Just now on MSNBC: Rep. Khanna says Congress is frustrated with DOJ

[berni_mccoy]

And the lack of action on Jan. 6 conspiracy to overthrow the government.

Says there is plenty of evidence and the public needs to see visible action on the part of the DOJ.

Says the DOJ could have a parallel criminal investigation to the Select Committee.

I have a feeling that members of Congress know that DOJ is not investigating the organizers.

[TexasTowelie]

1. I'm okay with your post reporting what Rep. Khanna said.

However, why do we need to discuss your feelings again? Version 20211218-1249 of Gloom, Despair, and Agony on Me isn't likely to address your feelings or make you feel better, so why are you dredging this up again when it didn't end particularly well for you the last time you did so?

[stopdiggin]

3. +1 -(nt)-

[gab13by13]

5. I have no problem with the poster's last sentence.

I think it summarizes what Khanna said.

Time for the Churchill quote? Our democracy is hanging by a thread, the insurrection didn't stop on 1/6 it has intensified, those are facts and you bet they are scary.

Wanting DOJ to act to save our democracy is necessary and should be demanded.

[flying_wahini]

11. Maybe let him have his say?

[TexasTowelie]

21. I'm sorry, but I'm tired of the drama.

The last couple of nights I've stayed away from DU comparatively speaking because of the speculation made by some members. As I mentioned, he has already brought up his doubts and they have been thoroughly discussed. Rehashing the same topic is pointless, unproductive, and disruptive.

[demmiblue]

23. Then use the ignore/trash thread function.

Easy peasy.

[TexasTowelie]

42. If I did, then there would hardly be any threads left to read on DU.

I also shouldn't expect to see so much criticism of Democrats and members of a Democratic administration on a site that supports Democrats. I'm less inclined to post about other unrelated topics that Democrats may want to discuss because the overall atmosphere on DU is becoming negative, undermining, and unproductive. Speaking of which, it's time to do some laundry.

[demmiblue]

72. Ridiculous. There are a plethora of great posts on DU...

AND I have a healthy ignore list (mostly finger-waggers, drama llamas and people who tend to post duplicates ad nauseum).

If one tends to constantly involve themselves in the relatively small number of drama-filled flaming threads, I can see how their view of DU can become skewed.

[TexasTowelie]

80. I don't use the Ignore function very much

and even when I ignore a specific member I usually only keep that person on ignore for a relatively short period of time. I don't trash threads because I do want to read the good, the bad, and the ugly. There are members here that I don't particularly like, but occasionally they might post something that catches my interest even if I don't rec or comment on the thread.

The one thing that I am certain of is that DOJ will move at their own pace. Their investigation is not going to be influenced by what is said on DU and they will set their own timelines while also potentially prosecuting any referrals from the J6 committee. That is their job at the DOJ and I'm not going to take the role of Monday morning QB rationalizing, questioning, and doubting every course of action.

[AncientAndy]

81. I'm viewing the site by "Most Discussed"...

and had to scroll down 60 stories before I found a positive one about a Democrat. It’s the one titled “Huge accomplishment by President Biden”.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=latest_threads&mode=latest&sort1=replies

[Crunchy Frog]

87. I know that it makes my experience here immeasurably better.

Real life already provides me with sufficient aggravation. I don't need to deal with it here as well.

[MineralMan]

51. Why would someone do that?

Because you told them to? I'm not sure I understand. I don't use either of those tools on DU, either. I want to see what is posted here - all of it. And, as a DUer, I know that any DUer can participate in any thread on this forum. We discuss things here; we don't just agree with everything posted here. Should we? What do you think?

[Alpeduez21]

29. This is my first time seeing the op's opinion

It NOT the first time I’ve heard the usual suspects onDU whine about not wanting posts about the complete lack of effort by Garland et al to be posted

[TexasTowelie]

35. Oh well,

I don't have any control over when you decide to read DU. It is odd that you only note the whines about Garland and ignore all of the OPs that are effectively undermining him, but people only see what they want to see.

[Tommymac]

78. Um, you seem to be pointing to yourself here.

Posters post. Readers read. Blogs work that way.

There are Dozens upon Dozens of threads in many Forums to read here. Take your pick, don't pick on legitimate people who are motivated to post their view point as it matters too, whether you agree with it or not.

After all, you are free to rebut and respond just like I am doing to you... or ignore and trash threads that bother you that much too.

We are all in this together - if you want to get frustrated get frustrated at TFG and the Insurrectionist Party trying to destroy our democracy and kill us by ignoring Science and how to mitigate the Pandemic.

[femmedem]

96. This is a discussion board, not merely a news source. I know you've been feeling down

and that is likely coloring your response.

I greatly appreciate everything you bring to DU--you are one of my favorite posters--and I hope you feel better soon.

I sometimes find DU depressing and take short breaks. More often, I skip posts that I suspect will lead to discussions that don't have value for me. But those posts might have value for someone else. Sometimes people need to vent and others need to know that they are not alone in their worries.

I really do hope you feel better soon. I'm luckier than most--I don't live alone, we haven't had covid in our household, I have enough money to pay my bills--but I, too, am feeling worn down by the extended pandemic and wondering when so many ordinary pleasures will feel safe again.

Edited to add: I've read through more of the replies and want to thank you for the information you posted throughout the discussion.

[MineralMan]

53. Without comment? I didn't see anyone try

to stop the OP from posting. Are you suggesting that people not state any disagreement with other DUers here?

Any DUer can "have his say," but not without discussion by other DUers.

[dpibel]

18. Feelings bad, faith good?

The "patience grasshopper" gang seems to feel that its faith in Garland is much more valid than anyone else's questions, doubts, or, if you will, "feelings."

How does that work?

[TexasTowelie]

27. Let me set you straight--I am not a member of any gang

unless you consider being a Democratic party voter as being a gang member.

I worked in government and I also was involved in the initiation of legal cases so I have personal experience with how valuable a commodity "patience" is and nobody is going to tell me that acting impulsively or rashly is good policy. I don't have an issue with people asking questions, but when the same question is asked (or the same opinion is stated) repeatedly by the same person in multiple OPs it is disruptive and some may speculate that it reaches the point that it is considered "trolling" as well.

I don't see the point of trying to undermine the Biden administration by continually subjecting Garland and the DOJ to criticism from people who are impatient, seeking immediate gratification, and most likely don't have the intellectual understanding of what it takes to prosecute a case. So to answer your initial question, yes--feelings bad, faith good.

[Crunchy Frog]

54. Are you suggesting that members of Congress are impulsive and rash?

Is the Biden administration so weak in your opinion, that it will be undermined by some posts on a political discussion board?

[TexasTowelie]

59. Yes, there are members of Congress that are impulsive and rash. That shouldn't come as a shock to

anyone. I also don't believe that the Biden administration is weak despite the desperate futile feeble attempts being made to undermine it.

[Eliot Rosewater]

79. Then allow me say to you if donald trump the traitor is the GOP nominee in 2024, there is no way

the country survives.

In fact, I say we may not survive Nov 2022 when NO red state official will certify any election they lose that they have the power to.

In a healthy democracy the courts would take over at that point, our courts have too many MAGA on them and even if that were not the case the chaos created on purpose will kill the country.

Dont believe me or the OP?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/2024-election-coup-military-participants_n_61bd52f2e4b0bcd2193f3d72

Generals Warn Of Divided Military And Possible Civil War In Next U.S. Coup Attempt
"Some might follow orders from the rightful commander in chief, while others might follow the Trumpian loser," which could trigger civil war, the generals wrote.
Mary Papenfuss
By
Mary Papenfuss
12/18/2021 09:28am EST

Right now we are in a state of emergency as if a tidal wave was coming and we have hours to get out of the way...like it or not. And I am not just speaking to you but to anyone here who doubts this.

[Autumn]

2. Thanks for posting this. I don't watch MSNBC and was not aware of what Rep. Khanna had to say.

This is big. When Rep. Khanna says this we have a big problem.

[lapucelle]

7. If Ro Khanna did say this and is making himself the spokesperson for "Congress",

we do indeed have a big problem.

[Autumn]

16. It's not like he's giving out classified informtion. IMO he's doing his job.

I see plenty of politicians talking about things on TV. In fact our VP made a statement in the last few days that was rather stunning about the Biden administration. Keeping the people informed is not the big problem, hiding things from citizens is the big problem. Of course, YMOV.

[lapucelle]

20. If Ro Khanna actually said "Congress is frustrated" then he is purporting to speak for Congress.

It would be a major problem if any one member appointed him or herself the spokesman for the entire body.

[Autumn]

24. Call the DOJ or Pelosi. Maybe they will investigate him. Right now I'm out of fucks to give

about him "appointing himself spokesman for Congress". Which he did not do. He said "Congress is frustrated". I imagine their frustration is off the charts, between the insurrection, Trump selling out our country and roaming around holding rally's and the obstruction of Biden's agenda by a couple of our own members.

[lapucelle]

43. When someone says,"Congress is frustrated" that person purports to speak for Congress.

Just because some might be "out of fucks to give" about whether Democrats like Ro Khanna are misquoted or misrepresented, it doesn't mean that everyone else is.

[Autumn]

46. Make sure you find the proper statute and call Pelosi and the DOJ and report what he said.

They can handle his crimes. laughing: Until then? No fucks given.

[Fiendish Thingy]

63. Do you think it's time for impeachment hearings for Garland?

Since Biden doesn’t intend to fire him, that would be your only recourse.

[Autumn]

66. I think that our leadership and the President should give him a *nudge* and remind

him that we are a nation of laws and the powerful should be held to the same standard of laws as the regular person. When laws are broken there must be repucussions. The fact that the Bush administration was not held accountble for the crimes they commited was a part of what led to Barr and Trump.

[Fiendish Thingy]

70. But that would be unethical, akin to Barr's relationship with Trump

You don’t want Biden to act like Trump with the DOJ, do you?

[Autumn]

75. I want the DOJ to investigate the many crimes that Trump committed.

Publicly, openly and thoroughly. Do their fucking job. End of story.

[questionseverything]

89. Not the same at all

Trump wanted people prosecuted for imaginary crimes

Biden’s justice department should be encouraged to follow the law wherever it leads

[Fiendish Thingy]

91. Read up on the protocols on the relationship between WH and DOJ

Except from counsel to counsel, WH is not supposed to have any contact with DOJ.

[lapucelle]

4. Ro Khanna was claiming to speak for "Congress"?

That doesn't sound like him.

[gab13by13]

6. There are plenty more who have said the same thing,

Adam Schiff for one.

[lapucelle]

8. Yes, but they speak for themselves, not for "Congress". N/T

[pecosbob]

9. This place is starting to remind me of the Wumao army.

[LymphocyteLover]

26. what does that mean?

[pecosbob]

34. Wumao Army are Chinese trolls paid by the CCP to spam social media

The net result is that in certain social media if you post anything that paints China in a bad light you will be brigaded by trolls.

[Autumn]

49. Fascinating.

[taxi]

55. That explains everything. nt

[jalan48]

61. +1

I'd bet Wall St and especially the fossil fuel industry have their own little Wumao armies trying to shape public opinion here in the good ole USA

[dem4decades]

10. Why does everyone here defend DOJ? They have done nothing other than

Charge low level thugs.

The Republicans still have Durham out there creating trouble and we have nothing.

[gab13by13]

12. That's something that Garland should do,

appoint a special counsel, just like Barr appointed Durham. Barr gave Durham protections so he can't be fired, he is getting paid to dig up dirt on the Bidens.

[Poiuyt]

15. Normally, I would defend an impartial DOJ, but not in this case

Being impartial does not mean ignoring political crimes committed by actors on the other side. When these crimes are so egregious, they cannot be ignored and must be prosecuted without regard to political costs.

[Irish_Dem]

19. Yes, could he be carrying the impartiality issue so far he lets

the major GOP perpetrators off the hook?

[Beastly Boy]

17. 727 "low level" thugs, to be precise

the "low level" charges include: Assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers, inflicting bodily injury, obstructing official government business, assault with deadly weapon, obstruction of Congress, to name a few.

https://www.insider.com/all-the-us-capitol-pro-trump-riot-arrests-charges-names-2021-1

Oh yes, none of it counts unless Trump gets indicted. Reason enough to accuse DOJ for doing nothing, right?

[dem4decades]

41. Yes they are low level charges when you ignore sedition. But I'm glad you're

Happy pawns are sacrificed

[Beastly Boy]

82. I am extatic about 727 traitors facing charges!

For starters, it sends a resounding STFU message to all those who idly muse about DOJ doing nothing. And frankly, I don't care for being a crime snob: I will not be particularly offended if a traitor serves 10 years for assault with a deadly weapon or 10 years for insurrection. Or state charges of tax evasion, for that matter, even if you might consider it a lower level charge.

These 727 charges also reinforce my affinity for equal justice under the law. Proven guilty, a felon is a felon, with no distinction of rank or position, and I am glad the law applies in equal measure to both pawns and kings. It's our best defense from queens walking away free of charges.

And you will have to elaborate about who you consider pawns, and what you mean by "sacrificed". Some may misinterpret your comment as saying that all 727 indicted felons are pawns, and that it doesn't make any difference whether they face charges or not.

[berni_mccoy]

58. There were thousands who attacked the Capitol

So there is a long way to go before all the thugs are brought to justice.

It won’t mean anything unless those responsible are brought to justice.

[Beastly Boy]

84. Are you saying that the 727 indicted insurrectionists don't mean anything?

I sincerely hope you didn't mean it!

And I believe you are contradicting yourself: you acknowledge there is a long way to go before before all the thugs are brought to justice (no shit!), yet you demand Garland take hasty action or else it's his fault for doing nothing.

[berni_mccoy]

86. Did I say that or do you make it a habit of putting words in peoples' mouths?

[Beastly Boy]

90. No, this is the first time you said it.

You never cited any examples of me putting words into your mouth either.

But I did say that you are partial to making unfounded accusations.

[Skittles]

95. we're supposed to have, you know, CONFIDENCE in them

we are supposed to forget about Fitmas, Mueller, etc.

[Poiuyt]

13. Not only Congress is frustrated with the DOJ

Generals Warn Of Divided Military And Possible Civil War In Next U.S. Coup Attempt

--snip--

The “lack of military preparedness for the aftermath of the 2020 election was striking and worrying. Trump’s acting defense secretary, Christopher Miller, testified that he deliberately withheld military protection of the Capitol before Jan. 6,” the generals noted.

That can’t happen again, they emphasized.

Military leaders can’t wait for elected officials to take adequate action to prepare for the next time. “Not a single leader who inspired” the last attempt has even been “held to account,” the generals noted.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/2024-election-coup-military-participants_n_61bd52f2e4b0bcd2193f3d72

[Pantagruel]

14. Impatience not confined to DU

Khanna's mail is probably reflecting the frustrations. But as I've argued before:


https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=16151153

In addition, DOJ underwent 4 years of Trump hiring, indisputably biased against even handed justice. Sadly, many of those hires probably still ensconced at DOJ, throwing wrenches in the gears, further slowing the processes.
Garland has a tough job in front of him, probably massively understaffed. Trump put a crook in charge of almost every cabinet division. The sheer list of potentially prosecutable offenses is daunting on size alone.

Patience folks.

[mopinko]

68. i think this is part of the problem, also. he has a big ship to right.

assuming it isnt easy to just fire doj personnel, he's got a lot of housekeeping to do.
me, i, i'd do that 1st.

[questionseverything]

71. All the more reason he should have hired a special prosecutor months ago

[Mr. Ected]

22. Former AG Barr had no problems articulating his messages to the public

No matter how nefarious they were.

If Garland could simply throw us all a bone and let us know that he understands our concerns and that DOJ is processing its own evidence regarding the attempted overthrow of our government (among other things) many of us would sleep better at night.

After all, it's our government, right? As long as they don't telegraph their moves, a little comfort couldn't hurt.

[TexasTowelie]

56. Let's begin with February 21:

Garland pledges to make investigation into Jan. 6 attack his first priority as attorney general
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/garland-face-tough-questions-confirmation-hearing-be-biden-s-attorney-n1258444


Then there is this statement released by the DOJ on June 24:
Statement of Attorney General Merrick B. Garland on the Investigation into the January 6th Attack on the Capitol
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/statement-attorney-general-merrick-b-garland-investigation-january-6th-attack-capitol


Then we heard from Garland again on October 21 when there were doubts about the DOJ prosecuting Steve Bannon:
Garland: DOJ 'will apply the facts and the law' when considering Bannon referral
https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/21/politics/garland-house-judiciary-hearing-oversight/index.html


I don't understand the notion that Garland is not taking his job seriously, but you asked for a bone and I've provided three bones to alleviate everyone's concerns. What do the doubters want in the future--the entire steer butchered into parts easily retrieved from the freezer?

[Beastly Boy]

25. Do you have a feeling that Congres knows there is no investigation, or

do you have a feeling that Congress doesn't know there is investigation?

To listen to Khanna, the latter is more likely to be the case.

I have a feeling that we would need Khanna's direct quote before we can sort out our feelings.

[LymphocyteLover]

31. I suspect more the latter but what is clear is that assuming there is an investigation

of the Jan 6th leaders, it hasn't progressed very far-- no signs of a grand jury.

[dem4decades]

45. Have any records even been requested or subpoenaed? DOJ is a huge disappointment,

So sick of thinking they'll do anything.

[Beastly Boy]

88. It's cool to be disappointed.

It's a whole different thing when one's disappointments (referring to the OP) become the basis of unfounded accusations.

[dem4decades]

93. Quite honestly, I'm pretty sick of being disappointed.

Remember how fast the FBI jumped on the Weiner laptop investigation and running out to the microphones to let the nation know they were on the job?

So do I, but now the FBI does nothing, no one is going to court to fight FBI subpoenas into the insurrection.

The only DOJ investigation being done is by Durham, it's disgraceful.

[msfiddlestix]

28. ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ ✔️

[DanieRains]

30. So The Department Of Justice Is Ran By Republicans And Oligarchs? Who Could Have Guessed

They are too busy protecting Epstein's friends to do their job.

[DanieRains]

32. The Justice Department Needs To Report To The Intelligence And Judicial Committees

They will know what and what is not being done.

[Budi]

33. As expected from Ro. A regular on FoxNews.

An ally of Silicon Valley & Peter Thiel.

Passing on yet another statement degrading the Democratic leadership of this country.
Par for him.

Ro knows nothing more than we do as to what Garland's doing with the matter of taking down the mob.
This is his opinion & not a factual based statement.

I'm not a fan & not required to be, considering his political affiliations.
Thanks anyway.

[NBachers]

77. I liked Mike Honda. I wish hhe was still in the seat that Ro Khana is now occupying.

[MineralMan]

36. OK, So, Ro Khanna Can Speak for Congress Now?

Really? He has been in the House since 2017. I suggest that he is not competent to speak for Congress, nor even for the Democratic Caucus in the House of Representatives. As far as I know, he is also not a member of the January 6 Committee. Nor is he a member of the Judiciary Committee.

Now, I wouldn't be surprised if he feels frustrated with the DOJ, but I think he cannot speak for Congress.

Perhaps you can explain how he can do that. Your feelings, however, are not evidence.

[Budi]

39. Thank you.

Ro is another messenger for Media with little authority to speak against the Jan 6 committee nor AG Garland's DOJ internal business.

Now perhaps a better question to Ro, would be to explain his long time political affiliation with Peter Thiel.


Is there a link to the OP or is it just snippets of an opinion?

[MineralMan]

40. I don't know about a link. You'd have to ask the OP.

I'm not watching MSNBC this afternoon, so I did not hear this live. I only know about it from the OP's paraphrase and analysis of what one House member may have said.

I'm not a huge fan of Ro Khanna, nor of Justice Democrats in general. I remember the past all too well.

[Budi]

44. Peter Thiel donated severl times to Ro's campaigns.

Thiel & Silicon Valley & his direct line to Trump, is enough to question statements by Mr Ro.

ick.

[MineralMan]

50. Well, OK. He also got lots of donations from Facebook folks.

I'm not sure that's relevant to this, though.

[Budi]

62. Silicon Valley deserves to be busted.

Thiel's Palantir, Stripe CrCard processing, which was written by Saikat Chakrabarti when he worked for Thiel & before Zack Exley's Brand New Congress, when it merged with Justice Democrats. & Then there's Thiel's ties to Mercer & Cambridge Analytica.. & on & on.

I could go on here, but will leave it for another day.

[berni_mccoy]

52. I did paraphrase as I was listening on the radio

However he did say “members of Congress” and used the word frustrated. Alex Witt asked him if he was frustrated and he said, “frustrated, yes as are many members of Congress”, in reference to the lack of DOJ action.

[MineralMan]

64. I see. So, it's not "Congress," but "members of Congress."

That's a different thing, isn't it. Which members? How many? 2 is members. 5 is many members? Not much precision there, is there, and certainly not all of "Congress."

See why we asked questions?

[questionseverything]

73. So much for that democratic unity , huh?

Such a shock

[MineralMan]

83. What? Khanna votes with the Democratic caucus.

If he runs again in his California district, I hope he wins. If he is in danger of losing, I'll donate to his campaign. That does not mean that I agree with him on everything, though. I don't live in his district.

You're off base.

[gulliver]

38. Hopefully he didn't actually use the word "frustrated"

I'm fine with Congresspeople saying what they have to say to humor their constituents' impulses. The DOJ is independent it course, but a lot of folks insist on working the ref. Fine

[berni_mccoy]

47. He did. I paraphrased but that word was used.

I was listening on the radio but I will try to get the link to the video

[RussBLib]

48. all I want for Christmas...

...is the DOJ to confirm they are "on the case" re T**** and his band of coup plotters

[TexasTowelie]

65. They probably cannot make such a statement

because it could be construed as prejudice that could jeopardize the entire investigation. See post #56 for confirmation that the DOJ is on the case. I'm sorry if that isn't the Christmas gift that you wanted, but I wish you Merry Christmas all the same.

[RussBLib]

67. I am not in the screaming "do something!" camp

I believe that Garland and the DOJ are working methodically to determine what happened and who instigated things, and I hope he is not shying away from going after T**** when the time comes. Our democracy depends on it.

I get impatient like many, but each week brings new revelations, so I am pretty sure the entire picture is not yet in focus.

But still, a tiny little bone would be nice, something like, "yes, we are paying close attention to the House committee, and we are pursuing things in deliberate fashion." That would be plenty.

The Jan 6 anniversary will be....interesting.

[TexasTowelie]

74. I didn't consider you to be among the "do something!" camp.

I think that the tiny little bone that you are hunting has already been provided. The DOJ got the indictment on Bannon and that was because of the House committee. There will almost certainly be more indictments coming down the pipeline, but we may have to wait for the J6 committee to do their live interrogations of witnesses to initiate the indictments.

[pecosbob]

57. DoJ is world renowned for jailing rich, politically-connected people.

Last edited Sat Dec 18, 2021, 05:15 PM - Edit history (1)

Wake me up if any indictments are handed down.

[Fiendish Thingy]

60. You probably should start a petition to impeach AG Garland

Maybe Rep. Khanna would take you up on it. You might even get 2/3 in the senate (mostly republicans of course)

Since he has already testified to congress, and won’t discuss any ongoing investigations, and since you and many here are certain that the lack of information or even a simple confirmation of an ongoing investigation of Trump and the coup organizers is solid proof that there isn’t an investigation, then impeachment seems to be your only recourse.

Who do you think Biden could get confirmed as Garland’s replacement? (Hint: someone already confirmed once by the senate could be promoted and not need reconfirmation)

[TexasTowelie]

85. That might satisfy the need for immediate gratification that some desire.

It would be regrettable though since an impeachment would be directed at the wrong person.

However, the impeachment shelf life won't last long since Biden will need to nominate someone else to replace Garland. While, I didn't consider that the nominee may have already be confirmed, I was thinking more along the lines that in order to get an AG confirmed it is going to take 50 votes in the Senate and that also means that Manchin and Sinema will have to vote for confirmation. That may not be an easy goal to obtain considering the negative rhetoric that both received from the progressive wing of the party.

Provided that the nomination is confirmed it will take time for the new AG to get into office, evaluate the case, and possibly not take any action.

Meanwhile, replacing an AG will certainly take time and add further delays into the prosecution of any individuals--most likely until after the mid-term elections. Therefore, I hope that the progressives do not ask for Garland's resignation and I'm reminded of the saying, "be careful what you ask for, you might get it."

[Budi]

69. I sure can understand why AG Garland is the recipient of a smear campaign!

I mean, look what's at stake for the participants to the dirty desperate coup on our process to certify & seat a new President voted of & by the people & their electorate.

Maybe Ro could address how deep that corrupt rabbit hole may go.

Who's protecting who, by the drumbeat of degradation messaging directed daily at the of the man, chosen by our President & whose past specifically qualifies him for this particular case?

Who all cowers behind such derrogatory slander, for what AG Garland will find out?

Who's hands got a little dirty in the process of keeping Biden from being crtified on Jan 6th.

Just making a point.

[boston bean]

76. I don't listen to much he says.

[Polybius]

92. I don't think this is a winning issue to run on

With Russiagate, the public grew tired of it and it led to nowhere. I'm fine with letting Garland do his job behind the scenes. Take your time, then prosecute if necessary. Hearings will do more harm than good.

[berni_mccoy]

94. If you're considering the political ramifications first, you don't have the correct priorities

This issue is about holding those in power to the same justice as the thugs they used to commit violence.

And as far as politics go for the next election, things already look extremely bad for Democrats. Unless BBB and the Voting Rights bill get passed, we are going to lose our majority in 2022 and the executive in 2024.