Garland says the Jan. 6 investigation won't end until everyone is held to account

[Joinfortmill]

https://www.npr.org/2022/03/10/1085016383/garland-says-the-jan-6-investigation-wont-end-until-everyone-is-held-to-account

"We are not avoiding cases that are political or cases that are controversial or sensitive," the attorney general said in an exclusive interview with NPR. "What we are avoiding is making decisions on a political basis, on a partisan basis."

"We begin with the cases that are right in front of us with the overt actions and then we build from there," Garland said. "And that is a process that we will continue to build until we hold everyone accountable who committed criminal acts with respect to January 6."

[spanone]

1. ...K&R...

[hlthe2b]

2. Justice (grossly) delayed is justice denied & this is beginning to feel like an interminable delay

that will result in the latter.

[CrackityJones75]

11. I mean sure....

I mean sure if you just disregard what he said completely. Maybe he is lying. I don’t know. But I don’t have reason to believe he is lying. I can be annoyed that it isn’t going as quickly as I would like but that doesn’t make the man a liar.

[hlthe2b]

12. i ignore nothing that he said. I only state the facts before us. I hope he "gets around to it" but..

Justice (grossly) delayed IS justice denied and we are approaching that. There is still time, but not that much.

[CrackityJones75]

14. Where did you come up with that?

Justice delayed is justice denied? I have always heard a rush to judgement isn’t justice.

A rush to justice in fact could weaken the case against the people that need justice applied to them. we have been seeing bigger fish lately and hopefully that comes with cooperation on getting everyone that needs to be held accountable. I don’t think the DOJ can just find people guilty of things because “we all know what happened” even if we all know what happened.

[hlthe2b]

16. Where did I get it? Really?

Where have you been for the past five or more decades? Really? You don't know the concept--this ancient legal maxim of justice? One that MLK espoused to desperately try to address civil rights and justice for all people, but predates well before that

Allow me to help (google is your friend)

"Justice delayed is justice denied" is a legal maxim. It means that if legal redress or equitable relief to an injured party is available, but is not forthcoming in a timely fashion, it is effectively the same as having no remedy at all.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_delayed_is_justice_denied

“Justice delayed is justice denied” is an ancient legal concept, but it’s been cast in stark relief in the last few months. The new pressures of the current pandemic have heightened the reality of inequality and injustice. Systems that most of the world contently ignored have reached a breaking point—or, perhaps, a boiling point. Now is the time that leaders must act to rectify generations of discriminatory systems.

https://www.aspeninstitute.org/blog-posts/justice-delayed-is-justice-denied/

Justice delayed is justice denied

"Justice delayed is justice denied" is a legal maxim meaning that if legal redress is available for a party that has suffered some injury, but is not forthcoming in a timely fashion, it is effectively the same as having no redress at all. This principle is the basis for the right to a speedy trial and similar rights which are meant to expedite the legal system, because it is unfair for the injured party to have to sustain the injury with little hope for resolution. The phrase has become a rallying cry for legal reformers who view courts or governments as acting too slowly in resolving legal issues either because the existing system is too complex or overburdened, or because the issue or party in question lacks political favour.
https://www.definitions.net/definition/justice+delayed+is+justice+denied

[MLAA]

23. It's always better to answer someone's question with grace and patience and save

the sarcasm for the other side. Hope your day gets better and I hope justice does pick up speed.

[hlthe2b]

24. I agree.

Bless your heart!

[ShazzieB]

32. That was actually very informative.

I did not know the origins (or should I say oranges?) of that phrase, and now I do.

[Fiendish Thingy]

61. And yet, the term "delayed" is entirely subjective...

The definition of delayed can depend on the impatience of the definer.

You do realize that the most significant physical evidence and testimony, evidence that dramatically increases the odds of convictions, has only emerged in the past 6-7 weeks?

I don’t consider 6-7 weeks to be that much of a delay for the DOJ to act. The delays in getting to this point were indeed painful, but not at all the fault of Garland and the DOJ.

Since the SCOTUS ruling on Trump’s privilege claims, we have seen the release of thousands of documents, including the memos regarding seizure of the voting machines. In addition, the committee has only recently heard testimony from Pence’s staff, some of whom were in the room when the coup was being plotted.

Now, it looks like Eastman will lose his court battle, and his coup-plotting emails will become part of the record. I don’t think Eastman wants to spend the rest of his life in prison, so, with a little more “delay” to pressure him to flip, we just might get some Justice.

Kudos to Garland for taking the unusual step of issuing a second clarifying statement.

[hlthe2b]

65. When his former law professor (Tribe) and other former DOJ officials express alarm re: his reticence

hesitancy, delay, reluctance, I pay attention. As should you.

[MineralMan]

68. Tribe was ONE of his law professors.

One.

I'm sure he had many, many others.

[hlthe2b]

83. Where did I say the "ONLY" law professor? Why would you even think that?

He is, however, one who formed a post-graduate relationship with him and kept in contact.

[Fiendish Thingy]

69. I do pay attention to Tribe on constitutional matters, however

Tribe has never, ever prosecuted a case in his entire career.

[hlthe2b]

84. The many former DOJ officials certainly HAVE--like Glenn Kirschner, Barb McQuade,

Joyce Vance, Renato Mariotti as a few examples. Not all have expressed uniform concern over the speed of investigation though they have all commented on their surprise that IF an investigation is ongoing why the "usual" signs of depositions, subpoenas, or incidental information from related court filings etc. have not been evident and at least a few more (Neal Katyal) has expressed concern that Garlands time and practical influences/temperament as the OKC prosecutor has receded to the background over his more recent years as a highly cautious judge--possibly. adding to his reticence to be perceived as "aggressive" in either investigation or prosecution where political consequences are high.

[Fiendish Thingy]

86. No they haven't.

Kirchner has expressed qualified concerns, acknowledging his opinions are based on the absence of public information;

McQuade and Vance have made good cases for prosecution, but, at best, have expressed puzzlement at the lack of public information on the investigation. (Feel free to post links where they directly criticize Garland- every segment I’ve seen they always qualify their statements)

Mariotti I’m not familiar with.

[hlthe2b]

87. Exactly my comment. Qualified concerns. Same as with Tribe. Don't restate my comment to

something it was not.

[Fiendish Thingy]

89. You invoked Tribe, McQuade, Kirchner et al to support your claim of grossly delayed Justice

This back-and-forth started with your assertion that Justice had been grossly delayed, and you eventually invoked Tribe, McQuade et al as expert evidence of your assertion, which, by your own admission, it is not.

Sheesh.

[hlthe2b]

90. Delayed is the case. I'm done with your attempt to create some extreme argument with me when

there is none. There are some on this forum who will excoriate Garland and profess that he never intended to prosecute Trump. That is the extreme view that I quite obviously do not share, but with which you are trying to argue with me. It is disingenuous and has no place in terms of tactic here. Enough. Go seek them out. Bye.

[hlthe2b]

88. No. Nothing you just posted is in conflict with what I STATED.

[Grasswire2]

94. nt

[Silent3]

17. He said enough to make it clear no one higher up will be held to account before 2022 elections

Coup plotters running for Congress can stay in power, gain power by grabbing the House and maybe the Senate in 2022, and use that power to ensure Democrats never win again, making democracy a moot point in 2024.

So maybe, just maybe, some of the big fish spend 6-9 months in jail, if the DoJ gets that far, before a Republican president pardons and releases them all.

Ain't justice grand?

[CrackityJones75]

19. He did?

missed that part.

[Silent3]

20. It's March. Elections are in less than seven months and we're no higher than Proud Boys...

...and assorted street rabble when it comes to indictments. Also, the DoJ can't keep all of their activity secret, such as the interviews with the high-profile people that will have to be conducted before any indictments are handed out.

So, yes, it's quite clear between what Garland said, and from all other observable activity, that any high-level indictments before November are incredibly unlikely. Given how slowly any resulting cases would proceed in the courts, convictions before November are essentially impossible.

Justice delayed, justice denied.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

31. Likely not much before Nov 2022, but the OathKeepers level is just below Stone

The Proud Boys don't seem to have been coordinated with higher ups or very loosely if at all. I think the Oathkeepers conviction (of one) and plea deals in progress by two is much more important. But we shall see.

[Fiendish Thingy]

67. The indictments for seditious conspiracy are 1 degree of separation from Trump

Only Roger Stone and Alex Jones stand between the Oathkeepers indicted for seditious conspiracy and Trump.

Televised committee hearings start next month. The biggest unanswered question I have is how will the hearings address the complicity of sitting Reps like Gosar, Brooks, MTG, Cawthorn, etc.

It’s entirely possible the committee will wrap up before summer is over, and not unfeasible to anticipate some DOJ indictments of some coup architects before the traditional Labor Day cutoff for election year prosecutions.

I don’t expect we’ll see any federal indictments of Trump himself until after the midterms.

[uponit7771]

37. This is gaslighting, SOL has already ran or about to run out on a couple cases (link)

https://www.citizensforethics.org/reports-investigations/crew-reports/president-trump-staggering-record-of-uncharged-criminal-misconduct/?link_id=1&can_id=e7d22c4ddf16b61ea95107e48ae83a6e&source=email-walgreens-and-sedition-4&email_referrer=email_1471384&email_subject=trumps-crimes#table

[not fooled]

74. Yep

and the escape clause is "who committed criminal acts"--he can later say yes, there was misconduct but [in his estimation] it didn't rise to the level of "criminal acts."

I wish I could conclude differently but he is going to go down in history as one of the key enablers of the GQPee.

[Fiendish Thingy]

76. These SOL's are totally unrelated to the January 6 crimes

And many of the crimes don’t meet the 3 legs of evidentiary requirements to convict on obstruction, (only 4 out of 14 potential charges do) hence the DOJ’s declining to prosecute.

But again, this thread is about Garland’s comments regarding January 6 prosecutions, the SOL’s of those won’t run out until around 2026.

[uponit7771]

93. +1, then the should peruse the 4 that do. I don't think enough people understand the attack the

... GZP is putting on democracy here and abroad.

40% rejection rate of ballots in Texas is an example ... that's a lost election for democrats and if they gain the house and senate then there's no stopping them from implementing their anti democracy laws for another 2 years.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/02/11/texas-voting-law-ballots-rejected-poll-watchers/

[FoxNewsSucks]

43. It's beyond an annoyance.

There's a definite clock ticking. Thanks to being stopped from passing voting laws, republicons will retake and probably keep control.

Furthermore, statutes of limitations are expiring. Open-and-shut cases aren't being prosecuted. Maybe the best example of that is the failure to prosecute MF45 for the Stormy Daniels matter. His signature was on the check. Cohen went to jail, and cooperated. Yet they let that slide.

I'm not ok with letting these criminals off the hook, and won't defend anyone not actively doing every damn thing they can to prosecute.

[gab13by13]

58. Watch out,

I was called anti-Democratic because I had the audacity to complain about DOJ not prosecuting the fake Cyber Ninja company.



I'm afraid to criticize Alvin Bragg's decision because he's a Democrat.

[msfiddlestix]

26. This 10,000 % n/t

[Bernardo de La Paz]

28. The Jan 6 investigation is already the largest the FBI ever mounted. Far from over. . . nt

[hlthe2b]

30. No one said it was. Not one person on this thread.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

33. Fine. When you wrote "interminable" and "justice denied" that was redolent of "over" so I replied.nt

[hlthe2b]

34. You apparently did not see the word "DELAY" that followed that term in every single context?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

38. I never said you said the exact word "over", so relax. Have you looked up "redolent" yet?

It was as succinct as I could be without using words like "smells" that would convey negatives I did not want to express.

[hlthe2b]

42. I don't appreciate those who reframe my comment with words I never used to make it sound the

way they WANTED it to sound to fit their preformed argument. And no, "delay" does not in any way equate to "over" nor is it "redolent" of such a conclusion.

By comparison, your argument would have had MLK giving up on civil rights rather than pursuing through the "interminable" delays.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

46. Okay, I'm sorry if it came off as "reframe". Was not my intention at all

I dislike being on the receiving end when others try to "stuff words in my mouth", as I put it.

I probably should not have been quite that terse.

[hlthe2b]

47. Thank you. I appreciate that.

[Ohio Joe]

54. Is it really delayed?

I mean... This is a mob case with TFG at the top. How quickly do you think such a case should take get to the top guy? After only a year on the case, he is already knocking on Stones door through Joshua James who will be testifying before a grand jury. Seems like it's going at a good pace to me.

[hlthe2b]

57. The preeminent Laurence Tribe (Garland's former Prof at Harvard & someone who has had contact

with him) certainly believes that it is. Tribe is eloquent and respectful, but he has repeatedly indicated his doubt (along with many others, including former DOJ officials) that DOJ is even actively investigating Trump. And he has confirmed that he has had some contact with Garland, though, of course not providing any details nor revealing such conversations or communications.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=16465349

[Ohio Joe]

59. That is talking about a special prosecutor...

I'm not seeing anything about no investigation happening or that it is taking too long. I'm not a lawyer so I'm not sure if the investigation is better off the way it is or with a special prosecutor.

[hlthe2b]

63. That is his most recent opinion piece. His twitter feed (which I do not have the ability to search

right now at work) HAS for the past several months included intermittent discussion of his fears that Garland is leaning towards giving Trump a pass.

Here is his feed online. https://twitter.com/tribelaw Go back several weeks/ months and/or search google for his prior opinion pieces.

[Ohio Joe]

91. I don't have twitter so I can't really search his twitter...

So I did some googling and found this from Jan 7th 2022:

Link to tweet

It does not look to me like Laurence thinks Garland is letting TFG off or not going after him.

[hlthe2b]

92. Yes. Tribe is intensely respectful of Garland and is measured in his criticisms as I would expect

Tribe is eloquent and not even remotely a bomb-thrower. He has, however, expressed concerns that Garland is reticent to be move-in any manner some would critique as "aggressive" and has been driven far more by his 20 plus years of judicial temperament, rather than his much earlier years as a prosecutor. Tribe knows him, has communicated with him at least occasionally recently, and is fair-- making him one to which I would listen. See if you can't search later. I'm not registered on Twitter either--thus my use of the online link.

[KS Toronado]

71. My gut feeling is the DOJ is not actively investigating him yet

because they're waiting on more people on the lower rungs to point at the top of the ladder. And Garland being
a strict letter of the law type person, will probably wait until magaloons think he's guilty.

[gab13by13]

62. It took Robert Mueller 12 weeks to do the following;

Mueller got indictments or guilty pleas from;

George Popadopoulas
Paul Manafort
Rick Gates
Michael Flynn
13 Russian Nationals
3 Russian companies
Richard Pinedo
Alex van der Zwaan
Konstantin Kilimnik
12 Russian GRU officers
Michael Cohen
Roger Stone
Sam Patten

Mueller also laid out the evidence to indict Trump for obstruction of justice.
Mueller also laid out the evidence to convict Trump in the Stormy Daniels payoff.

I'm guessing that DOJ has more resources available than Mueller had?

[Ohio Joe]

78. That is not true...

Mueller started in May 2017

George Popadopoulas - Charged 10/3/2017 - Pled 10/5/2017
Paul Manafort - Charged 10/27/2017 - Pled 9/14/2018
Charged 2/22/2017 - Found Guilty 9/21/2018
Rick Gates - Charged 10/27/2017 - Pled 2/23/2018
Charged 2/22/2018 - Dismissed 2/27/2018
Michael Flynn - Charged 11/30/2017 - 12/1/2017
Michael Cohen - Charged 11/29/2018 - Pled 11/29/2018
Roger Stone - Charged 1/24/2019 - Found guilty 11/15/2019

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_charges_brought_in_the_Special_Counsel_investigation_(2017%E2%80%932019)

Sam Patten - Charged 9/2018 - Pled 4/2019

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Patten

Not sure where you got your info but it is simply not true that Mueller got ll those indictments/guilty pleas in 12 weeks... They all would have had to have happened by 9/2017 and none of them did.

[Fiendish Thingy]

80. Thanks for your fact checking

Kind ironic that someone who regularly posts the number of days Garland has failed to prosecute would get numbers wrong…

[Fiendish Thingy]

79. 12 weeks? Try minimum 9 months, for less complicated crimes to prosecute than seditious conspiracy

Using your defined timeline, it’s only been 6-7 weeks since SCOTUS ruled against Trump’s privilege claims and thousands of documents were released, and since Pence’s staff testified to the committee, so by your own definition, shouldn’t Garland’s team get at least 5-6 more weeks to develop their case on charges infinitely more complex to prosecute?

[Beachnutt]

3. Sure hope it happens before 2024

not saying a rethug will win but just in case....

[Silent3]

15. Something big should have been done before the 2022 midterms...

...and from what Garland just said, it sounds like that's pretty much a lost cause now.

Republicans, some of whom were certainly active participants, and many of whom were enablers, will be allowed to grab control of the House, possibly the Senate, and then use their power to make Democratic victory in 2024 impossible.

[FoxNewsSucks]

39. "power to make Democratic victory in 2024 impossible"

Manchin and Sinema have probably already done that. The voting laws were probably the highest priority things that needed to pass, and they made sure it wouldn't happen.

Stopping the BBB also took away a great deal of accomplishment Democrats could have run on. Also stopped by the same two senators.

[kentuck]

4. It sounds good.

Better than saying nothing, I suppose.

[malaise]

5. Thank you Mr Garland- some of us knew you'd lock them up

Last edited Thu Mar 10, 2022, 12:25 PM - Edit history (2)

Consequences are coming!
Get thee to the greatest page

[gab13by13]

6. I think Mr. Garland should reconsider this statement.

"We are not avoiding cases that are political or cases that are controversial or sensitive," the attorney general said in an exclusive interview with NPR. "What we are avoiding is making decisions on a political basis, on a partisan basis."

There was only one political party who attempted to overturn our election and overthrow our democracy. Who on the Democratic side was complicit in this attempted coup? Who in the Democratic party was complicit in delaying the certification of certain states to fraudulently make Trump the winner?

This investigation needs to be partisan because only one side is still attempting to subvert our democracy.

Jesus, Mary, and Joseph he is certainly going out of his way to let Republicans know that he isn't going after them because they are Republicans who simply want to stay in power no matter how. The entire Republican party, except for Cheney and Kinzinger, still is complicit in overthrowing our democracy.

[stopdiggin]

10. the point being reasonably clear

that DOJ goes after crime and criminal behavior, as opposed to political parties or agents. IF the two happen to intersect - so be it. But you don't align yourself with, or against, any parties (or political factions) a priori.

Mr. Garland had it perfectly right in his statement.

[CrackityJones75]

13. So the DOJ which is supposed to be non-partisan

So the DOJ which is supposed to be non-partisan so as to not jeopardize their credibility, and in a statement where they feel the need to ensure that non-partisanship, should give a message that is partisan?

[gab13by13]

25. I do not back a political party

whose #1 goal is to destroy our democracy. Merrick Garland may have to say he is non-partisan but he damn well better be partisan in his actions, our democracy depends upon it.

The Republican party, the Putin party, is rigging elections, the Putin party is passing laws that rewrite history that control what is taught in schools, is passing laws that discriminate against anyone who isn't a member of the white master race and gender.

The Republican party is doing what an autocratic government does. The Republican party is the biggest threat to our democracy, bigger than Russia, bigger than ISIS, it's past time to quit coddling them, we need to call them out for who they are.

[uponit7771]

41. +1, what's scary is FAUX News and GZP use same bullshit propaganda as Russia's TASS and Pravda

[Fiendish Thingy]

81. Oh really?

Merrick Garland may have to say he is non-partisan but he damn well better be partisan in his actions, our democracy depends upon it.

Nonpartisan doesn’t mean bipartisan, or sympathetic to either party, it means nonpartisan.

As it should be.

[uponit7771]

40. RIGHT !! not admitting the fact that it ***IS*** partisan doesn't help

[LexVegas]

7. ...

[dixiechiken1]

8. Awwwww, that's nice.

[Mr. Ected]

9. In order to expedite, if that's even possible, I would imagine more attorneys would need to be hired

Or assigned to the task at hand.

The only way to make justice work faster is to increase manpower, not change pace.

I'm sure this is known and has been acted upon without public knowledge (or not, if the idea is misguided).

[Miguelito Loveless]

18. Color me skeptical

[kacekwl]

21. WTF was that nonsense ?

[Goodheart]

22. Not buying it.

[Evolve Dammit]

27. actions (or lack thereof) speak louder than words. 14 months and counting

[Alexander Of Assyria]

29. Lordy, so many folks not reading what Garland said...thinking on it...but ofc Outrage First, maybe

read and think later.

Hope this at least sinks the sailors on the How Can U Tell IF Ship…is there is even an investigation, cause where are the interviews, grand juries, etc. etc….lol

…come on, give up that ghost at least and a bit of the internet machine outrage?

[ShazzieB]

36. Amen to all of this!

[woodsprite]

35. Unless the repubs steal the votes and majority in the election. :(

[uponit7771]

44. Garland doesn't speak on the timing issue? Why? Cause he doesn't want to be partisan ?! COME ON

... the lack of threat from the GZP attack on democracy expressed in these comments tells more than when people will be arrested and thrown in jail.

IT IS PARTISAN !!

It wasn't democrats who attacked America it was republicans and we need to address that fact **BEFORE** going into the midterms partisan or not.

The "bothsideism" of no partisanship here isn't warranted, we know who the threat is.

[Rebl2]

45. I have a question

It’s only the President that can fire the AG, right? If republicans take over the senate next year, they couldn’t get rid of Garland could they?

[uponit7771]

48. No but they can setup special counsel that will step over the DOJ investigations

[Paladin]

49. Hope my grandchildren live to see it. (nt)

[kentuck]

50. It must be shocking to many Republicans....

...that the story has not gone away. It is as strong today, if not stronger, than it was on January 6th.

Republicans have always been able to use passage of time as a way to re-define and re-write history. They have not been able to do that this time.

[Nevilledog]

51. It's. A. Political. Decision. If. We. Don't. Prosecute.

[Justice matters.]

52. At this pace, the 10 Obstruction of Justice allegations have already expired...

Too late to indict.

Ignored for too long.

[iemanja]

53. Wow

I hadn't realized that.

[Justice matters.]

56. Quite a Justice system...

Justice delayed is Justice denied for the conman who says he's rich and connected... (to putin's butt).

[iemanja]

64. For Jan 6, as well?

Or is it the obstruction allegations from the Ukraine issue and the firing of Comey?
I don't think DOJ plans to investigate either.

[Justice matters.]

66. Mueller Report Tome II

A thousand former Federal prosecutors signed a memo stating they believe the orange "Capone" terrorist should have been charged with 10 counts of OoJ. Even Mueller himself said in Congress hearings he could charge him after his "presidency" is over.

[Fiendish Thingy]

82. Which has nothing to do with January 6

And you’re wrong- only a couple of SOL’s have expired, some won’t expire until 2025 due to ongoing conspiracy/coverups.

Regardless, only 4 out of 14 potential obstruction charges meet all three required evidentiary components for a potential conviction, hence the DOJ’s reluctance to indict. The “open and shut” argument is laughable.

For more information, go to emptywheel.net (you might have to go back a few pages, but thankfully they have a pretty good search function).

[Alexander Of Assyria]

95. The post u replied to wasn't meant to be serious, just stirring the pot. Pot is empty. Lol

[usaf-vet]

55. For Garland's comment to be accurate, it assumes WE HOLD, the WH, HR, and take the Senate.

Garland says the Jan. 6 investigation won't end until everyone is held to account.....

For Garland's comment to be accurate, it assumes WE HOLD, the WH, HR, and take the Senate.

[usonian]

70. Amen to that.

Your post says it all.

SPECULATION
It sure looks like some people are waiting for a "Watergate Moment", i.e. the hearings.
But hearings reverse course when you're in the minority.

FACT
THINGS WE CAN DO TO PRESERVE DEMOCRACY IN 2022 AND BEYOND.
(shameless plug for my thread, updated often)
DON'T LET THE CLOCK RUN OUT.
https://democraticunderground.com/100216380145

[pandr32]

60. AG Garland is building up from the foundation

So far, the foundation is large, the walls will be high, and oh--that roof! Brick by brick this will be a solid case. The responsible someone(s) will not be squirming away this time.
This is what is needed. We need to quit complaining it isn't fast enough or in time for an election.

[Justice matters.]

72. In 3 years and 10 months, the statute of limitations will be expired.

Just like the Obstruction of Justice cases in Mueller's report Tome II expired this year.

[pandr32]

85. A whole lot of room in almost 4 years.

[jalan48]

73. Sounds good.

[Emile]

75. So not over until TFG faces justice!

[MineralMan]

77. Garland is doing his due diligence on this.

That is going to be very important when it's time to prosecute the nomenklatura in this case. Yes, indeed it will. To be successful in prosecuting, convicting, and winning appeals with regard to those particular individuals, details and foundation-building are going to matter.

AG Garland is building his case, one step at a time. The current round of prosecutions is just a step away from the penultimate set of wrongdoers, who are just one step away from Trump himself.

Garland has said all he can say at this point. The cases are continuing to reach upward.