General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWatching the live testimony, Garland seems to be frail and senile
When he was being interrogated by Gaetz (I think it was him) about the whether or not the indigenous people "violently" protesting at the capital should be considered the same crime as Jan 6th and should be considered "domestic terrorists" and would he prosecute these liberal protesters the same way. Garland stammered and said he didn't know the facts of the case and wouldn't comment on it. He reiterated that they would face the same justice if guilty of domestic terrorism.
Hell NO! That was truly the WRONG response. He should have stood up and said that INTENT is the key to whether they should be charged as terrorists. By definition, terrorism is an act of using violence to affect political coercion. Not the same thing as a demonstration against a policy.
He should have said the word INSURRECTION and shut that asshole up.
AZSkiffyGeek
(12,744 posts)Complaining he wasn't filling everyone in on all of his investigations wasn't enough? Now we've got to question his mental fitness.
Jesus...
malaise
(297,145 posts)Divide and rule won't work with me
obamanut2012
(29,448 posts)Patton French
(1,824 posts)In the face of some pretty ridiculous attacks. Sure, maybe standing up and pounding his fists on the desk would be fun to see, but that aint gonna happen.
LetMyPeopleVote
(180,895 posts)Tomconroy
(7,611 posts)that allows, if convicted, for a sentencing enhancement for terrorism. AG Garland is doing fine.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)who came on Jan 6 would not be guilty of intending insurrection. Because they didn't. A lot of them, including ones who ended up going inside with others, came to protest. Some at most came to create delay and help foil the Democrats' attempt to steal the election, but to save, not overthrow, the government.
Whatever. Someone who helped rob a bank but honestly thought the money belonged to their friend and was his to take still robbed a bank.
Zorro
(18,778 posts)It was some other Florida putz.
Garland's voice did seem to quaver a bit, though. Not easy responding to demands for a special prosecutor to investigate Hunter Biden's art sales, etc.
spanone
(141,914 posts)chowder66
(12,392 posts)he doesn't have all of the information on. His more general responses are carefully crafted.
obamanut2012
(29,448 posts)BlackSkimmer
(51,308 posts)No further comment.
MineralMan
(151,454 posts)Interesting, but I can't agree. Can you expand on what gave you that impression, perhaps?
PortTack
(35,820 posts)Raven123
(7,861 posts)The phrase frail and senile are loaded. I didnt see his testimony, but I disagree with the stated reason for this assessment.
George II
(67,782 posts)lapucelle
(21,086 posts)Kahuna
(27,372 posts)stillcool
(34,407 posts)infullview
(1,135 posts)I don't think Garland is up to the task. Only my opinion.
Response to infullview (Reply #19)
Torchlight This message was self-deleted by its author.
mcar
(46,199 posts)and are so experienced in it that they can opine on what the Attorney General of the United States should be saying.
And, also a medical professional, able to diagnose over the TV.
AZSkiffyGeek
(12,744 posts)Therefore he is senile.
mcar
(46,199 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)....almost the entire hearing and he hasn't stammered once.
He cannot, as Attorney General overseeing an ongoing investigation, characterize what happened as an insurrection.
Elessar Zappa
(16,385 posts)Nope.
ecstatic
(35,106 posts)lamp_shade
(15,510 posts)Dorian Gray
(13,850 posts)outrage! Anger! Dementia!