General Discussion

Scrivener7

(59,609 posts)

40. .

Reply to Beastly Boy (Reply #39)

Fri Jun 9, 2023, 09:50 AM

Jun 2023

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:

For those of us who complained about how long this took [View all] Baltimike Jun 2023 OP

Truth. Goodheart Jun 2023 #1

And it is bad form to mock an aggrieved victim clamoring for justice Ponietz Jun 2023 #2

So why do you think it took so long?? honest.abe Jun 2023 #3

The pyramid strategy was a mistake. gab13by13 Jun 2023 #5

Of course we all wanted it to go faster but.. honest.abe Jun 2023 #17

+1 2naSalit Jun 2023 #31

If I have to apologize gab13by13 Jun 2023 #4

+1 Emile Jun 2023 #10

Well said Doc Sportello Jun 2023 #13

If you complained about the time it took AND you have prosecutorial experience, I'll listen. brooklynite Jun 2023 #6

+1 And keep in mind the Sandy Berger case timeline onenote Jun 2023 #14

Jack Smith got it done. In seven months. Scrivener7 Jun 2023 #7

With the full force of the DOJ expertise and resources at his back. Beastly Boy Jun 2023 #24

Did Garland not have the full force of the DOJ expertise and resources for those 2 years? Scrivener7 Jun 2023 #26

He absolutelu did. He also had the full scope of responsibilities running DOJ. Beastly Boy Jun 2023 #34

So we agree that the cases against Trump did not move forward as quickly as they could have Scrivener7 Jun 2023 #36

We absolutely do NOT agree! Beastly Boy Jun 2023 #39

. Scrivener7 Jun 2023 #40

...with prior evidence at his disposal. mzmolly Jun 2023 #29

You are right. Its the Trump age of winner / loser on everything. nt LexVegas Jun 2023 #8

LOL, Don't be sad, I'm sure everyone will think up something new to complain about! FSogol Jun 2023 #9

LOL!! Thanks. I needed that. nt Baltimike Jun 2023 #11

No Garland Fan Club membership for me, thanks just the same. Paladin Jun 2023 #12

Garland had nothing to do with these indictments. nt intrepidity Jun 2023 #15

Thank God for Jack Smith. Seven months from hire to indictment. Scrivener7 Jun 2023 #25

Except Garland and his investigators did all the initial work Fiendish Thingy Jun 2023 #27

Ancianita has put together an excellent post on activities in the investigations. Scrivener7 Jun 2023 #28

Without the actions of Garland's team (who became the bulk of Smith's team) Fiendish Thingy Jun 2023 #33

Yes. Ancianita's post shows Garland did do a few things in the 2 years before Smith was hired. Scrivener7 Jun 2023 #35

The facts speak for themselves Fiendish Thingy Jun 2023 #37

Yes. After MANY months of prompting, Garland did subpoena the documents and move Scrivener7 Jun 2023 #38

Prosecutors can't win cases without evidence, regardless of how quickly or slowly it's obtained Fiendish Thingy Jun 2023 #42

I know you don't see my point. Scrivener7 Jun 2023 #43

Garland appointed Jack Smith as special counsel IronLionZion Jun 2023 #45

Exactly. Too many things fell by the wayside. Not to mention William Barr. Autumn Jun 2023 #16

Some of us didn't want to celebrate too soon IronLionZion Jun 2023 #18

That's where I am...keeping Mueller and Fitzmas in mind. nt Baltimike Jun 2023 #19

As they talk about the indictment in the news infullview Jun 2023 #20

That old saw may not be so true any more treestar Jun 2023 #21

Those who complained how long it took have nothing to apologize for, but Beastly Boy Jun 2023 #22

Nobody needs to apologize Fiendish Thingy Jun 2023 #30

I'll chime in... OneGrassRoot Jun 2023 #23

So Justice has been denied? Fiendish Thingy Jun 2023 #32

that you're still bashing him for 'taking too much time' bigtree Jun 2023 #41

Perhaps DownriverDem Jun 2023 #44

The truth of the matter is that the documents case took a year, incident to indictment. Chainfire Jun 2023 #46

Yep. A special counsel should have been appointed immediately Sky Jewels Jun 2023 #47

Thank you. Boomerproud Jun 2023 #48

... Sky Jewels Jun 2023 #49