A challenge for Garland critics.

[ancianita]

117. I feel ya, bigtree. I daresay you kinda asked for this. Nevertheless,

I'm with you in spirit.

Anyone here can and does point out single indictments that he could have made yesterday. We've been through this.

For at least a year we've also discussed that that's just not how the DOJ works with this scale of investigation, the timeline for building consistent ruling precedents to get to the top dog planners of big crimes against The People -- which single indictments for documents cases don't require.

Critics of Garland come from a position of impatience at best, worldy wise cynicism at worst. Garland critics care more that their demand for justice be on their timeline. They dismiss the mountainous scale of work needed to successfully investigate and prosecute three or more criminal cases against a former president.

The scale of Garland's DOJ is beyond understanding, like the scale of America's problems.
A look at Main Justice's site everyday proves that.

The hundred or more moving parts -- timelines, warrant & grand jury evidence gathering beyond reasonable doubt, case building -- are what Special Counsel, Jack Smith, is handling, and not Garland, who runs the biggest law firm on Earth.
But somehow, Garland critics want Garland to handle single indictments as some 'low hanging fruit.' Garland's DOJ Special Counsel, Jack Smith, is handling an entire crate of fruit, low hanging right in there with the rest. Garland fends off criticism, anyway, even while he's accused of making incorrect decisions.

From four years of Republican drama before the court of public opinion, we should know by now that the consequences of single, easy-conviction cases create media cycles, rev up old narratives, and would produce a Koch army of Garland critics from the Right -- loud, outraged political victim headlines, platform drama, the right wing Bannon scream machines
-- intended to condemn all DOJ credibility, since they've already framed Garland as a "political" witch hunter. It worked for Trump and his Barr tool over the Russia investigation.

Critics of Garland are battle worn, and frustrations can just be triggered by an OP with Garland's name in it. But now and months from now are no time for anyone to slug it out to score points against someone whose job none of us could begin to do, whose work is leak proof, whose dedication is unimpeachable.

Have a good night, bigtree.