AG Garland reiterates 'no person' -- not even Trump -- is above the law over Jan. 6

[MarineCombatEngineer]

Attorney General Merrick Garland on Wednesday reiterated that "no person," not even a former president, was above the law amid calls from some congressional Democrats to charge Donald Trump after last year's Capitol riot.

During a press conference, a visibly animated Garland twice said that "no person" was above the law when pressed specifically about Trump, whom Democrats say incited the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection over his unfounded claims of widespread voter fraud in 2020. Democrats also cite Trump's larger, months-long campaign to try and reverse his election loss. (Trump insists he did nothing wrong.)

The Department of Justice has been prosecuting various cases related to the rioting last January.

"There is a lot of speculation about what the Justice Department is doing, what's it not doing, what our theories are and what our theories aren't, and there will continue to be that speculation," the attorney general said Wednesday. "That's because a central tenant of the way in which the Justice Department investigates and a central tenant of the rule of law is that we do not do our investigations in the public."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ag-garland-reiterates-no-person-not-even-trump-is-above-the-law-over-jan-6/ar-AAZNg69?li=BBnb7Kz

Can we now put to rest the false info posted here on DU on several threads about the memo, and, while we're at it, how about stopping the numerous bash AG Garland and the DoJ posts and threads?

Seems to me that AG Garland pretty much debunked all that today.

[MontanaMama]

1. I don't give a lot of credence to what people say.

I pay attention to what they do. Time will tell. The clock is ticking and we’re running out of time. If Dems don’t keep the house, all bets are OFF. If Joe Biden isn’t our President in 2024, AG Garland is out of a job. If the corrupt SCOTUS decides that state legislatures can overturn a free and fair national election then none of it matters.

[Bev54]

38. What is the arbitrary time limit here? It is not running out and they have to do the job right

I truly hope you will read this article in lawfare by Ben Wittes.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/defense-justice-department

[MerryBlooms]

62. DOJ didn't know Hutchinson existed until her

J6 testimony. DOJ is watching J6 hearings because DOJ with all its superior investigative power, supeona power, etc... Is still not investigating the true causation of J6. J6 Committee has said many times how frustrated they are with DOJ. J6 is on the front line of this war, they are the ones that know what is going on.

DOJ was stunned by Hutchinson's testimony, why was that? DOJ should have been the first to interview her, had they been doing due diligence!

I'm with others, in wait and see, attitude. DOJ has not given me confidence in their investigative diligence. J6 Committee has my confidence, and J6 Committee is questioning DOJ.

[Bev54]

63. Yeah and the DOJ didn't know about Nixon tapes until it was exposed in congress

Give it a rest.

[MerryBlooms]

80. I'm not giving anything a rest. Fuck that attitude.

Our officials answer to us, we the people. You give it a rest.

[MontanaMama]

78. The time limit is not arbitrary.

If the Dems do not hold the house, the J6 investigation and committee are done. Republicans have promised to turn the tables and “investigate” Dems. If Joe Biden is not re-elected, Merick Garland is also done. I absolutely understand “doing the job right”. All of the doing and talking will not matter if the DOJ changes hands and it absolutely could. We have agencies such as the Secret Service and maybe others that are compromised. We have a SCOTUS that has announced they plan to hear a case this fall that could hand control of our national elections to state legislatures of which republicans hold 30 states. Merick Garland does not have the luxury of a whole lot of time. I assume he knows this.

[Bev54]

79. Yes Garland has almost 2 1/2 years, I don't think he needs to rush it.

I would like to see him do something after the Nov election, which I think he too is waiting for.

[MontanaMama]

81. I wish he had that much time

but he does not. If he is really waiting until after the Nov election…and I can’t imagine why he would if he’s really got a case…then what’s stopping him from waiting until after the 2024 election? Why the hell do elections stop the rule of law being enforced? If TFG runs again, as he says he will, will that stop AG Garland from moving forward?

SCOTUS may very well end free and fair elections…they are hearing a case this October regarding exactly that. How in the world can anyone in their right mind think they won’t do the wrong thing? We know who they are. It’s time to believe them. I hope Merick Garland believes it as well.

[Bev54]

83. Garland knows it. He also knows what he is doing.

Here is a good article to read, I hope it gives you some peace.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/defense-justice-department

[MontanaMama]

85. I will read it.

[Scrivener7]

2. When they've broken the law in front of 300 million people dozens if not hundreds of times,

they really ARE above the law until and unless they are indicted for ANY of those crimes.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

4. Who says they're not going to be indicted?

AG Garland certainly didn't say that, or even allude to anything like that.

[Scrivener7]

20. And yet he has not been indicted for any of it. I'll believe it when I see it.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

22. So I'll put you down as not believing AG Garland,

despite his clearly stating that NO ONE is above the law, including the Mango Menace.

Got it.

[Scrivener7]

24. I'll believe it when I see it. You can "get" whatever you like.

And really, why do you need to "put me down" in any category whatsoever? You keeping score on this?

I am able to read your opinion and simply disagree with it. You don't seem to have the same ability.

[Scrivener7]

26. I'm saying I'll believe it when I see it. Weren't you the one who got all twisted thinking people

were putting words in your mouth? In those cases (plural) no one was.

In this case, you are.

Projection abounds.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

27. Fair enough,

I'll delete my posts.

[dchill]

41. I, too, will believe it when I see it.

I remember Mueller. Trump never should have been allowed to run for re-election. Yet it seems he's going to do it again.

[Scrivener7]

71. It seems to me to be the only really sensible position. Strangely our thinking this seems

to make some people absolutely berserk. I get that they think Garland is just about to hand down all the indictments we could ever want. I get that they have total faith.

It doesn't anger me at all that they think this way. But it seems to really chap their asses that we think the way we do, and they seem to have a compulsive need to criticize our opinion and attribute bad motives to us.

I don't get it at all.

[dchill]

82. Some folks just want to be right all the time.

I should know - I'm one of them. Of course, I thought Fitzpatrick and Mueller were both going to deliver the goods. So...

What do I know?

[uponit7771]

46. The law, Comey obstruction of justice has already ran out and TFG did that on video !!!

[MarineCombatEngineer]

50. Hey, if bashing AG Garland/DoJ makes you feel better,

more power to you, I hope it makes you sleep better at night.

[uponit7771]

52. Fact based critiques is not "bashing" please lets not classify stating reality as a bad thing.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

57. What facts?

You have no idea, nor do I or anyone else here what is the status of the investigation, as it should be, AG Garland knows not to show the evidence to the subjects until it's time to drop the hammer on them.

[uponit7771]

58. I already stated SOL on Comey obstruction has ran out, he's not going to be prosecuted for ...

.... something he did RIGHT IN THE OPEN ON VIDEO by the DOJ.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

64. Comey has absolutely jack shit to do with this investigation,

why the fuck you keep bringing this up is beyond me.

[uponit7771]

68. I'm not narrowing my critique of DOJs lack of action to J6 investigations, that's not reality based.

TFG crimes go back ***YEARS*** that the DOJ could've already brought him on charges for but has not.

Benedict Donald should've been shackled for shit he's done RIGHT IN FRONT of us and that the DOJ and other other prosecutors have already outline in a multitude of memos.

[uponit7771]

69. I'm not narrowing my critique of DOJs lack of action to J6 investigations, that's not reality based.

TFG crimes go back ***YEARS*** that the DOJ could've already brought him on charges for but has not.

Benedict Donald should've been shackled for shit he's done RIGHT IN FRONT of us and that the DOJ and other other prosecutors have already outline in a multitude of memos.

[Chin music]

36. +1z

[Bev54]

44. Just because they broke the law in front of us in our eyes

and the 1/6 committee is bringing a lot out in the public, the DOJ has to deal with courts and judges and evidentiary rules and have an argument for every defense they are going to throw at them. These investigations do not happen overnight and they are stretched by a lack of resources that Garland requested, but they intend to get the job done.

The committee is providing us with the story of what happened, they are not restricted by judges. We will learn the story but the DOJ has to put all of the crimes together and indict under the criminal statutes and make the case that is clear concise and will get a guilty verdict by whoever is on a jury. Just think of how many prosecutors and investigators it takes just to try one person. They have to get this right and we need to give them the time to do it right.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

48. Thank You!!!!

I understand the frustration of some here, but this Garland/DoJ bashing is really getting stale, but if the doom and gloom crowd want to continue the bashing, despite AG Garland's press conference today, more power to them, I hope it makes them sleep better at night.

[Scrivener7]

49. No one expects these prosecutions to happen overnight. It's been a year and a half.

That train left the station a long, long, long time ago.

Just to recap: there was an attempted coup.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

53. Yeah, there was an attempted coup, which has never happened in the history of the US,

so, yeah, this magnitude of an investigation takes time to get it right, DoJ only gets one shot at getting it right, it's incumbent upon us to give him the time to do it right.

I know, I know, it's been 18 months, you've made that very clear.

[uponit7771]

56. +1, TFGs Comey SOL has run out already. Americans are still waiting for the DOJ to prosecute shit

... TFG did 6 - 7 years ago not just last year.

If 99.9% of the J6 terrorist were a group of non-whites we'd not have to ask about anything the DOJ would be updating the scared American public monthly if not more often.

We've seen the DOJ go ham in the past, I don't see the do such now

[uponit7771]

51. People aren't just talking about J6, the number of laws TFG has *OPENLY* broken is well documented

[Bev54]

59. Yeah easy enough but there is many more criminal acts and they need to have

all the proper evidence. People don't always turn overnight either, they are looking to get it all. They have to break into phones and encrypted apps to get the evidence to compel a jury that may have a person or two who are sympathetic to Trump to be totally convinced. Not all evidence that we see will make it through the evidentiary process in a court. They will have a defense for everything and the DOJ need to be ready with proof to dispel their claims. It took over 2 years for the first prosecutions in Nixon, this is far more complex with nearly 1,000 defendants. Sheesh, get off his back.

[uponit7771]

65. Stop, they've had years to investigate Comey OOJ but let the SOL run out already. They don't ...

... need 1412423 pieces of evidence he admitted to firing Comey for investigating him on video.

Yaw need to stop

[MarineCombatEngineer]

67. And again, what does Comey have to do with this investigation?

[uponit7771]

70. Already clearly outlined multiple times

[Bev54]

72. It would not matter what evidence you were given that MG's DOJ is in the middle

of investigating Trump and his cohorts, you are cemented to your own opinion that you will not even let the evidence in.

Read this article maybe it can open your eyes but somehow I doubt it.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/defense-justice-department

[uponit7771]

75. The Comey OOJ is not being investigated, the SOL has ran out. TFG admitted on video to firing Comey

... for investigating him, that was out in the open.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

77. Ha, you were right.

[Bev54]

74. Total deflection

[MarineCombatEngineer]

76. Oh yeah. nt

[duckworth969]

3. Yeah, leave Garland alone and let the man do his job

Politically, he is in a “no-win” scenario.

If he’s pissing off people on both sides, he’s probably doing it right.

I’m glad this press conference was held tho.

Good to get some reassurance and see a bit of passion from our AG.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

6. Yeah, he was pretty animated, which is unusual for him,

he's usually stoic and reserved.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

5. I'm starting to think the baseless attacks on Merrick Garland are being orchestrated

by persons who are not acting in good faith and who wish to sabotage the current Democratic administration.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

7. I think you might be on to something. nt

[Just A Box Of Rain]

8. I wish I was wrong about that.

But other explanations don’t add up.

[dchill]

42. You are.

[sellitman]

9. Interesting theory

Can't deny it sounds very plausable

[Silent3]

12. I'm quite capable of being very cynical about the DoJ without anyone having to "orchestrate"...

...my feelings. When such feelings are easy to come by, there's no need to adopt a conspiratorial view of how it happens. Please leave that mindset to the right-wing tin foil hatters.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

13. I'm about the least conspiratorially minded person you will ever meet,

but the attacks on Garland are so relentless and so off base that it does make me suspicious.

[Chin music]

39. +1z

[Scrivener7]

21. Maybe people would like to see the perpetrator of an attempted coup prosecuted.

Though there do seem to be a lot of brand new posters stirring shit on the subject.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

23. Yeah, there sure seem to be a lot of newbies bashing him. nt

[Just A Box Of Rain]

28. Count me among those who desires to see TFG and other insurrectionists prosecuted

I think such prosecutions are essential to the survival of the Republic to be frank.

Prosecuting a former president where one needs a unanimous jury to get a conviction requires having an air-tight case, and avoiding that appearance of political persecution is vital.

Garland seems perfectly suited to the job IMO.

[Scrivener7]

29. I'll count you as someone who assumes that people who disagree with your opinion

about the outcome of something that as yet has no outcome are part of an "orchestrated effort by persons who are not acting in good faith and who wish to sabotage the current Democratic administration."

Just as you said.

That's where I'll count you.

I won't count you among those posters who can simply disagree with others on this without accusing them of shit.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

32. I'm happy to be counted as a proud Democrat who knows there are forces who would like

nothing more than to bring our party down.

And I am suspicious of the attacks on Merrick Garland. This kind of shit doesn’t happen by accident.

[Scrivener7]

34. That's so special for you. Nor does an influx of brand new posters stirring shit.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

35. It is quite curious that you requard people who trust in Joe Biden's choice for AG

as “shit stirrers.” LOL

Quite curious indeed.

[Scrivener7]

43. Curious that this is your interpretation. I regard (by the way, it's "regard") shit stirrers to

be shit stirrers.

Gonna question my loyalty to Biden now, are we? That's kind of an old one. Go back to the manual. Surely you can do better.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

45. Manual? Why are you accusing me of nefarious intent when such a charge is a pure fabrication

on your part.

Talk about a need to “do better.” I suggest looking in the mirror and to stop slandering Democratic Party loyalists on a forum for Democrats.

Good lord.

[Scrivener7]

54. Obnoxious when someone accuses one of "nefarious intent when such a charge is

pure fabrication," isn't it?

So maybe you should stop doing that.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

55. Irony is dead

[Scrivener7]

61. I'll just remind you of what started this, and wish you a lovely day.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=16949916

Just A Box Of Rain (736 posts)
5. I'm starting to think the baseless attacks on Merrick Garland are being orchestrated
by persons who are not acting in good faith and who wish to sabotage the current Democratic administration.

I suggest looking in the mirror and to stop slandering Democratic Party loyalists on a forum for Democrats.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

66. And I continue to believe that this is this is likely the case.

The attacks on Garland are relentless and off-base.

Doesn’t seem accidental.

[demmiblue]

60. Indeed.

Like effieblack/Starfishsaver. That entity was supposedly a diehard Dem, and we all know how that turned out. Prickly one that one was. Always right, and constantly putting down others.

[Scrivener7]

87. Her/his spirit seems to live on.

[iemanja]

30. FFS

People are allowed to disagree with you without being trolls. How ridiculous.

[AkFemDem]

10. After one of his multiple impeachments....

When he once again escaped conviction by a McConnell led Republican senate, Trump repeated the old quote, “If you come at the king, you better not miss”

My guess is Garland is really smart and capable and that’s why Obama wanted him on the USSC, and he’s really up to date on lots of evidence since Biden has made him AG… and he probably has a much better idea than most pearl clutchers out there as to when there is an actual airtight case that the The Fat Ole Windbag can’t squeak out of. He’s meticulously and responsibly building a prosecution that can’t be beat. When he comes for the king, he won’t miss.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

11. Very well stated.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

14. Well stated indeed.

[SunImp]

15. Good

[H2O Man]

16. Recommended.

Thank you for this. While I understand some of our friends here being confused by Rachel's reporting, if one takes the time to put things in the proper context, it was clear that AG Garland had in no way indicated that the criminals from the Trump cult would not be prosecuted.

I think it is likely that Meadows will be indicted before Trump. It seems likely, in my opinion, that Meadow's legal team knows that the Trump team plans to blame him for the insurrection -- indeed, that has been reported as recently as this week. Thus, they are likely to try to negotiate a deal with the DOJ in the coming weeks and months. And I think that Trump would be more likely indicted next year.

[Justice matters.]

17. If Fani Willis finally indicts him and gets a conviction...

... and appeals confirm his conviction even up to the SC, indicting him on the federal level will be a slam dunk.

[H2O Man]

18. Great point!

[William769]

19. I'm still not sold.

He can say "no person," not even a former president, was above the law, All he wants. Prosecuting is another story.

[Chin music]

40. +1z

[malaise]

31. You are correct

Rec

[TheRickles]

33. "...a central TENET...". Sorry, not the key point here, but very annoying nonetheless.

[kacekwl]

37. Mr. Garland I know trump is not above the law

Do you ?

[Hotler]

47. Then do something! Shit or get off the pot. nt

[MarineCombatEngineer]

73. Huh?

How do you know he isn't doing something?
Are you privy to what is going on inside the DoJ in regards to this wide ranging investigation?

[Cha]

84. Yeah, he's not lying.

TY MCE!

As far as the "put to rest..?" part.. I doubt it. But this is Good News for the Likes of me.

Focus!
Please Fight to Save Our Democracy💙 in 2022 & 2024!

[ecstatic]

86. It rings hollow. It's about to be 2 years post attack. Has maralago been

searched yet? He says nobody is above the law, but you and me would have been searched by now, with at least 1 hour in jail. We don't get 2 or 3 years to destroy evidence and commit more crimes.

[Scrivener7]

88. And we didn't commit a thousand unprosecuted crimes for years before that.