Well from the lips of y’all to the ears of God, certainly. I’d love to be wrong. But Trump has survival skills that cockroaches stand in awe of.
I guess this is the ultimate test of whether or not the perfect is the enemy of the good. But I am somewhat encouraged by news stories I see tonight in which Trump’s cronies actually described their “alternate” slates of electors as fakes. But Trump can find a way to lie and bluster out of that.
Trump can still send a mob to his house. As far as Republicans are concerned, that’s legitimate political discourse (unless of course it is them being chased out of a restaurant or etc.).
Why weren’t they doing that themselves right from the start? What if the house committee didn’t uncover any information, where would the DOJ be now? The investigation needed to begin as soon as Garland was given his title. This was not some conspiracy theory, it happened live on camera on Jan. 6, Trump called for a crowd to march on the Capitol to prevent congress from certifying the election because he falsely claimed the election was stolen. The plan was exposed as reality on Jan. 6 when Hawley and other traitors attempted to block the certification. We saw that Trump did not take any steps to call off the mob and stop the violence. He has never admitted that he lost the election and continues to promote his big lie. The house committee turned up no evidence contrary to the obvious, Donald Trump conducted a failed insurrection against the government with the intent to stop the certification of a legitimate election. What has Garland been doing for a year and a half?
They can’t fire him. But they can lie about him, smear him and encourage their useful idiots to post death threats to him. They can get any internal DOJ Trumpers to make up shit about him. They can get Faux News to promote these lies over and over and over again until they become accepted.
Right. And the delays have given Trump World the time to figure those things out.
By the way, I’m announcing my candidacy for president in 2024. I can commit all the federal crimes I want and the DOJ can’t touch me. I’ll start my campaign for the next election before this one completes so I’ll be free for life. Is this country great or what?
Attorney General Merrick Garland did not rule out the possibility of prosecuting former President Trump over the Jan. 6 Capitol attack in a Tuesday interview with NBC News’ Lester Holt.
Sure, he’s been spending his time on the rabble. He is clearly behind in this game and if not for the pressure from the house committee he wouldn’t be moving at all.
Has Garland empaneled a special grand jury to initiate an investigation into the events of Jan. 6? With that step an AG should not have to worry about politically sensitive investigations prior to elections. If a grand jury establishes that a crime was committed then it’s not a politically motivated investigation.
I don’t like hearing all these technicalities the talking heads keep bringing up about the motivation and state of mind of Trump and his co-conspirators. It’s always like this when it comes to crimes committed by government officials, they protect themselves in the way the laws are defined so there’s always an out. When you rob a bank the cloth bag with a $ on it is all the proof needed that your state of mind was to rob a bank. Use a violent attack on the Capitol to overthrow the government and the the state has to prove that you didn’t do that unintentionally and you didn’t actually believe you were preventing someone else from robbing the bank by stealing the money from the vault.
Good point. I guess the problem is the inherent uncertainties about specific actions — e.g., there’s no direct order by Trump to the mob to, say, “kidnap Pence and Schumer, and place them on guillotines until they agree to certify alternate slates of electors”…
…but there’s abundant, obvious-from-day-one evidence of only slightly less specific intent, to disrupt the legal political process through menace and threats of violence.
(and did the intent include ordering or encouraging actual violence and occupation, as indeed occurred? That might be a little harder to prove…but what’s EASY to prove is that a reasonable person should be able to know that one has a good chance of leading to the other…and that, once it had started, it should have been stopped immediately).
Hadn’t seen anything about their state of mind. Huh. Well, there are mental institutions for that. Then you go to jail after your ‘state of mind’ is better. Works for me.
This is what’s aggravating. But perhaps they are just being quiet about it. I have my doubts though…
The investigation IMHO, should be loud and proud. Standing up for democracy. Stir this pot up. Get people talking, scare the shit out of the insurrection and seditionists.
This too is troubling. Trump admitted to obstruction in an interview with Lester Holt.
I quoted part of that interview in another thread specifically because it seemed to me that Garland was emphatically saying that anyone – no matter who it is – who was criminally responsible for the events of Jan 6 or found to be “attempting to interfere with the lawful transfer of power from one administration to another” will be held accountable.
I suppose the salient question here is whether Garland was just flapping his mouth for purposes of a sound bite, or whether he can be taken at his word.
I’m going to disagree. It would be great to convict Trump, but at the end of the day, they should indict and try him if they have sufficient evidence, even if for political reasons they think he’s unlikely to be convicted. The facts need to be made public, regardless.
I am fine with taking the time it takes, but if at the end of the day there is lots of evidence, but not as much as they’d like to make it a slam dunk, they should still go forward.
We need to demonstrate that no one is above the law. A trial will show that, even if Trump is acquitted, because the facts will be out there, part of history. It will show that just being rich and powerful doesn’t make you immune.
I agree that Trump should be indicted and tried, and that there is more than enough evidence to do so. But we all know how he’ll spin this in the likely event that he’s acquitted: the evil liberals tried to take him down, but ultimately he was completely exonerated! And to his devoted faithful, that will be the only “fact” that matters.
That’s why an actual conviction is equally as important as an indictment.
And I’m totally mystified by the reverence that is bestowed on someone just because they are “a former president”. Of course in normal circumstances a former president deserves the greatest respect. But a former president who is a criminal and a traitor deserves a special kind of condemnation, because he betrayed the entire nation and abused the greatest position of trust that America has to offer.
