General Discussion

Atticus

(15,124 posts)

18. In closing, yes I see those words. I also read the rest of what that poster said, not

Wed Jan 5, 2022, 06:15 PM

Jan 2022

just a selected few words, and, lo and behold while occurrences other than January 6th were also discussed, AG Garland was not even mentioned, let alone accused of saying that, which is what your OP certainly implies.

As I said above, this response is closing further "discussion" with you. As I told you elsewhere, it's just not worth it.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

49 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Some Posters On DU Are Misrepresenting What Garland Said [View all] Effete Snob Jan 2022 OP

Haters gotta hate mcar Jan 2022 #1

Thanks, makes the point well. elleng Jan 2022 #2

Garland gets damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. LakeArenal Jan 2022 #3

Dumb question XanaDUer2 Jan 2022 #4

By prioritizing them and going for the highest charges and heaviest penalties Effete Snob Jan 2022 #6

Thank you XanaDUer2 Jan 2022 #12

ENFORCE Them! ProfessorGAC Jan 2022 #43

You should include the objectionable quote in your OP. PTWB Jan 2022 #5

You removed the entire preamble Effete Snob Jan 2022 #7

No. Let's not mischaracterize what he said, please. PTWB Jan 2022 #13

Threats to federal officials are dangers to democracy Effete Snob Jan 2022 #37

"The ONLY folks threatening our democracy are radical right wingers. That's it." hadEnuf Jan 2022 #39

Guess I missed that. Who said Garland "both-sided" JANUARY 6TH? OR--- Atticus Jan 2022 #8

You tell me what the two words in bold here say: Effete Snob Jan 2022 #11

In closing, yes I see those words. I also read the rest of what that poster said, not Atticus Jan 2022 #18

Here are some more for you Effete Snob Jan 2022 #15

The OP included some rando who threatened a judge wellst0nev0ter Jan 2022 #19

MERRICK GARLAND INCLUDED HIM Effete Snob Jan 2022 #35

Good golly, did you listen to the speech? dpibel Jan 2022 #44

The WHITE suspect that Garland was referring to wellst0nev0ter Jan 2022 #49

Glad you posted this JustAnotherGen Jan 2022 #9

"...some people are not going to get respect from certain quarters at DU." ShazzieB Jan 2022 #45

Thank you. sheshe2 Jan 2022 #10

now you've ruined their "GOTCHA" moment CatWoman Jan 2022 #14

Brooklyn Dad Defiant Twitter post cilla4progress Jan 2022 #16

He also said, in different words, that the little fish are leading us to the bigger fish. George II Jan 2022 #27

And that is how you bag the conspirators! Just_Vote_Dem Jan 2022 #29

This is something I've been thinking ColinC Jan 2022 #46

But the sorts of violence and threats he's talking about *are* associated with specific ideologies fishwax Jan 2022 #17

yes. Grasswire2 Jan 2022 #20

Thank you. That is all I have ever said, but somehow I am now "anti-Garland" and Atticus Jan 2022 #23

+1 leftstreet Jan 2022 #24

Well said. hadEnuf Jan 2022 #40

Yes. Not disputed. The issue is dissemination and inhaling of dishonesty. Hortensis Jan 2022 #47

Maybe misinterpreted would be better. spanone Jan 2022 #21

Toobin might have been distracted at the time... IrishAfricanAmerican Jan 2022 #26

Well, that is a real possibility. spanone Jan 2022 #28

Toobin has things well in hand Generic Brad Jan 2022 #31

... sheshe2 Jan 2022 #30

Okay, well golly Effete Snob Jan 2022 #36

You are correct. Sogo Jan 2022 #22

BTW-Garland is not a standing Democratic figure randr Jan 2022 #25

You are, putting it generously, confused dpibel Jan 2022 #32

Not only that... PTWB Jan 2022 #48

per the "misrepresentation" llashram Jan 2022 #33

Only thing missing from Garland's speech today was..... KS Toronado Jan 2022 #34

He HAD to phrase it like that or he'd be roasted on FOX News. LiberalLovinLug Jan 2022 #38

But to those indies who don't pay much attention to politics 3825-87867 Jan 2022 #41

I guess they ignored a lot of the speech then Effete Snob Jan 2022 #42