuted Trump than attacking them bigtree Aug 2025 #24
He should have appointed Jack Smith immediately, rather than 2 years later. Bluepinky Aug 2025 #25
show us specifically where that would have made a difference bigtree Aug 2025 #32
He gave them a hat (to buy) MaineBlueBear Aug 2025 #26
I have zero problem with people defending Marrick Garland. gab13by13 Aug 2025 #31
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»'The Situation: In Defens...»Reply #8