Garland's Decisions For 2 Investigations

[gab13by13]

1. Matt Gaetz

Gaetz was accused of numerous sex related crimes which carried a minimum sentence of 10 years in prison.
Garland looked at the evidence from numerous individuals, including Gaetz partner in crime who turned state's evidence on Gaetz. Including the victim herself along with other eye witnesses, along with documentation, receipts.

Garland deemed the witnesses to not be reliable and shit canned the prosecution.

2. Hunter/Joe Biden

The investigation into the Bidens had been going on for years. Hunter and Joe were accused of taking kickbacks from Burisma and China.
Garland became AG and continued the investigation. The main FBI informant, whistleblower got his information from Russian agents. The main informant is being prosecuted for lying to the FBI and stands to do jail time. Nevertheless, this investigation was allowed to branch out until prosecutor Weiss dug up a tax violation (one that is rarely prosecuted) and gun violation against Hunter. In order for Weiss to indict Hunter on the tax crime he asked Garland to make him a special counsel, and Garland gladly obliged.

3. Garland Bonus decision.

Garland appointed Hur a special counsel to investigate President Biden having possession of classified documents at his properties.
Garland released Hur's unredacted report on his investigation that contained lies and defaming statements about Joe.

Still waiting on Garland to release the Mueller report and am not holding my breath for Garland to release the Jack Smith reports.

I still have scars that haven't healed for my truth telling about Merrick Garland.

[Fiendish Thingy]

1. If the "truth" you tell is imaginary, are the "scars" actually real?

Regardless of all the misinformation you’ve spread over the last few years, one thing remains unquestionably, undeniably true:

Your searing, blinding white hot hatred for Merrick Garland burns with the intensity of a thousand suns.

I defer to Master Yoda on hatred:

Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering

What Yoda didn’t speak on is that the suffering that comes from hatred often afflicts the hater as well as anyone targeted by their hate.

Sincerely wishing you a peaceful, hate-free Christmas and New Year. Self care will be critical in facing and resisting the challenges that lie ahead.

[gab13by13]

3. I haven't seen any links from Empty Wheel lately,

The main informant that Garland trusted in the Hunter/Joe investigation is going to prison and yet Garland allowed the bogus investigation to continue. Yet Garland dismissed the Gaetz investigation because of unreliable witnesses. Who can be more unreliable that an informant who gets his information from the KGB?

My scars have nothing to do with hate. My scars are the result of so many people attacking me because I keep posting the truth about Merrick Garland.

Why not post the Empty wheel link that is your only defense of Garland?

[Fiendish Thingy]

9. Once again...

I don’t defend Garland, I defend reality, by refuting your unsubstantiated opinions that you present as verified facts (yes, sometimes you include actual facts in your Garland bashing, but only as a path to insisting on a particular meaning gleaned from those facts).

Did Garland dismiss the Gaetz investigation, or was it the US Attorney in Florida?

Emptywheel appears to be focused on the challenges ahead, and the journalistic malpractice occurring on a daily basis. She has covered the Trump investigations exhaustively, and, aside from Smith’s final report, I’m not sure what else there is to discuss unless new information surfaces. There is no need for me to post past links from her site, as you never read them anyway, or if you did, your blinding hatred for Garland kept you from understanding the point she was making.

My scars have nothing to do with hate. My scars are the result of so many people attacking me because I keep posting the truth about Merrick Garland.

From my unscientific observation, it was only a handful of posters who challenged you on your false statements about Garland and the DOJ. Otherwise, your Garland-bashing threads often rose to the top of the rec list - seems that would give you quite a boost, rather than scars.

The fact is you seem driven to post Garland bashing OP’s almost daily, scapegoating him for everything from Trump escaping justice (when folks in the reality based community know the real villain of this story is the Roberts court) to Harris losing the election, to the heartbreak of psoriasis.

My wish is for you to, as Princess Elsa sings in Frozen, “Let It Go”, and free yourself from the prison of Garland hatred and let your self-inflicted scars heal so you will be prepared for the challenges that lie ahead.

?feature=shared

[dchill]

19. Reality doesn't need to be defended.

I needs to be changed, and many times, punched in the face.

[Fiendish Thingy]

33. You mean like how Luigi changed reality? Nt

[dchill]

41. Sure, FT, sure. Anything you say.

[Fiendish Thingy]

42. Just trying clarify what you meant to say. Nt

[Scrivener7]

44. Lol! This seems to be the new argument all the Garland

apologist kids are sporting:

"We shit on you, insulted you, name-called and swarmed you FOR YEARS and insisted the DOJ was going to do something. Ok, it never happened, and now we know it won't, but there's no way we're going to admit we were wrong. So NOW, we're going to tell you to 'let it go.' Sometimes we'll also insist you're a bad Democrat if you don't let it go. Because we don't like to talk about it. For obvious reasons. So move on, all! Nothing to see here!"

I do like your addition: the portrayal of yourself as one of the brave few standing against the many. That is just hilarious.

I will agree, though, that most of the scores of people who engaged in the swarming have been reasonable enough to admit their mistake. Only a handful still insist that the glaring evidence of their obvious wrongness is meaningless because Marcy Emptywheel says so.

[Fiendish Thingy]

46. Still quite inaccurate

"We shit on you, insulted you, name-called and swarmed you FOR YEARS and insisted the DOJ was going to do something. Ok, it never happened, andnow we know it won't, but there's no way we're going to admit we were wrong

Your statement still frames the argument as DOJ did nothing , and those of us defending reality know that is factually inaccurate, that DOJ did indeed do something (investigate and prosecute Trump) despite obstruction and delays from both career staff and the courts.

Then you double down and call those who point out this observable, measurable reality (DOJ did indeed investigate and prosecute Trump) “apologists”. The defense of reality requires no apologies.

If anyone is acting as an apologists, it is those who completely ignore (and apparently accept and forgive) the indisputable, critical role the courts, especially SCOTUS played in enabling Trump to evade justice. No matter who the AG was - Schiff, Kirschner, Weissman, Yates, you pick - the delays and obstruction by the courts and the ultimate outcome - no trial before the election - would have been the same.

I am fully expecting your reply to move the goalposts (“yes, Garland and DOJ “did something”, but it was slow, incompetent and not aggressive enough”, etc.) I can only have a discussion with you based on your actual words , which is why I have quoted you in my reply.

P.S. I don’t think I’ve ever insulted anyone personally- I have ridiculed the errors in their arguments and questioned their motivation for spreading provably false information, but did not insult or call them names. Believe it or not, we all wanted to see Trump behind bars.

[Scrivener7]

58. Of course. They're doing secret things behind the scenes and it's not a Law & Order episode.

Grasshopper.

But shouldn't you be letting this go? Or is that just the people who disagree with you?

[Fiendish Thingy]

59. Secret things behind the scenes?

What are you talking about?

The investigation, indictment and prosecution of Trump by DOJ is part of the public record, and refutes the claim by you and others that “DOJ did nothing”.

Indeed, my original response to gab was to encourage him to “let go” of his burning, all consuming hatred for Garland, as a form of self care to better prepare for the challenges ahead. Of course, the choice is ultimately his to make. Despite the distressing outcome of Trump’s court-enabled evasion of justice, I carry no such hatred, so there is nothing to “let go” of.

In the meantime, I will continue to defend reality and the facts that contribute to that reality.

(See quote in my sig line for more info)

[Scrivener7]

60. So it is only for the people who disagree with you. Somehow, that doesn't surprise me at all.

Also, "what are you talking about?"

You can't be serious. Really, that's too much. This is parody, right?

[Fiendish Thingy]

62. Are you talking about DOJ's non-public actions during the early part of the investigation?

Sure, those things were “behind the scenes”, but much more is known now than was known in 2021-22, hence my confusion over your comment that apparently referred to DOJ actions “behind the scenes” that you seemed to imply were taking place right now . I’ve made no such claims about current DOJ activities.

Someday, perhaps we will all know even more about what went on internally at DOJ during the Trump investigations, but what we do know at present definitely refutes any assertions that DOJ “did nothing”.

My advice to “let go” of hatred stands for all of us who hope to maintain the emotional stamina required to cope and resist during the next four years. True, deep-seated Hatred is an all-consuming, crippling emotion that can cast aside love and compassion (see how the insurrectionists treated their own families, some even threatening to kill their families).

Hatred of Garland, and scapegoating him for Trump’s evasion of justice, when the finger of blame should be pointed squarely at the courts, is, as you say, probably limited to those who disagree with me.

[Scrivener7]

63. That's nice. Happy holidays to you and yours!

[Fiendish Thingy]

66. Indeed! Here's to a hate-free holiday to you and all at DU! Nt

[Scrivener7]

74. *sigh*

[Envirogal]

68. Garland screwed this country

Not sure why you jumped on this because it is so obvious Garland sat on his hands. If he had held Trump accountable early in (knowing he uses the courts to delay) rather than waiting too long and allowing Tramp enough time to rebrand, regroup and….delay.

[Fiendish Thingy]

70. Walk me through how Garland, or any AG of your choosing, could have circumvented the courts' obstruction

Step by step, if you please.

Remember, anytime a “more aggressive” AG might have prevailed in a lower court on a particular issue (immunity, executive privilege, attorney-client privilege, admissibility of evidence), that ruling would have been appealed to a higher court, and a stay issued blocking any movement on the prosecution or trial.

There would have been no end of issues litigated, and in the end, the outcome would not have been different- there would have been no trial before the election.

BTW, DOJ began a preliminary investigation of Trump before he left office in 2021, and Garland launched a formal investigation, with a dedicated team of prosecutors, in June 2021. He did encounter resistance from career staff at DOJ and FBI, but, as the abundant evidence shows, did not “sit on his hands”.

Why do you ignore the critical role of the courts in enabling Trump to evade justice?

[Duncan Grant]

5. In 2003, we called this a personal attack, a violation of the TOS.

I’d be happy to read anything you post about the content of the OP. If there’s a good factual defense of Garland, let’s discuss that and weigh the merits of two opinions/analysis.

I’m less interested in reading insults directed at an individual.

[Fiendish Thingy]

14. If you've been here since 2003, surely you've seen the pushback on gab's Garland bashing

Which is in itself a violation of TOS.

When dozens, sometimes hundreds, of folks have rec’d his Garland scapegoating posts without question, A handful of us, about 4 or 5 IIRC, have consistently challenged gab’s false statements and faulty conclusions (opinions drawn from facts, which aren’t supported by those facts) repeatedly and often at great length and detail with numerous factual sources.


The investigations have been closed, and the charges dismissed. There is no need to rehash the tiresome “debate” over whether Garland is the true villain in this story.

Scapegoating requires minimal critical thinking skills, and provides bountiful emotional rewards, often at the expense of a clear perception of reality. 77 million Trump voters have proven that to be true.

[LeftInTX]

18. Blaming Garland for everything that's wrong with the world gets old!

[Blue Full Moon]

24. He offered them a republican to vote for, they didn't.

[Blue Full Moon]

23. Garland has beyond a doubt helped the republicans and their takeover.

[Fiendish Thingy]

32. That is your opinion

Not supported by facts in evidence.

There is far more factual evidence that the Roberts court intentionally and deliberately aided and abetted not only Trump’s escape from justice, thwarting Garland and Smith’s efforts to hold him accountable, but also assisting the Republicans in their transforming of America into an autocracy.

[Blue Full Moon]

35. Proof is in the pudding

[Blue Full Moon]

36. Facts support the fact either he is incompetent or complicit

[Fiendish Thingy]

40. The facts support neither conclusion

That is your opinion drawn from the facts.

Incompetence would require proof of good intentions, but poor, unskilled execution, whereas fact based reality has shown while there was indeed intention to investigate and prosecute to the full extent of the law, with a team of experienced prosecutors on hand, the execution of the investigation was obstructed by career employees at DOJ and FBI, as well as by SCOTUS.

Complicity would require evidence of Garland’s intentions to assist Trump in evading justice, and in Garland directly obstructing the investigation and prosecution. There are no facts in evidence to support this conclusion (and no, Garland moderating panels at the Federalist Society nor the passage of time between the launching of the investigation in June 2021 and the indictments are not PROOF! of Garland’s complicity)

[hadEnuf]

45. Fact. We are now on the road to a fascist dictatorship. Fact. The actual criminals now have full power and have

been walking away laughing while the DOJ was prosecuting obscure and rarely enforced technical laws against Democrats.

Quotes from imaginary Yoda are not really assuaging at this point.

[Fiendish Thingy]

47. You left out many facts

Without all the facts, the story is incomplete.

Other than Hunter Biden, which Democrats were prosecuted for “obscure and rarely enforced technical laws”?

You completely ignored the facts regarding the delay and obstruction by the courts and the role it played in enabling Trump to evade justice.

[hadEnuf]

48. Oh, come on.

The fact is that no number of apologies is going to validate the slow walking and milquetoast handling of Republicans by Garland's DOJ.

[Fiendish Thingy]

50. Again, ignoring facts for your own distortion of reality

Lots of MAGA insurrectionists (who I’m assuming are republicans) are behind bars.

Trump is not, and that isn’t due to any “slow walking and milquetoast handling” (your subjective opinions not supported by the facts), but is largely due to delays and obstruction by the courts.

As I said in another reply, pick your preferred AG- Schiff, Kirschner, Weissman, Yates, etc. and the outcome - no trial before the election- would have been the same.

[hadEnuf]

61. Sorry, Garland concentrated on putting away a few small fish while trying not to look "political" to the big fish.

And the big fish swam away.

Trying to overthrow the government seems pretty political to me and any actual moves to hold Trump accountable would have been made totally political by the Republicans anyway, so I guess Garland just chickened out?

You can dissect it and split hairs claiming facts, but overall, Garland let Trump and the Republicans slide.

[Fiendish Thingy]

65. The big fish was indicted

It was the courts that allowed him to swim away.

As for the medium size minion fish, it was Jack Smith , not Garland, who declined to seek indictments of those co-conspirators (although most were identified as unindicted co-conspirators). If the courts hadn’t obstructed justice, and Trump went to trial, those co-conspirators would have likely been called as witnesses and pressured to flip.

[58Sunliner]

49. Too bad you weren't around to advise the civil rights leaders when they called out injustices in the 50's and 60's.

[Think. Again.]

2. K&R

[Scrivener7]

4. "It's not a Law & Order episode!!11!!"

Well, it turned out that's for damn sure.

Precious little law or order resulted from Garland's tenure.

[Mike 03]

6. Even Biden said picking Garland was a mistake.

According to Bob Woodward, his inner circle--people closest to him--pushed for Garland.

Source: WAR, by Bob Woodward

[TheRickles]

17. If Biden felt it was such a mistake to pick Garland, why didn't he fire him a couple of years ago?

[SunSeeker]

21. Because it would have looked awful with a pending investigation against Hunter.

It's the same reason Biden initially would not pardon Hunter...

Until he realized, with the election of Trump, that Americans don't give a shit about appearance of impropriety.

[Orrex]

71. If you think about that question in terms of political reality, you'll have your answer

If Biden had fired him and the subsequent AG's actions resulted in pro-Biden or anti-Trump outcomes, then Biden, the AG, and the outcomes would have been attacked 24/7 by the reichwing propaganda machine and every Republican in government.

It was a mistake to pick Garland, a mistake that Biden openly acknowledged. But by then it was too late to replace him.

[TheRickles]

73. He could have urged Garland to retire in order to spend more time with him family.....

[Orrex]

75. That would be effectively the same as firing him

[uponit7771]

7. Damn, the bigger picture makes Garland look like an op and that's still bad.

[Grasswire2]

37. all I had to do was see....

....that the person who pushed Garland into AG job is the same person who is or was personal attorney for the Trump crime family to know that Garland for AG was an op.

AKA "Mistress of Disaster" for questionable decision making in the past.

[gab13by13]

8. The FBI informant, Smirrnov, pleaded guilty.

Now there is a rush to get him sentenced January 8th, I believe. Smirnov has dirt on everyone, including Congressional Magats.

Something is rotten in Denmark with the push for an early sentence. Marcy Wheeler is laughingly calling what Smirnov did and what Hunter did to be similar, give me a fucking break.

Musk/Trump may want to get Smirnov sentenced during Joe's presidency and that will give Trump an excuse to pardon a Putin stooge. Trump will claim, as Marcy has claimed, that Smirnov got too stiff of a sentence. Smirnov won't have to worry about going near windows in high buildings.

[Aviation Pro]

10. At this point, Milquetoast would have been a shit justice on SCOTUS

His judgement or lack thereof is profound and I hope the little weasel does not get a Presidential pardon.

[DiamondShark]

54. Yep, many posts deleted.

Not to mention all the posters "self deleting."

[58Sunliner]

53. I have to question the motivation.

[oldmanlynn]

12. Dems need to stop putting republicans in charge of DOJ and FBI

Every time it back fires.

[NotHardly]

15. Garland is a traitor to the people to whom he is responsible ...

[gab13by13]

16. Garland is still our top cop,

and I have zero proof about this but something smelly is going on at DOJ. It usually takes 3 months to sentence someone and Smirnov wants to be sentenced in less than 30 days.

I am saying that Musk/Trump are working out the best logistics for him to pardon a Russian mole FBI informant.

Marcy Wheeler is claiming that what Hunter and Smirnov did should have gotten similar sentences, that is a joke. So when Smirnov is sentenced while Joe is still president once Trump takes over he will quickly claim that the Biden justice department overreached in its sentencing so then Trump will have an excuse to pardon a Russian mole.

Maybe Garland is clueless as to what is going on?

Bookmark this post, if I am wrong and Trump does not pardon or commute Smirnov's sentence, I will own up to it.

[niyad]

22. "garland in heels"??? wtf does that even mean, because from where I

am sitting, it reads like an extremely sexist insult.

[onecaliberal]

25. Point taken. Intent was they are of the same mind.

[niyad]

28. "they" who?

[rubbersole]

26. Pardons are going to be like candy falling from a piata. 🪅.*

Russian assets will be at the top of the list. The rule of law is only going to be used for retribution. Pam Bondi will make Garland (weak pos) look like Atilla the Hun to actual criminals in government.

*Spell check won't let me type piñata.

[MLAA]

29. I was a Garland supporter for the first year or two. What a major, total disappointment he is, even derelict.

[yaesu]

30. I cannot blame gar for hiding under his desk through all of the fascist crime spree

it's a scary world out there!

[republianmushroom]

34. A little more, another one above the law.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100219844449
https://news.yahoo.com/news/elon-musk-being-investigated-violating-201238122.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/17/technology/elon-musk-spacex-national-security-reporting.html

47 months and counting

[djacq]

43. Failure... Plain and Simple

Dean Obeidallah was right...

We Democrats need fighters and Garland was not a fighter.

[58Sunliner]

51. Merry Christmas to you gab.

Garland did not do his job to protect our democracy. The end result speaks for itself.

[3auld6phart]

56. Still

Wonder why Pre. Obama ecccommended gutless Garland to be an S S Court Justice ?

[getagrip_already]

64. Amd where oh where is the sc report?

I doubt we will ever see anything of substance. Its likely under review by garland.

He probably ran out of black ink.

[MineralMan]

67. Guess what? In a month, you won't have Garland to kick around any more.

[Scrivener7]

76. Wasn't that Nixon's line?

[MineralMan]

77. What a great memory!

Yes, indeed it was.

[Orrex]

72. Haven't seen any of the cheerleaders reciting the mantras lately

Thou shalt not suggest that Garland is anything less than a paragon of justice, alacrity, and propriety.

[displacedvermoter]

78. Right up there with Mueller,

another tireless defender of the law.

Do you think we will ever see his unredacted report? Probably when we see Smith's.

[Politicub]

79. Never was a fan. But, it doesn't matter now.

His appointment is coming to an end. What’s the point of complaining?