I know when Garland is going to charge people at the top.

[fightforfreedom]

When he is dam ready to charge people at the top. I am pretty sure it takes an unbelievable amount of manpower and time to investigate, indict, over 800 people. Evidence has to be gathered. search warrants issued, phones taken and then analyzed. Grand juries have to be put in place. Then you have to build a case before you charge over 800 people, many who have been charged with seditious conspiracy. Cases that can be tough to prove.

I understand why people are saying Garland /DOJ are doing nothing, will never charge anybody at the top.

[SoonerPride]

1. I know when Garland is not going to charge people at the top

tomorrow
the day after tomorrow
or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that or the day after that

[we can do it]

2. Pathetic

[SoonerPride]

6. Facts are stubborn things

[we can do it]

9. Present some.

[fightforfreedom]

11. Exactly.

[JanMichael]

26. The only thing we know is that it hasn't happened. This is like the god thing.

Millerites:

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

Miller may someday be vindicated. But until then the Great Disappointment.

I suppose if Jesus did return I might be like "well fuck me. That's a surprise"

If the AG goes all out war on Trump and his 2nds then I would be like "damn. I was wrong."

Oh yeah he did present something. Nothing.

[SoonerPride]

32. There were no indictments of higher up trump officials today

I guess I’ll post that every day until the end of time.

[Treefrog]

42. Why don't you?

Meantime nothing is happening.

[SoonerPride]

66. Trump has been committing crimes for at least 50 years

Financial crimes.
Sexual assaults.
Bribery.
Graft.
Fraud.
Perjury.
Obstruction of Justice.

And how many times has he been indicted or tried?

I’ll wait.

[BlackSkimmer]

5. Lol, well played.

[Chautauquas]

16. +1

[jalan48]

22. LOL

[Trumpdumper]

50. SoonerPride is either an expert at irony ...

or totally misunderstands the process; the notion that if you swing and miss, it's over; and why the need for secretiveness and thoroughness is paramount.

[CrackityJones75]

62. Heres another one.

[LiberalFighter]

3. They are investigating more people than normally would be.

It is also easier to investigate when it involves a specific location or a few connected locations.

This involves probably nearly every state.

[fightforfreedom]

10. Some people act like this is a normal investigation, piece of cake.

Should be over by now. All the people at the top should have been investigated, indicted, and serving their prison sentences. Some people see what they want to see. Facts be dammed.

[LiberalFighter]

64. The Watergate investigation took over two years.

And involved far fewer people.

[elleng]

13. Right.

[elleng]

4. 'Then you have to build a case,' imagine THAT!!!

[SoonerPride]

7. Yeah they've only had a year and a half

They need at least 12 years to formulate a case.

[fightforfreedom]

14. A year and half and over 800 people charged.

For our always slow moving justice system, that's fast. That was the first step and it still continues with the arrest of the Proud Boys today. This investigation has a long way to go, you might as well accept that fact or you will be saying nothing is going to happen for a long tome , until you are proven wrong.

[SoonerPride]

36. Low level nobodies

Most charged with criminal trespass.

Some proud boys getting slapped with seditious conspiracy is better.

But anyone with a name has skated.

Let me know when they are indicted.

[agingdem]

21. and after nearly a year the J6 committee

Last edited Mon Jun 6, 2022, 07:11 PM - Edit history (1)

is still issuing subpoenas, interviewing witnesses..and because Garland didn't indict Trump 10 minutes after he took office then you assume he's going to let Trump and the coup cabal walk?...again, the J6 committee is tasked with telling the story, the DOJ is tasked with bringing the guilty to justice and assigning punishment within the parameters of the law..

[Beastly Boy]

23. A year and a half to charge over 850 people comes to

about 560 charges per year, and that doesn't even take into account the charges not related to J6.

Pretty damn impressive by anyone's REASONABLE standards.

...What, did you expect at least 1,000 charges per year?

[Voltaire2]

30. We expected charges against the trump admin

goon squad put in place after the election to stage a coup.

[Beastly Boy]

59. That's what I undderstand you expected. So the 850 charges don't count?

Were they not related to 1/6? Did they materialize all by themselves without any input by DOJ? Were they not instrumental in the subsequent charges of seditious conspiracy against the leaders of the insurrection? Were your expectations not met, at least to some degree, by the indictment against Peter Navarro, who was, BTW, a member of the Trump admin goon squad? Is the DOJ investigation not still ongoing?

All this in a year and a half! And that's just the stuff that was made public.

I mean, one's expectations don't necessarily need to be reasonable, but it helps!

[BlackSkimmer]

28. Apparently. nt

[Phoenix61]

52. Garland started March 11, 2021.

You think that’s when the investigation started? That he knew everyone who worked there and had already selected who would be in charge of what? That all of Trumps loyalists were identified and dismissed that day?

[fightforfreedom]

53. I posted about this recently.

Some people keep on saying it's been a year and a half, nothing has happened. Because of that they are saying nothing will ever happen. It's not true. They dismiss all the things Garland has done and had to do in a little over a year. They dismiss investigations that are taking place, like the fake electors, which of course leads straight to people like Rudy, Eastman, Meadows who came up with the plan.

They ignore the fact that Navarro described the attempted coup in detail on TV. He named people who were involved. That is not going to be ignored by the DOJ. Nothing has happened yet, which means nothing. There is no set time frame for Garland to take action.

[uponit7771]

60. The DOJ did not begin operating on 3/11/21, a non partisan organization would've started ...

... the millisecond they found out there were people who wanted to stop the peaceful transfer of power.

Period.

[Phoenix61]

69. You think the DOJ was operating as a non-partisan

organization while Trump was in office? You think Barr was investigating anything to do with Jan 6th? Really?

[uponit7771]

70. NO! But do you think its operating as a non partisan organization now? You think DOJ is going to...

... end their partisanship because there's a temporary AG picked by a dem?!

You think Hunter Biden's laptop and a political investigation in Sussan is non partisan cause Garland is AG?!

REALLY !?!?

[Phoenix61]

71. 😂😂😂😀😀😂😂😀

[uponit7771]

72. I'll take this non answer as you knowing its a partisan organization that AGG has to clean out ...

... and get to serving the country vs the GZP.

Any non partisan organization would not wait till a new head came into office once it saw a text book attempted coup not but a couple of miles from its office.

[Phoenix61]

73. 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[uponit7771]

74. Copium turned up to 12 on a 10 scale

[Phoenix61]

87. 😂😂😂😂😀😂😀

[samsingh]

8. he won't charge anyone at the top. Democracy is at stake and we can keep playing our games.

[BlackSkimmer]

31. Of course he won't. nt

[Thomas Hurt]

12. The real issue isn't whether he is doing anything but whether he can reasonably be expected...

to have any success if the mid terms go badly for the Democrats. Of course it is obvious that if the Pig or DeSantis wins in 2024, this whole "no matter high it goes" thing is going to be shitcanned by the christofascist AG.

[getagrip_already]

15. Jan 6th isn't the first crime, or even the last......

Sure, it takes a lot of resources. But there are crimes dating back to the inauguration and as far forward as the classified doc haul.

But even Jan 6th was 18 months ago. They are just indicting outsiders. They arent seriously investigating top level actors.

Why?

Glen Kirschner believes trump handed out pocket pardons. Conway says she was offered one.

The doj would likely know since several were probably given to doj/fbi officials.

Until someone in his inner circle is charged, I'm sticking with my belief that none ever will be.

You can be as sarcastic as you like. I used to say the exact same things you said above. I could have written it. I was wrong.

[sop]

17. We should start a pool...guess who will be indicted, tried and convicted, and when.

[867-5309.]

18. Thought I'd see "when hell freezes over"

[getagrip_already]

20. Well, in a way....

He may not be good and ready until he'll freezes over. So you both be correct.

[czarjak]

19. It's complicated. Crime on steroids produces rage?

[malaise]

24. K&R

Agree

[brooklynite]

25. But in last week's LAW& ORDER, the investigation and trial took only 44 MINUTES!

[Novara]

27. You beat me to it, LOL

This ain't an episode Law & Order, which wraps up before you brush your teeth for bedtime.

Some of you just can't give an inch. You've made up your minds that you know exactly that nothing will happen and even when you see things happening, you still sing your old song. It's okay to admit that you may have been wrong. It won't kill ya. In fact, people respect those who can admit they were wrong.

Me? I'm not predicting. I am just enjoying seeing indictments for some pretty damn serious crimes. The DOJ has the goods on those indicted and may possibly have proof it goes higher. I have hope justice will prevail yet I also won't be surprised if the orange motherfucker never sees the inside of a jail. And while that will be profoundly disappointing, it may happen. The one damn skill he's got (other than being a racist, sexist criminal, stupid piece of shit) is his skill in not directly giving a criminal order, but strongly hinting it. "I want you to do me a favor, though" is not the same thing as "if you do this for me, you'll get your military supplies." It's the only damn thing he's good at.

[Scrivener7]

34. That is the dopiest comment, and yet it is always repeated when this discussion comes up.

I suspect people think it's witty. Not sure why.

Just to recap: it's been a year and a half since the attempted coup to overthrow our Democracy.

[brooklynite]

37. Do you recall how long it took for indictments in Watergate?

"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 Jan. 6."

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

[Scrivener7]

44. And in that year and a half, nothing has been done to prevent the SAME people who

attempted that coup from attempting another coup at any time. One that would likely be lots more successful because now they've had practice.

And yes, I do recall the watergate timetable.

The break-in was discovered and the burglars were arrested in June 1972.

Liddy and James McCord were convicted in January of 1973 of conspiracy, bugging DNC headquarters, and burglary. Four others, including Howard Hunt, had already plead guilty.

That's seven months from discovery of the crime to the first convictions of planners of the crime.

[brooklynite]

45. No its not...

Hunt and McCord being convicted of the Watergate break-in is the equivalent of the people who've already been convicted of breaking in to the Capitol.

The indictments for the Watergate planning and coverup didn't come until 1974.

On March 1, 1974, a grand jury in Washington, D.C., indicted several former aides of Nixon, who became known as the "Watergate Seven"—H. R. Haldeman, John Ehrlichman, John N. Mitchell, Charles Colson, Gordon C. Strachan, Robert Mardian, and Kenneth Parkinson—for conspiring to hinder the Watergate investigation. -- Wikipedia

[Scrivener7]

46. Sure it is.

(As you yourself pointed out, those were indictments for hindering the investigation, not for planning and executing the crime.)

[fightforfreedom]

48. Comparing the time table of Watergate to Jan 6th investigation is ridiculous.

This investigation, crimes, towers over the crimes committed during Watergate. It is much more complex.

[Scrivener7]

49. Well, of course it's ridiculous. I wasn't the one who brought it up. But as long as it was,

it took seven months for the first convictions.

[newdayneeded]

76. Also,

Watergate was in secret, J6 was televised on dozens of stations. They even have footage of the trump family salivating over it. My point is there seems to be a lot of proof out there to fire off indictments.

[treestar]

86. Caught red handed at the scene

that would have been much simpler.

[agingdem]

38. I bet an insurrection would definitely have a part 2 and 3?...

Episode 1...22 minutes arresting 800 rioters...10 minutes in court before a judge, all pleading innocent...12 minutes on trial..guilty..case closed

Episode 2...opening scene..coup cabal destroying documents (flushing, ingesting, shredding, burning) US Marshall Service breaks door down..22 minutes coup cabal meeting with their lawyers...12 minutes in court pleading not guilty, arranging bail..10 minutes outside the courthouse smiling for the MSM denying their guilt..to be continued...

[brooklynite]

39. Sweeps months are pretty much gone as a programming concept.

[Voltaire2]

29. He can't even bring contempt charges

against people who brazenly refused congressional subpoenas.

Garland is a disaster. The wrong man for the job.

Link to tweet

?s=21&t=fHmSbT7itOE5JZsdD42BYg

[Scrivener7]

33. But you don't know IF Garland is going to charge people at the top.

Which makes this discussion inane.

[Treefrog]

41. I really am skeptical that he will.

I wish I didn’t feel this way.

[Chainfire]

35. Of the 800 cases (or whatever number they are juggling) I only care about maybe 20.

I don't give a damn about the mouth breathing foot soldier from Iron City, Alabama. I want to see the generals, colonels, and majors on the pointy end of the stick, they are the ones that matter. Perhaps if the hearings do indeed, "Blow the roof off" we will start seeing some indictments. If it doesn't happen in the next month to six weeks, don't look for it ever.

By the end of July there will be a big push to put everything on ice until after the elections. That ice will never thaw.

[Treefrog]

40. Too funny.

I will bookmark this thread.

[Meowmee]

43. I know too

Most likely never. A former so called president will never be charged with a crime in this country no matter how atrocious his crimes are and how numerous. Which is going to be the fatal flaw that destroys the country in my opinion.

If any high ups are charged I predict nothing will come of it- no real accountability.

And meanwhile we are still paying for his and his family’s security and who knows what else.

[fightforfreedom]

47. Lets say all the naysayers are correct, Garland charges no one at the top.

Then what? Garland would have to explain why he did not charge people that have clearly committed crimes. We all know it. You know who else would have to explain why no one was charged, Biden, The man who Trump tried to over throw.

Also, if Garland does not charge people at the top who have clearly committed crimes, that would severely damage the Democrats politically. The Republicans would immediately tell the American people we told you so. This was a witch hunt and the Democrats lied to you. You can not trust the Democrats, they are liars. You know they would say that.

This scenario is unrealistic, Unimaginable ,That's why I believe I will be proven correct. People at the top are going down. I don't know who, how many and I don't know if it will reach Trump. This investigation is going to play out, it's not ending any time soon.

[Scrivener7]

51. And that's a perfectly valid opinion. But it is just an opinion, and there are others that are just

as valid. And - horrors - they might not be the same as yours.

Until we know, none of us knows.

[uponit7771]

61. Garland would not "have to explain" anything and can tell congress to fuck off ........... too.

[Skittles]

54. he is already letting people off the hook for egregious activity

ya know?

[former9thward]

55. "Many" have not been charged with seditious conspiracy.

And those that have are loser nobodies that no one has ever heard of or cares about. Most have been charged with misdemeanors. Charges that carry no or little jail time.

[fightforfreedom]

56. 16 people have been charges with seditious conspiracy.

They are the leaders of the oath keepers and Proud Boys. Some of them have direct ties to people in Trumps inner circle, like Roger Stone. It's a very big deal.

[former9thward]

58. 16 out of 800 is not "many"

You keep on saying they have "ties" (whatever is meant by that) but none have been proven.

[fightforfreedom]

63. Yes, 16 it is many and there is video proof of ties.

I am sorry I have to say this, but some people who are saying nothing is happening and nothing will happen. No one in Trumps inner circle will be charged, have their facts wrong. People in Trumps inner circle are being investigated by the DOJ for the attempted coup.
People in Trumps inner circle have been subpoenaed for the fake electors scheme which was part of the attempted coup.

You don't investigate people unless you believe they committed crimes.

[SoonerPride]

67. In no universe is 2% "many"

[maxsolomon]

57. I feel like you posted this last week.

and the week before that.

January 6th, 2021 is 18 months ago - today.

[SoonerPride]

65. The OP will post it again next week

And the week after that.

Until 2030.

We just need limitless patience.

To say it has gotten old is an understatement.

The “this time we’ve got em” has been said every week since 2016.

Lucy pulling the football has nothing on the perpetual game of expecting any consequence for trump team and their myriad nonstop multitude of criminal acts.

Not JUST Jan 6, but literally hundreds of crimes for years prior to that.

How anyone can still have even a glimmer of hope that anyone ever will be held to account is flabbergasting to me. Contrary to everything that has happened for the last 6 years - no amend that - for the last 50 years of trump crimes to suddenly expect any consequences for trump and his cabal seems delusional.

Really.

[brooklynite]

68. And someone else will post a rant about how Garland isn't doing his job...

[Scrivener7]

75. At this point the only function of these OPs is to stir shit. While I have seen

people commenting about their doubt Garland will get the job done within threads, those are not the people starting threads and stirring the shit on this topic.

The only OPs I have seen for at least a couple of months whose function is to raise this argument again and stir shit are the ones, like this one, saying that there is no doubt that Garland will get the job done.

Please link to an OP, someone starting up the discussion anew and stirring the shit, from the last couple of months where someone is saying they have doubts that Garland will get the job done.

[fightforfreedom]

77. The point of posts like this is to remind people of this.

To point out the fact people who are saying no one at the top is being investigated , no one at the top will be charged are factual wrong.

Sometimes I do it with sarcasm, sometimes I present facts.

The DOJ is investigating people at the top and you don't investigate people unless you believe they have committed crimes. That is a fact.

[Scrivener7]

79. Stir, stir, stir.

[fightforfreedom]

78. The point of posts like this is to remind people of this.

To point out the fact people who are saying no one at the top is being investigated , no one at the top will be charged are factual wrong.

Sometimes I do it with sarcasm, sometimes I present facts.

The DOJ is investigating people at the top and you don't investigate people unless you believe they have committed crimes. That is a fact.

[Scrivener7]

80. Why do you need everyone to agree with your opinion about the outcome of a topic where no one

knows the outcome? Why do you feel the need to insist that your unfounded opinion about the outcome is correct while others' unfounded opinion about the outcome is wrong?

We won't know till we know. Until then, why stir the shit every other day?

I know you will reply by telling me your opinion is not unfounded, so have at it, but you will just be proving my point.

[fightforfreedom]

81. Not my opinion, facts.

You are upset because I have reminded people here the DOJ is investigating people at the top. They are investigating the attempted coup. I want to remind people here because some people are consistently saying no one at the top is being investigated, no one at the top will ever be charged. It's factual wrong and I have the right to point it out.

The investigations are not slowing down. They are growing larger everyday. People who believe nothing will happen are using what happened in the past as proof nothing will happen. It's irrelevant. Meadows was not charged for contempt as proof nothing will happen, irrelevent.

I have to tell you, I like my odds in this debate. The odds of someone at the top being indicted are very good.

[Scrivener7]

82. LOL! No, dear. I'm not upset at all.

Last edited Tue Jun 7, 2022, 10:32 AM - Edit history (1)

As I said, we will know when we know. Your daily insistence that everyone agree with you doesn't change that. It is simply puzzling. Like the way evangelicals are puzzling.

I think your odds are OK. Not great, not awful. But we'll know when we know.

So if we are talking about odds at this point, why don't we all just watch the race together? Why don't you stop fighting with the people around you and insulting them and demanding they bet on the same horse you have?

(PS: I think the adverb you keep looking for is "factually." The phrase is "factually wrong" not "factual wrong.&quot

[msfiddlestix]

83. Instead of these pointless circlular screeds, report to us when high levels are charged and arrested

that would be a worthy contribution..

[Joinfortmill]

84. Garland is a patriot. The end.

[treestar]

85. Yes. Watergate was much easier when it came out

that Nixon taped conversations.

Trump didn't do that and even got rid of records or didn't keep them.

And Nixon didn't have cult-like loyalty from his supporters.