For those of us who complained about how long this took

[Baltimike]

You have NOTHING to apologize for...there is no mea culpa that you have to make, and those complaining that you do have no right to insist you do a single fucking thing.

Justice delayed is justice denied.

They *finally* got there about SOME of his crimes. We can celebrate that without having to kowtow to the Garland fan club.

[Goodheart]

1. Truth.

[Ponietz]

2. And it is bad form to mock an aggrieved victim clamoring for justice

So ugly to taunt others this way.

[honest.abe]

3. So why do you think it took so long??

[gab13by13]

5. The pyramid strategy was a mistake.

Garland should have followed the evidence, the facts, regarding Trump and his inner circle from Day 1. Name me someone from the unwashed Magat crowd who attacked the Capitol who flipped on Trump. I am not saying that those people should not have been prosecuted, Garland did a fantastic job sending a message to the unwashed Magat crowd. There is no evidence that Garland "investigated" Trump and his inner circle until after Cassidy Hutchinson testified before the J6 committee. That is now water under the dam, Jack Smith caught up, we can just go from there.

[honest.abe]

17. Of course we all wanted it to go faster but..

there must have been a reasonable reason. Perhaps we will never know. I don’t buy it that Garland was incompetent or stupid or afraid or whatever negative reasoning others have suggested.

[2naSalit]

31. +1

[gab13by13]

4. If I have to apologize

then there must be calls for Adam Schiff and members of the J6 committee to apologize. There must be calls for former prosecutors, former judges, former Solicitors to apologize. There must be calls for the Michigan Secretary of State for the Michigan Attorney General to apologize.

I am a nobody who gets his information from the great guests that Nicolle Wallace has on (oh and she certainly must apologize) I get my information from the guests that Stephanie Miller has on, from Thom Hartmann.

I give Merrick Garland credit for picking the right man for the job.

We all need to celebrate that the wheels of justice are squarely turning towards Donald Trump and I really don't need to know what Fox News or CNN or the well meaning anchors at msnbc are saying. The job of Fox News now will be to taint the jury pool and I really don't plan on clicking on any of that propaganda here.

What is said during a trial has zero comparison to what is being said at Fox News. Trials only deal in facts. Great job Jack Smith, nail the fat fucker's ass.

[Emile]

10. +1

[Doc Sportello]

13. Well said

You and others have nothing to apologize for. I didn't take a side on the issue but there certainly was nothing wrong with questioning how it was handled. The posts calling for apologies are petty and divisive.

[brooklynite]

6. If you complained about the time it took AND you have prosecutorial experience, I'll listen.

Otherwise, I'll rely of Garland, Smith and the DOJ's judgement of how much investigation is called for.

[onenote]

14. +1 And keep in mind the Sandy Berger case timeline

Berger unlawfully removed (and in some instances later destroyed) classified documents from the National Archives. He did this in the summer and fall of 2003. When the Archives discovered that the documents were missing in October 2003, they referred the matter to the DOJ, which began a confidential investigation. That investigation became public in July 2004 and it was not until April 2005 that Berger, having agreed to plead guilty prior to any indictment being handed down, entered a guilty plea and was fined $50,000 and sentenced to two years probation.

It's unlikely that the Bush DOJ in 2003-2005 was slow walking an investigation of a Clinton advisor. And while the factual and legal issues presented by the Berger case were much more straightforward than those presented by the Trump classified documents case, it still took nearly a year before the Berger investigation became public and a total of 18 months from the beginning of DOJ's involvement to the presentation of the case to a court.

In the Trump/classified documents matter, DOJ was called into the case in February 2022 and an indictment was issued 16 months later.

In short, these investigations take time if they're going to be done correctly.

[Scrivener7]

7. Jack Smith got it done. In seven months.

[Beastly Boy]

24. With the full force of the DOJ expertise and resources at his back.

and Trump being his only subject of investigation.

Still, 7 months is very impressive indeed. I recall, 7 months into the J6 investigation, all the calls for Garland's head.

[Scrivener7]

26. Did Garland not have the full force of the DOJ expertise and resources for those 2 years?

I have noted that the argument has changed in the face of Smith's very evident flurry of action.

The argument used to be, "Garland was doing a double secret probation investigation for all that time and he just wasn't leaking."

It changed to, "Of course he didn't work as fast as Smith, he had so may other things on his plate."

Which, of course, is agreement with the position that the treasonous acts and the attempted coup were not prosecuted as fast as they could have been until Smith came along.

[Beastly Boy]

34. He absolutelu did. He also had the full scope of responsibilities running DOJ.

Apples and oranges.

Were Smith to run DOJ and Garland to exclusively investigate the two instances Smith was charged with investigating, it is anybody's guess who would have come out ahead.

Garland not leaking and having too may other things on his hands are not mutually exclusive arguments. In fact, they are pretty complimentary. Garland's double secret probation investigation has yielded over 1000 indictments towards his record in the J6 investigation alone, a testimony to just how much Garland has on his plate. Smith has yet to contribute to this record, which I have no doubt he will do soon enough. None of this, however, can be objectively cited as either one of them has been slow enough or fast enough, since both "slow" and "fast" in this instance are purely speculative terms with no real point of reference to judge them by.

[Scrivener7]

36. So we agree that the cases against Trump did not move forward as quickly as they could have

until Jack Smith came along. And to me that is very important, as we are talking about an attempted coup and treason.

I'm glad we have finally found common ground.

[Beastly Boy]

39. We absolutely do NOT agree!

Such a nebulous definition of what you are talking about virtually guarantees that any agreement or disagreement on the subject is absolutely meaningless.

[Scrivener7]

40. .

[mzmolly]

29. ...with prior evidence at his disposal.

And, testimony of the cronies and lemmings.

Garland said 'we have to get this right' and that was true.

I'm not defending Garland or criticizing - I'm saying Trump is no ordinary criminal. He has to be convicted.

[LexVegas]

8. You are right. Its the Trump age of winner / loser on everything. nt

He started this contentious atmosphere and it has permeated everything.

[FSogol]

9. LOL, Don't be sad, I'm sure everyone will think up something new to complain about!

[Baltimike]

11. LOL!! Thanks. I needed that. nt

[Paladin]

12. No Garland Fan Club membership for me, thanks just the same.

Appreciate your well-stated blowback comment.

[intrepidity]

15. Garland had nothing to do with these indictments. nt

[Scrivener7]

25. Thank God for Jack Smith. Seven months from hire to indictment.

[Fiendish Thingy]

27. Except Garland and his investigators did all the initial work

That made these indictments possible in the first place.

Without taking the steps with NARA that ended with executing a search warrant at Mar a Lago, Smith would not have been able to get the indictments.

[Scrivener7]

28. Ancianita has put together an excellent post on activities in the investigations.

It allows us to compare the number of actions that took place in the two years before Jack was appointed to the actions that took place in the seven months since. To me, it speaks for itself.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100217983417

[Fiendish Thingy]

33. Without the actions of Garland's team (who became the bulk of Smith's team)

Smith would not have gotten indictments at this point.

That is a plain and simple fact, regardless of whatever tally someone has comparing the number of actions taken.

It was the actions of DOJ in spring/summer 2022 that made this entire prosecution, especially the obstruction charges, possible- it is the foundation, without which, Smith couldn’t get indictments.

[Scrivener7]

35. Yes. Ancianita's post shows Garland did do a few things in the 2 years before Smith was hired.

Though I disagree in that Smith has certainly proved that he could have quickly done those same few things on his own.

Again, to me the post speaks for itself.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100217983417

[Fiendish Thingy]

37. The facts speak for themselves

Without the DOJ actions of May-August 2022, how would Smith have established intent to unlawfully retain documents, and intent to obstruct Justice?

Without obtaining the unlawfully retained documents, there is no case.

[Scrivener7]

38. Yes. After MANY months of prompting, Garland did subpoena the documents and move

to get the ones that had not been disposed of in those many months.

But that is like saying, "Without that arresting officer, that lawyer would never have won that case!"

[Fiendish Thingy]

42. Prosecutors can't win cases without evidence, regardless of how quickly or slowly it's obtained

Garland’s team gathered the initial, essential evidence that made the entire case possible, and Smith took it, along with the rest of his teams evidence, to the grand jury and got indictments.

Without the incomplete compliance with the May 2022 subpoena, establishing knowledge and intent to retain documents and obstruct Justice, and the August 2022 search warrant seizing the retained documents, there would be no indictments.

I just don’t see what your point is in focusing on the difference in the speed and number of actions taken by Garland versus Smith, when the most important thing is the summation of all their actions resulted in getting indictments.

[Scrivener7]

43. I know you don't see my point.

[IronLionZion]

45. Garland appointed Jack Smith as special counsel

On November 18, 2022, United States Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Smith special counsel to oversee the criminal investigations into Donald Trump's actions regarding the January 6 United States Capitol attack, and Trump's handling and storage of government records, including classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate.

US Attorneys report up to the Attorney General. This is all DOJ.

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

The Smith special counsel investigation is an ongoing investigation opened by U.S. Attorney General, Merrick Garland, on November 18, 2022, to continue two investigations that had been initiated by the Department of Justice (DOJ). Garland appointed Jack Smith, a longtime federal prosecutor, to lead the independent investigations. Smith was tasked with investigating former president Donald Trump's role in the January 6 United States Capitol attack, and Trump's mishandling of government records, including classified documents.

Smith moved quickly to advance his investigations, assembling a team of at least twenty DOJ prosecutors, and within days had called witnesses for grand jury testimony, issued subpoenas to election officials in multiple states and asked a federal judge to hold Trump in contempt for refusing to comply with a subpoena.

[Autumn]

16. Exactly. Too many things fell by the wayside. Not to mention William Barr.

[IronLionZion]

18. Some of us didn't want to celebrate too soon

I think we're all glad he got indicted...bigly.

[Baltimike]

19. That's where I am...keeping Mueller and Fitzmas in mind. nt

[infullview]

20. As they talk about the indictment in the news

Pundits are all referring to what a bad actor he was as president and how he made millions violating the emoluments clause. They should have indicated him while he was president. Talk about justice delayed and denied! Holly shit.

[treestar]

21. That old saw may not be so true any more

Justice undertaken too fast could be justice denied, too. That applied when there was no as much forensic evidence and juries had to rely on what they believed or on eyewitness testimony, which as been said to be inaccurate. If the case is not well put together, justice might fail and TFG found not guilty, which he would make out to be exoneration.

Why double down on being wrong, especially those who claimed TFG would never be indicted?

[Beastly Boy]

22. Those who complained how long it took have nothing to apologize for, but

those who irrationally bashed Garland as the single source and reason for their all too frequent complaints, can use some hindsight reflection on their conduct.

Also, there are people who promised to apologize, literally and in writing, should they be proven wrong. They were proven wrong. Whether they apologize or not is a matter of how much they value their own words.

And I can't even fathom what, on the eve of justice being served, your "justice denied" meme has to do with people keeping their word... or not.

[Fiendish Thingy]

30. Nobody needs to apologize

Except, as you said, those who promised to (if they wish to retain any shred of integrity)

There were numerous posts bashing Garland, declaring him a Republican Trojan Horse, and they declared with absolute certainty that Trump would never be indicted by DOJ for anything , usually adding “if I’m wrong, I will be the first to admit it, and will apologize”

The Crow cafe is open for business, but all those who promised to dine on opening day are conspicuously nowhere to be found…

[OneGrassRoot]

23. I'll chime in...

because why the fuck not. lol

Personally, it annoys me when any group acts like they KNOW something when in reality none of us KNOW everything there is to know about any given situation.

I don't care if it's the people who ridicule others who discuss the potential of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe or the people who ridicule others for continuing to have faith that justice is still possible when it comes to Trump.

Maybe I have been biased, acknowledging I don't know shit about either situation, but I have only detected that arrogance coming from those who are skeptics. Skeptics, whether intentionally or not, tend to insinuate other people who see things differently are idiots.

Skepticism is good and necessary. It's the way it's expressed that causes animosity and backlash.

[Fiendish Thingy]

32. So Justice has been denied?

Not sure how you got to that conclusion…or was a trite cliche all you could come up with to defend your previous complaints?

[bigtree]

41. that you're still bashing him for 'taking too much time'

...with this clipped acknowledgement of what he's accomplished so far.

This is such a bogus attack. I'm a fan of justice. That's what we're seeing. Not an internet prosecution, but actual justice metted out by a grand jury, and ultimately another jury of citizens.

Hating this is hating our system of justice. Just that simple. Garland isn't responsible for how that system operates, but he's certainly working it in a way that is progressing against Trump. Whinging right now about the man who set all of this in motion isn't the edge you think it is.

[DownriverDem]

44. Perhaps

it's because most folks don't know how the law works. They want it now, and if you don't have all the ducks in a row, the case will fail.

[Chainfire]

46. The truth of the matter is that the documents case took a year, incident to indictment.

The case that could eliminate Trump's ability to serve in any government office and send him away for years is still hanging fire. While I celebrate the Florida indictment, I want to see sedition charges in my lifetime. I want Trump convicted for trying to overthrow the government by stealing the election. At that time, I will dance in the street.

[Sky Jewels]

47. Yep. A special counsel should have been appointed immediately

when AG Garland took office -- especially in regard to January 6, which was a fucking coup d'etat attempt intending to use violence to nullify an election, overthrow the government and install a dictator!

[Boomerproud]

48. Thank you.

[Sky Jewels]

49. ...