I wish Biden would replace Garland today

[intrepidity]

We *really* need some drastic, immediate action!

[Beachnutt]

1. Trump is a madman on the loose

and the guilty cohorts are scared goons capable of anything, we do need swift action.

[Wednesdays]

2. ...

[intrepidity]

4. YES! THIS SHIT AGAIN! nt

[PunkinPi]

9. He's not back on Twitter. People are posting screenshots from his "truth social". nt

[Calista241]

41. No kidding. nothing screams 'above all reproach" like firing the old boss so a new boss will do it.

[Stinky The Clown]

45. Gettin' a lotta mileage out of that image, huh?

Easier than debating, though.

[867-5309.]

3. I wouldn't hate it n/t

[Magoo48]

6. Yes, preferably with someone awake this time.

[FarPoint]

7. Try and relax....

Garland has this....that is my sense....the Hearings must proceed to inform the country to prepare for the massive indictments and arrests to follow by August.

[2naSalit]

11. +1

[MineralMan]

8. Do you, now?

Not going to happen, thank goodness. Garland is on the job. No doubt you could do better, for sure, but you don't have his job.

[Willto]

10. Has Anyone Checked

to see if Garland is in a coma. Because if he's conscious then he has no excuse not to have put handcuffs on a few people by now.

[LuckyCharms]

12. You should call Garland and tell him that then.

Be persistent.

I know you'll be able to get through to him on the phone.

Give him your thoughts on the matter.

[Willto]

13. Not

I know you'll be able to get through to him on the phone.


Not if he's still in a coma.

[LuckyCharms]

14. No, you.

[FarPoint]

27. Thank you...

I needed the feel good laugh....

[LuckyCharms]

28. .

[FarPoint]

26. Are you new to politics....????

Relax.....Garland has this all.....Let me ask you this.....How long do you think it would take to get a replacement AG to be able to command this overwhelming prosecution with the prime suspect , tRump?


One year???

[rogue emissary]

15. Who would you want Biden to replace him with?

[BlackSkimmer]

20. Good question!

Wonder if you'll get an answer?

[rogue emissary]

23. Honestly just wondering who would be qualified for the position and

would take action the poster believes Garland hasn't taken.

[iemanja]

29. Adam Schiff

Would be my choice.

[rogue emissary]

35. Schiff has said, if he was AG. He'd provide drastic, immediate action?

[iemanja]

36. He's been critical of DOJ

and their reticence in acting.

[rogue emissary]

37. But he indicated he would have taken immediate action or

taken more action than the DOJ has taken so far?

[iemanja]

40. By implication yes

You can't imagine he'd make a direct statement like that since he isn't AG and wouldn't want to be seen as angling for the AG job.

[edhopper]

30. Adam Schiff

for one.

[intrepidity]

46. I'd ask Tribe, Schiff, Goldman, Kirschner for their recommendations

to start

[brooklynite]

16. [phone]

1600 Pennsylvania Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20500

Nobody complaining about Garland seems to think they should do anything themselves.

[NewsCenter28]

19. I saw your post on my Saturday thread, Booklynite

where you said expanding the supreme court was off the table, a filibuster carveout was off the table, and that impeachment of Thomas was off the table in response to Roe. I'm not sure if you meant it but when you said "no quick fixes," you sounded dismissive about the end of Roe, you seem quite willing to do nothing meaningful about Roe, regardless of the devastating impact it will have on millions of American women, and you have also strongly hinted that your preference is that Trump is not held to account criminally for what he did on January 6th, by DOJ at least. Your strategy will lead to massive GOP victories in 2022 and 2024. Some of us would prefer that the US not become a fascist country, and we do not have the financial resources that you have to survive living in fascism.

If you do have a blockbuster strategy to deal with Roe and Trump that doesn't involve the things I mentioned above, I'm more than willing to hear your ideas. I'm not closed off to you but "no quick fixes", the day after millions lost their rights is not an acceptable response, sir, at all. It sounded, again to me, very much like Ted Cruz saying "thoughts and prayers" about guns. Once again, though, if I misread you, I strongly apologize in advance, but I think that your "let's be realistic here" and no "quick fixes" was very callous. Again, if I misread you, sincere apologies in advance once more.

Basically, what I am saying is I want Roe protected and Trump destroyed. With your ties to the Democratic leadership, what is YOUR strategy to do that? In the end, all the emotion in this post is really about those 2 things in my first sentence.

I also certainly hope that your solution to Roe and Trump is not reading a poem.

By the way, have you seen the anger of Parkland survivors, Cameron Kasky and David Hogg on Twitter, not to mention Elizabeth Warren and AOC's anger? Many in the base are not willing to accept your Que, sera, sera lassize faire strategy any longer.

[brooklynite]

21. Here is exactly what I said: word for word.

Just to add a touch of reality to this discussion...there are no quick fixes

We won't be expanding the Court.
We won't be imposing term limits.
We won't be Impeaching any of the conservative Justices.

Note that I said nothing about the filibuster or any Congressional policy. I was talking exclusively about proposed changes to the Court.

[NewsCenter28]

24. All right

I understand. Sorry. I do have a proposal for you though. It seems to me that President Biden doesn't really believe that the presidency has much of a bully pulpit and that he doesn't believe in executive orders on anything, preferring congressional action instead, presumably because he believes SCOTUS will just strike down his orders (?) Even if it did, President Biden using the bully pulpit more and issuing more executive orders on issues like student loans and Roe would a) buy us time, even if they are struck down and b) would energize the base in a midterm election year where turnout is EVERYTHING. Or even barring that, not doing things like saying "The court makes terrible decisions" when he had a chance to really smack down the court on Roe on Saturday before he left. All he has to do is show us fire, show us that he truly cares, and the midterm election dynamics could instantly change. I sincerely believe that.

Roe was a gift that could single-handedly change November and it seems like the WH is doing nothing to capitalize on it. Do they not understand the golden opportunity Roe handed President Biden and the Dems? Cabinet secretaries and the VP should be fanning out in a massive media blitz over this. Statements should be coming from the WH, congressional leadership, and our governors daily. In short, we should be CRUSHING the fascists with this tyrannical ruling. Senate and house votes, even if fillbustered, would also be a welcome step.

[Demsrule86]

34. We have a hostile court which will more than likely strike down any executive order and make it

worse. Why do you folks resist so much the fact that our only way out of this is to elect more Democrats...it was losing multiple elections that got us here and winning multiple elections will save us in end. There is no easy way out much as I wish there was.

[Demsrule86]

33. And you are absolutely correct.

[Demsrule86]

32. Really...I am sick of this 'anger'...nothing can be done at the moment until we have more

Democrats...so my suggestion is everyone needs to put on their big girl and big boy pants, lose the anger and elect more Democrats.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

18. ....

[Trumpdumper]

22. Again with this nonsense.

If you think Garland is not investigating, you haven't been paying attention.

[Demsrule86]

25. That is not how prosecution works...

[Novara]

31. Would you maybe want to wait for Garland to say that he's NOT going to prosecute?

Not that I think it's likely at all, not after today, but as far as you know, Garland could be getting ALL of the ducks in a row right now. You don't know that he's NOT.

Sheesh.

[LiberalFighter]

39. Exactly. Especially when all the ducks in a row are airtight.

[LiberalFighter]

38. And delay it further?

His replacement would need to be nominated by Biden and approved in the Senate.

[Patton French]

42. Damn, it's frustrating, but I don't know.

The J6 has be phenomenal. Surely it will lead to prosecutions, potentially all the way to the top.

[IzzaNuDay]

43. No quick fix.

MG knows what he is doing. He wants to ensure his prosecution is airtight, no loopholes. I trust his judgment on this.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

44. This is awesome!!!!

So, because you seem to know what's going on in the DoJ, then maybe YOU can tell us why you want Pres. Biden to replace AG Garland.

Here's the plain brutal truth, you don't know fuck all what's going on in the DoJ regarding AG Garland's next move, as it should be.

Here's another plain brutal fact, you never, ever let the person under investigation know what evidence you have before you're ready to drop the hammer.