Rachel said it tonight,

[gab13by13]

Rachel said that the Georgia Fulton county DA is investigating Trump's attempt to change the results of a valid election; a violation of state law. She then said, it does not appear that DOJ is investigating Trump's attempt in Georgia to change the results of a valid election, a violation of federal law.

Rachel said that DOJ is prosecuting people who invaded the Capitol attempting a coup. Rachel also said, it does not appear that DOJ is prosecuting people who organized and planned the coup.

Steve Bannon was low hanging fruit, not a member of Trump's administration, his trial is the middle of July. When will Mark Meadow's trial be scheduled if he is indicted?

I have been harping about this, bless the select committee, but it can only refer criminality to DOJ. If DOJ has been doing nothing, as people like Rachel Maddow are worrying about, it is troubling.

Hey but Liz Cheney is definitely going after Donald Trump.

[Whiskeytide]

1. Keep in mind that Bannon's trial ...

… in July, and eventually Meadows’ trial, is for contempt of Congress for defying a congressional subpoena. Nothing more. Basically a misdemeanor calling for up to 12 months and carrying a $1,000 fine. They are not being prosecuted for anything relating to Jan 6.

[TheBlackAdder]

5. If Cheney is getting primaried by these Trumpers, she'll take their gawd down with her.

[JohnSJ]

2. How do they know what the DOJ is doing. I don't think they announce what they are doing

unless until they are ready to bring charges

[2naSalit]

3. +1

[BigmanPigman]

12. Ditto!

[gab13by13]

24. You may ne right,

in the words of Rummy;

There are things we know, there are things we don't know, there are things we don't know we don't know.

[malaise]

51. THIS

That is all

[malaise]

52. THIS

That is all

[kentuck]

4. There are two ways to convict:

In a court of law.

And in the court of public opinion.

Neither is easy or a given.

[gab13by13]

22. Have you listened to the audio conversation

between Trump and SOS Raffensberger? That's a pretty good start for opening an investigation.

[Mr.Bill]

29. That's being investigated by the Georgia AG

as a state crime. I think it's important to convict some of these people for state crimes so a future republican president can't pardon them. And some are saying he committed this crime in as many as 20 different states. What he did is a crime in every state.

[gab13by13]

40. Good point,

the feds could also indict though.

[Baitball Blogger]

6. Very curious, isn't it?

[steampunk]

7. I've seen enough. AG Garland was a hugh mistake. WTF's he doing up there? Dude can kiss my ass.

[Poiuyt]

9. I agree

Maybe Garland is investigating, but it would have to be the most silent investigation ever. Adam Schiff has also wondered what's going on at the DOJ office.

[wnylib]

39. Have you noticed that after Schiff's initial

comments on the subject he has not been pushing it?

[orangecrush]

33. Welcome to DU

[sheshe2]

8. Rachel said.

Rachel said, Rachel said.

Hmmm. Okay.

[Grasswire2]

10. oh brother

That's Dr. Maddow.

[sheshe2]

11. ????

[Laura PourMeADrink]

16. You mean the Oxford & Stanford grad? :)

[Grasswire2]

17. I read her bio just to make sure I knew how educated she is.

Dayum!

[gab13by13]

13. Just trying to give a 2nd opinion other than mine,

it appears that paraphrasing Rachel has had no effect on the wait and see crowd.

[CrackityJones75]

55. Aside from wait and see what else would you have us do?

Rant and rave?

[Beastly Boy]

14. Link?

[gab13by13]

18. Link to Rachel's show?

There are a heck of a lot of experts out there who believe DOJ isn't doing enough.

We just had a Trump appointed judge state that prosecutors of insurrectionists should be charging some of them with interfering with a government function, a serious felony. We had at least 2 other judges state that prosecutors are not seeking more serious charges for insurrectionists. That's not coming from me.

Merrick Garland needs to appoint a special counsel, just like Barr appointed John Durham who is still getting paid to dig up dirt against president Biden. It sure looks like this select committee has an expiration date, but a special counsel, like Durham, will not. What is Garland waiting for?

If there are Trump moles in DOJ who were appointed by Trump can they be weeded out?

[Beastly Boy]

38. Link to Rachel's quote. You are referring to something that Rachel stated.

And how many experts KNOW that DOJ isn't doing enough? Experts believing something never resulted in a single referral to a Grand Jury. Same goes for judges stating something outside of their courtroom.

On edit: just happened to catch a rerun of Rachel's show. As I suspected, she didn't say anything about DOJ not appearing to prosecute people who organized and planned the coup. She only said that the DOJ does not appear to get involved in prosecuting certain congresspeople who apparently pressured Georgia's officials to overturn the state's vote count, something that the state's DA is already doing.

[gab13by13]

41. She said both.

[Beastly Boy]

42. Clearly, our views of what she said diverge. That's why I asked for a quote in the first place.

[gab13by13]

15. Hey wait and see crowd, answer me this;

why isn't DOJ investigating Mark Meadows right now, and not for ignoring a subpoena?

Why isn't DOJ investigating Donald Trump's attempt to overturn the results of the election in Georgia?

[relayerbob]

21. And how exactly do you know what they are doing or not doing?

[Beastly Boy]

26. Did any federal authority refer Mark Meadows for prosecution by DOJ?

Did any federal authority refer Donald Trump for prosecution by DOJ?

[gab13by13]

44. Where does it say that DOJ needs a referral?

If I call the FBI hot line and report a possible child sex trafficking ring in my neighborhood does the FBI have to wait until a federal authority requests them?

If Merrick Garland listens to the audio of Trump and Raffensberger can he take it upon himself to have the FBI investigate?

We are in a world of hurt if our DOJ has to wait for referrals from the select committee before it is allowed to investigate someone. What if we didn't have a select committee, then what?

[Beastly Boy]

48. Here, for instance:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_referral#:~:text=In%20the%20U.S.%20federal%20government%2C%20regulatory%20and%20law,formal%20documentation%2C%20but%20may%20include%20a%20case%20report.

In your example, FBI would be a law enforcement agency that would refer a case to DOJ for prosecution. Other federal law enforcement agencies, such as ATF, Department of Homeland Security and, I believe (but not sure about) the DC police, as well as Congress can also refer suspected federal crimes to DOJ.

And yes, Garland can alert FBI about the audio of Trump and Raffensberger, but he cannot prosecute either without FBI's referral for prosecution. Nor can he demand that FBI make the said referral.

[Mr.Bill]

31. Congress has to review the allegation

then send it to the DoJ for an indictment. The 1/6 Committee voted tonight in a unanimous decision to do just that. Same thing happened to Bannon a few weeks ago.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

19. I am *hoping* that DOJ is waiting for Congress to

pull it all together and connect dots? Like concentrating first on the people who broke in? Maybe that will lead to someone implicating the Dipshit's inner circle? ????

I may be totally wrong but isn't there some jurisdictional issue on FGs GA crime?

[ShazzieB]

23. I am hoping the same thing.

[gab13by13]

27. Nope, I don't think so,

what Trump did in Georgia, if convicted, is a violation of state law and a violation of federal law.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

36. You're right. Did she say anything about the FBI investigating?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/532632-trumps-georgia-call-triggers-debate-on-criminal-penalties%3famp


A pair of House Democrats, Reps. Ted Lieu (Calif.) and Kathleen Rice (N.Y.), sent a criminal referral against Trump to FBI Director Christopher Wray, calling on him to open a criminal probe into Trump's call with Raffensperger.

"As members of Congress and former prosecutors, we believe Donald Trump engaged in solicitation of, or conspiracy to commit, a number of election crimes," the lawmakers wrote in a letter Monday. "We ask you to open an immediate criminal investigation into the president."

An FBI spokesperson confirmed the bureau has received the letter but declined further comment.

[gab13by13]

45. Good catch, thank you,

I remember she said that what Trump did in Fulton county was both a state crime and a federal crime. She said it was a crime in every state. She said the Fulton county DA has opened an investigation but it appears that DOJ has not. So she left wiggle room by saying it appears.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

47. Ya and I'm not sure what the exact distinction is since FBI

part of DOJ. How does a congress person decide who to send a request for an investigation to.

Interesting theory

Link to tweet

?s=20

[Fullduplexxx]

50. Mueller already sid that in 10 counts of obstruction

[relayerbob]

20. She worries about everything

Thing is, MSNBC is not the extension of the government that Fox was. She has really no idea what the DOJ is or is not doing.

[gab13by13]

30. Well, remember back when Michael Cohen spent time in jail,

for the Stormy Daniels campaign finance violation? Remember who individual 1 was, Donald Trump. I know this. the statute of limitations has run out for Merrick Garland to indict Trump for the exact same thing that Cohen went to jail for. That is one fact that I know.

[orangecrush]

34. I trust Dr. Maddow's opinion

She does not speak without intensive investigation.

[pioche4]

25. Mark Meadows, indicted and frogmarched for Christmas...

Please!

[gab13by13]

32. The House will vote tomorrow

to send the criminal referral to DOJ, I think. I imagine Speaker Pelosi will send the referral as soon as possible. So how long did it take Garland to indict Bannon? 3 weeks? Bannon was low hanging fruit. Who knows maybe Garland won't prosecute? Remember now Meadows has filed a law suit against the select committee that will have to be settled. Bannon's trial isn't scheduled until the middle of July. When in heaven's name would Meadows ever go to trial, Christmas 2022?

[wnylib]

49. Regarding Garland indicting Bannon

after 3 weeks.

The AG does not indict. The grand jury does. If I remember right, the reason for the 3 week delay was related to the absence of either the district prosecutor or the district magistrate who had to sign the indictment.

But, several people at DU just KNEW that the delay was, of course, due to Garland and that he had never intended to see Bannon indicted and only did it after 3 weeks because so many people had complained. Sure.

[neverforget]

28. IF the DOJ is investigating, it's the most secret, leak proof investigation involving politicians

possibly ever. No sign of investigators, subpoenas, interviews, grand jury, etc. If Garland is doing it and it's been kept secret, great! If he's not investigating, then we're fucked.

[orangecrush]

35. Yup

[Baked Potato]

37. Maybe there is a very robust and thorough investigation going on.

One so important to the national security of the country that it is compartmented and known only by those who need to know. An investigation that could involve deep cover operatives who must never be exposed.

[Scrivener7]

54. Maybe I am the Queen of France.

[SheltieLover]

43. Kicking for visability

[Kablooie]

46. Is Garland a secret Trump fanboy?

I know everyone will poo poo this idea but he sure is acting like it.
He’s ignoring every single violation that could have serious consequences for Trump.
I don’t believe any neutral DA would do that.

We assume that since McConnell denied him the scotus position that he is against Trump but that may not be the case.

[Scrivener7]

53. A question for the "Leave Merrick garland ALOOOOOOOONE!!" crowd: It has been a year

that y'all have been saying, "we don't know, he's toiling in the dark, there will be a day when suddenly all of their work will be clear!!"

It has been a year. No small players in the conspiracy are indicted. No weird cousin has let it spill on twitter that their relative has been questioned by the DOJ. No co-worker has let it slip that their office-mate's laptop was confiscated. Senators and Reps and beltway insiders are begging Garland to show a bit of his work for the good of the country, but nothing has happened. Nothing.

It has been a year. At two years, will you still be thinking Merrick Garland is a stealth master and all is well? (After we have lost the midterms, by the way.) Three years? Four? At what point of absolutely no proof of progress will you begin to doubt Merrick Garland's progress?

[hydrolastic]

56. Has anyone thought that the fact that we can't know about investigations is part of the problem?

I mean all someone has to do is take over the DOJ and you now control everything, OH yea that already happened.....