Say… Stored in Moscow?
Unless those Top Secret documents are just a recipe for KFC or Coke, we have been dangerously compromised.
Those are extremely top secret, the Coke formula or the Colonel’s seven herbs and spices… Forget nuclear codes, now you’re talking Da Vinci Code-level stuff.
That’s not just national security, the fate of humanity would be at stake.
Does this sound like a wimp who’s going to lose his nerve, submit to Republican pressure, and not follow through? I didn’t think so. [Gift link]
An emotional Attorney General Merrick B. Garland addressed new citizens on Saturday at Ellis Island
…During a 10-minute speech in which he repeatedly stopped to collect himself, the attorney general recounted the tale of his grandmother’s flight from antisemitism in what is now Belarus before World War II, and the narrow escape to New York made by his wife’s mother, who fled Austria after Nazis annexed the country in 1938.
…The attorney general often uses public appearances to address Mr. Trump and Trumpism in veiled but unmistakable terms, decrying division and vowing to hold “the powerful” accountable for crimes they commit.
…“The protection of law — the rule of law — is the foundation of our system of government,” said Mr. Garland, a slight, upright figure standing under the soaring barrel vault in the immigration museum’s great hall, which served as the point of entry for millions of immigrants from 1892 to 1954.
“The rule of law means that the law treats each of us alike: There is not one rule for friends, another for foes; one rule for the powerful, another for the powerless; a rule for the rich, another for the poor,” he said…
…Mr. Garland … wrote his speech with the care he once lavished on appellate decisions…
…
My bold.
There is not one rule for friends, another for foes; one rule for the powerful, another for the powerless; a rule for the rich, another for the poor…
You can just imagine your average GQP’er reflexively wincing at that.
Well, aside from cash bail.
Indeed, there are many specific policies, in many parts of the USA, that do have practical implications making things easier for the rich and harder for the poor. In addition to cash bail, for example, we could look at the statistics on prosecutions of white-collar crime as compared with prosecutions of possession of small amounts of outlawed drugs.
As for Garland’s speech:
He needs to say, plainly and explicitly, that no President is above the law.
He will not do so.
I get that Garland believes–quite sincerely–that saying “no one is above the law” will be interpreted by every single listener to include Trump.
And he’s completely, utterly, and dangerously wrong in that assumption.
Millions of Trump fans and others who believe they will personally benefit from authoritarian rule have a clear understanding that “no one is above the law” does NOT, repeat, does NOT apply to Trump. Trump’s violations of US and state laws are apparent to just about everyone, but the fact that as of this date he remains unindicted, is “proof” to many that Trump IS above the law------------and more importantly, that our system INTENDS that Trump be, and remain, above the law.
Garland could short-circuit this with a single sentence.
But he won’t.
And it would actually make a difference. We have an election coming up in mere weeks, and we already know that many GOP election officials intend to skirt the laws----and feel great about it. After all, it’s in the service of Trump: The Man Who is OFFICIALLY Above the Law.
Garland could change this perception by speaking a single sentence: NO PRESIDENT IS ABOVE THE LAW.
But he won’t.
He’ll never say it. He’ll just tell himself “everyone knows that when I say ‘no one is above the law,’ that includes Trump, too.”
What he is telling himself is
FALSE
FALSE
FALSE
FALSE
FALSE
FALSE.
Garland needs to say “NO PRESIDENT IS ABOVE THE LAW.”
But he won’t.
You’re not alone in this.
Good citations–thanks.
I don’t think Garland has stopped to think about the possibility that his assumption (that “everyone” knows that “no one is above the law” includes Trump) is WRONG. And obviously he would then compound that by failing to consider the implications.
It DOES make a difference that he fails to say those words. He may not mean to reassure those who’ve decided Trump is above the law…but that’s exactly what he’s doing.
He’s reassuring them. He’s comforting them. He’s encouraging them.
He needs to say “NO PRESIDENT IS ABOVE THE LAW.” He needs to stop making assumptions (that it’s already covered by what he has said, or that saying it would change nothing).
Could Garland possibly be as stupid as you people think he is?
I didn’t claim that Garland lacked brainpower.
I claimed that he has chosen not to question his assumptions.
In other words: the accusation is that Garland is human.
There are plenty of very, very smart people on this site. Will any of them claim that they’ve never made assumptions and stuck to them? (I would be very surprised, if so.)
Garland has a self-image. Like all of us, he makes decisions that he feels will support that self-image. In this case, I’d guess, he’s decided that he will NOT be explicit on the topic of who is or is not subject to law, because of his assumption that every single listener will assume that “no one is above the law” means that Trump is not above the law.
I am suggesting that this apparent assumption of Garland’s is in error.
Are you suggesting that smart people never make assumptions that turn out to be flawed?
His actions, or lack thereof, will speak louder.
That’s right.
But his reluctance to say “No President is above the law” gives us a strong hint about what his actions are likely to be.
Or to put it another way: a strong hint about actions he may be reluctant to take.
I’m glad he’s done what he’s done since the January 6th Committee hearings. And obviously I hope he’ll do more than simply rack up a list of “actions” and then sadly announce that in spite of all the DOJ efforts, indictment is not possible.
Hope is not gone.
This is the same thread that began with the premise that Garland wouldn’t be “going after” anyone. So far it looks like he will be trying to enforce the law, even if it means signing off on a search of the former guy’s home. There is a judge involved who is obviously pulling for Trump. I’m not so concerned about Garlands words at this point, but his actions.
Patience, Grasshopper. There will be time for outrage should we need it.
The idea that Garland should say—now—that no President is above the law does not stem from outrage.
It stems from concern over the effect his decision NOT to say it is having on lawless persons who have power or influence over the fast-upcoming elections.
Again: Garland may sincerely believe that saying “no one is above the law” is understood by ALL to mean that Trump is not above the law.
If this is what he believes, he’s plainly wrong. And talking about it (all over the Internet and on news shows, etc.) is part of a legitimate effort to invite him to reconsider his assumptions.
It definitely seems to be fueled by outrage, as you have repeated expressed anger about this difference of opinion. I don’t see a clear statement by you for what benefit would be accomplished by him saying “no President is above the law,” let alone a means by which that would actually occur.
And I definitely don’t see any reason why his disagreeing with you on how he should word things means that he’s less likely to pursue charges. His actions speak louder, and his actions indicate that he’s going after Trump quite strongly.
I actually suspect the reason Garland isn’t directly mentioning presidents is that it would basically be directly referring to Trump. If some people don’t get that this also includes ex-presidents, that’s not something he considered worthy of concern. He sees it as more important that DOJ retain the semblance of impartiality, and that specifically mentioning the word “president” in this environment would go too far.
Garland tends to be more motivated by his personal beliefs than he does by politics. He’s likely being political only reluctantly. He’d rather just not have discussed anything until he could spring the indictment.
It feels to me that it’s important to you for Garland to say as openly and specifically as he’s able to the public that he’s preparing to prosecute Trump. Correct or no?
If you’re waiting for him to say, “Donald Trump is not above the law,” I’m betting he’s not going to.
Wouldn’t that put the door wide open for partisans to go after sitting presidents who haven’t really done anything wrong?
All those attempts to connect Joe to Hunter and Burisma, for example.
He’s not saying “No president is above the law” or “Donald Trump isn’t above the law” because that would rhetorically weaken his thesis. His whole point is that Trumps role as president and public figure is irrelevant. The point is that so far as the law is concerned Trump is a person like any other. They aren’t going to let him skate just because he is president but also they aren’t going to go after him just because he’s president. Bringing his title into it makes his title appear relevant and subtly suggests that that they are targeting him specifically.
This has the same energy to it as Republicans criticizing Democrats for not saying “Radical Islamic Terrorism”. It won’t win the war and if it has any effect at all, it will only be to give Trump ammo for his “more persecuted than Jesus” argument. There is no need to call out Trump and tell him that his day is coming. He just paid three million dollars up front for a lawyer to give him the time of day. He is fucked in so many ways it is hard to remember them all. He cannot make his troubles go away. He can only delay them. And every day that he delays he is shorter of breath and one day closer to death.
Prison would be a relief for him and I think he’d do well there but that is for another thread. Right now he’s in hell and he’s staying there for the rest of his life, especially if he gets another shot at the White House. Absolute endless misery for the rest of his life, day in and day out. The more he fights the more he suffers and the more it costs him. And his ultimate opponents, time and chance, have infinite resources. Things will go very slowly for a very long time and then things will go very quickly indeed.