General Discussion

wnylib

(26,454 posts)

23. You moved the goalposts in your response.

Wed Apr 5, 2023, 09:55 AM

Apr 2023

First you complained that DOJ did not prosecute the case that Bragg is prosecuting. When challenged on that, you switched to saying that DOJ should have prosecuted obstruction cases that Mueller "laid out" for them.

Mueller's investigation turned up some evidence of obstruction. But, since Mueller was not going to prosecute such a case, he did not do an in depth investigation that would have made the case ready for prosecution.

My guess is that, because of J6, Garland had more immediately pressing cases to investigate. Not to mention a DOJ riddled with embedded Trumpists. And several positions left open that had to be filled.

The ridiculous thing about claims that Garland does not want to prosecute Trump is that Garland's appointment of Jack Smith as Special Counsel indicates that Garland wanted to protect the investigation from being gutted by the Republican House.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

40 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Question About Merrick Garland [View all] gab13by13 Apr 2023 OP

Damn good question. Goodheart Apr 2023 #1

I mean, DOJ, prosecuted Michael Cohen gab13by13 Apr 2023 #3

Seems to me that wnylib Apr 2023 #18

Joy Reed asked the same excellent question on MSNBC last night. Paladin Apr 2023 #2

Nicolle Wallace has been asking that question for at least a year. gab13by13 Apr 2023 #4

Unforgivable lack of timely action by the DOJ. (nt) Paladin Apr 2023 #7

And Chris Hayes quickly refuted her complaint. Fiendish Thingy Apr 2023 #32

The rump committed crimes. That's why the DoJ is prosecuting (investigating) him Bernardo de La Paz Apr 2023 #5

Did I just get pulled over by the comma police? gab13by13 Apr 2023 #10

Didn't think they had a winnable case ? MichMan Apr 2023 #6

Yawn. lamp_shade Apr 2023 #8

"Instead"? Beastly Boy Apr 2023 #9

I certainly would like to argue the difference between gab13by13 Apr 2023 #11

The Feds never prosecuted or convicted Cohen, for Gawd's sake! Beastly Boy Apr 2023 #12

I stand by my statement that you have not refuted. gab13by13 Apr 2023 #13

I have no interest in refuting statements that deflect from your original question Beastly Boy Apr 2023 #31

you don't know what Garland had in front of him when he came into office bigtree Apr 2023 #17

I don't know jack shit, that is true. gab13by13 Apr 2023 #19

Weissman says all of the time that he doesn't know why bigtree Apr 2023 #21

Weissmann doesn't understand why Garland gab13by13 Apr 2023 #22

he doesn't understand, doesn't know, has no way of knowing right now until Garland answers bigtree Apr 2023 #25

You moved the goalposts in your response. wnylib Apr 2023 #23

Trump isn't being prosecuted for violating campaign finance law in NY. Nt Fiendish Thingy Apr 2023 #33

there's no chance of a presidential pardon for any conviction in the states. That's important. bigtree Apr 2023 #14

LOL former9thward Apr 2023 #37

you imagined that bigtree Apr 2023 #38

The underlying crime is federal. former9thward Apr 2023 #39

that's untrue bigtree Apr 2023 #40

I have been asking this for three years. Downsouthjukin Apr 2023 #15

Good question. nt BlackSkimmer Apr 2023 #16

I think we have to think of any DOJ prosecutions of the organizers of Scrivener7 Apr 2023 #20

Members of Congress will not be touched. gab13by13 Apr 2023 #26

'I have to look it up' bigtree Apr 2023 #30

I have one last thing to say, gab13by13 Apr 2023 #24

No, you are being criticized for routinely posting poorly founded innuendo Beastly Boy Apr 2023 #35

I've long since chalked it up to chickens**tery B.See Apr 2023 #27

we're susposed to ask these questions around here. Hotler Apr 2023 #28

these questions can't be answered by Garland right now bigtree Apr 2023 #29

Still on this, are you? MineralMan Apr 2023 #34

SDNY BumRushDaShow Apr 2023 #36