General Discussion

bigtree

(93,849 posts)

25. I may have a different interpretation of 'still interviewing witnesses' than you

Wed Feb 25, 2026, 04:09 PM

12 hrs ago

...understanding that the DOJ is engaged in myriad similar investigations in which the AG does not personally involve themselves.

The fact that Trump's name was all over it would be cause for more restraint by the AG from interfering with the FBI's efforts, not less, in any planet earth DOJ ever.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

56 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Top Oversight Democrat says Merrick Garland should testify on Epstein [View all] Mr. Sparkle 14 hrs ago OP

Oh BeyondGeography 14 hrs ago #1

DURec leftstreet 14 hrs ago #2

Great idea! And while they're at it, please subpoena whomever at SDNY requested NM to stop ranch investigation in 2019 SheltieLover 13 hrs ago #3

Years of silence Tetrachloride 13 hrs ago #4

Merrick Garland also has standing Mblaze 13 hrs ago #5

Lol. msfiddlestix 13 hrs ago #6

Agree. Spineless weasels like Garland never stand up for anything. BannonsLiver 12 hrs ago #19

he's trying to appear even-handed here bigtree 12 hrs ago #27

Bill Barr needs to be deposed. poli-junkie 13 hrs ago #7

Yes, Barr and Garland both need to testify FakeNoose 12 hrs ago #13

This!!!!! 👆👆👆👆👆👆👆 SheltieLover 9 hrs ago #52

Gooooood! Prairie Gates 13 hrs ago #8

🤞🤞🤞🤞🤞🤞🤞🤞 Whyisthisstillclose 13 hrs ago #9

Merrick Garland would take the 5th... Escape 13 hrs ago #10

Merrick Garland has never and would never take the 5th. SunSeeker 12 hrs ago #12

Thank you. Well said Raven123 12 hrs ago #26

Epstein-related files could not be legally released during Garland's term because Maxwell's case was still under appeal bigtree 13 hrs ago #11

Here comes the Garland Society. BannonsLiver 12 hrs ago #14

There is certainly grounds for criticizing Garland for his slow prosecution of Trump, but not for this. SunSeeker 12 hrs ago #22

I've heard all those excuses and rationalizations before. BannonsLiver 12 hrs ago #24

Those are not "rationalizations" about the handling of the Epstein files, they're facts. SunSeeker 11 hrs ago #39

When Bondi threw Garland's name at Ted Lieu he didn't disagree with her premise that Garland was delinquent on Epstein BeyondGeography 11 hrs ago #41

Ted Lieu was not implying Garland should have disclosed the Epstein files. SunSeeker 10 hrs ago #44

Exactly. Thank you bigtree. He didn't want to comment because it could endanger the conviction, which was on appeal. SunSeeker 12 hrs ago #16

this expectation of some is a degeneration of norms bigtree 12 hrs ago #23

Sounds sorta like can't fight the fire until the house KPN 12 hrs ago #21

I may have a different interpretation of 'still interviewing witnesses' than you bigtree 12 hrs ago #25

There's some management tools called priorities, assignment of resources, KPN 12 hrs ago #28

none of which have been shown by anyone to have been neglected or mismanaged bigtree 12 hrs ago #31

You have your opinion. I have mine. This was a big deal as KPN 11 hrs ago #38

I literally said none was shown bigtree 10 hrs ago #42

You can't show something that is missing -- like higher priority, greater emphasis, etc. I don't isolate everything to KPN 10 hrs ago #45

we're only talking about points and processes of law. What does 'proof' have to do with all that, you say? bigtree 9 hrs ago #48

Instead of escalating and projecting -- as in "obfuscating", KPN 4 hrs ago #54

the projection here is against Garland bigtree 3 hrs ago #55

Mmmhmmm. KPN 2 hrs ago #56

UH OH, Escape 12 hrs ago #15

I like to call it the Garland Society. BannonsLiver 12 hrs ago #18

Yes, and isn't it amazing... Escape 10 hrs ago #46

Interesting question. BannonsLiver 9 hrs ago #49

One million files and nothing was done The Blue Flower 12 hrs ago #17

Incompetence or worse? KPN 12 hrs ago #29

Blaming Biden's DOJ is everywhere on right wing social media. progressoid 12 hrs ago #20

Lol. In some ways, I can't disagree. KPN 12 hrs ago #30

We need to have a GOOD answer to this or it will cost us in the election. Currently our answer is that Scrivener7 11 hrs ago #35

THIS. Absolutely. Shed the thin skin and blinders. KPN 10 hrs ago #47

Instead of wasting time on Garland... appmanga 12 hrs ago #32

This. Good idea. Scrivener7 12 hrs ago #34

THIS SunSeeker 11 hrs ago #40

Garland won't tell us anything. Bring on Jack Smith to talk about his investigations. Scrivener7 12 hrs ago #33

The deep of corruption in the current and former DOJ is very enlightening. Pretty obvious walkingman 11 hrs ago #36

Brilliant idea xuplate 11 hrs ago #37

Well there's at least one thing MAGAts and Dems appear to agree on MorbidButterflyTat 10 hrs ago #43

It's essentially spring in my area already. BannonsLiver 9 hrs ago #50

So should Barr!!! SheltieLover 9 hrs ago #51

AGREE ! republianmushroom 7 hrs ago #53