I added the bolding. That is what should be noted here. Garland was doing nothing.
Perhaps he means the one where Trump is suing the Justice Department for $100 million for the “illegal” search of his home.
The one that Trump can order them to admit liability and settle once he takes power, thus proving that it was a witch hunt after all.
Didn’t we have a whole thread about Garland and the Justice Department?
In the Pit, this one is it (as far as I know).
But, yeah. The ONE thing that could have changed the Nov 5 outcome, I believe, was indicting Trump for both the federal cases in 2022 and proceeding with all appropriate speed. He’d have been convicted by the end of 2023 and the GOP would likely have run someone else. And the ‘someone else’ wouldn’t have been as strong—no other Republican offers the plausible excuses for supporting him that Trump does (chiefly the vaunted “he’s a great businessman and that’s what the US needs”).
Add in ‘Biden realizing his low favorability means he can’t win in 2024, and thus stepping aside by late 2023’, meaning a full Democratic primary, and we’d have had a chance to buck the global “anti-incumbency” trend.
Garland’s timidity will go down in history as being a root cause of the upcoming dark ages.
But he brought us peace in our time!
A big part of the blame goes to Cannon though.
I don’t think proving election interference and Trump’s role in Jan 6th would be quite as easy as some people here are making out. So if Garland rushed that to trial he may or may not have gotten a conviction. The documents case on the other hand was a slam dunk with Tump caught with the goods red handed. With any other judge he would have been convicted months ago and sentenced by now. Instead he got a judge would entertain his defense motions no matter how inane and delay indefinitely.
How is this not considered bribing the judge?
Trump has an R next to his name.
Because SCOTUS already ruled that it’s not bribery to reward someone after the fact. That sounds like insane bullshit but that’s what we get from the corrupt clowns in black robes.
On June 26, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court found that the main federal anti-corruption statute proscribing bribes to state and local officials does not criminalize gratuities, which the Court described as “payments made to an official after an official act as a token of appreciation.”
Yes, and…
Nominating an AG is an official act so he can’t be convicted or investigated for it. He could be impeached but that’s not going to happen unless Dems take the house and 2/3 of the senate.
We can dream about that in a couple of years but I can’t even dare to hope for it.
It’s fucking ridiculous. I as a COUNTY employee can’t recommend a surveyor for a problem with a property.
My Wife that also works for the county can’t recommend an appraiser.
But this is gonna be considered a gratuity. We all know this is bullshit, but there isn’t anything we can do about it.
Yup. I work for state government and it would be really illegal for me to accept tips for what I do, or any other after-the-fact consideration. But considering how much the conservative judges get wined and dined, would anyone expect them to understand how wrong that is?
I understand that that recommending this contractor or that, is not good. That’s fine.
When your job is in government. Your primary duty is to help people. I love that and we work very, very hard to do that.
That is our job. That’s all we do.
Where does it say you cannot file cases (for another box of documents) until you hit a sane judge. He’s running the DoJ, he’s got the mostest lawyers.
He really does deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as ol’ Neville, doesn’t he?
Yes, but it’s fair to wonder if she’d have been quite as blatantly pro-Trump if that trial had been taking place in late 2022 or early 2023. There would have been no talk of ‘this is election interference’ to provide her with plausible cover for her bias. The mood of the nation was different.
Maybe some elements of the way this all developed would have had to be sped up in order to indict Trump in 2022 and proceed to trial—but with an AG who was less deferential, it might have happened.
I still say Garland has a lot to answer for.
Who would give up a life-tenure judgeship to be in Trump’s cabinet? Cannon might be that stupid (all signs point to ‘yes’), but a smart move.
She would be eyeing a spot in the SCOTUS. God help us all.
A number of sources say Biden admin members think Garland is responsible for delays in prosecuting Trump that allowed the clock to run out. Some say Biden considers it a mistake as well. There’s no doubt about it, appointing Garland was one of several big mistakes Biden made, and Garland himself is responsible for a major failure to do his job and serve the people and the system of justice.
That was obvious in 2021.