Some Tidbits On Merrick Garland

[bigtree]

17. fiction

...and when did we start relying on DOJ to win elections?

Thing is, there's nothing more we should expect DOJ or Jack Smith will do, or should do to influence that vote. It's one thing for them to be mindful of an election cycle, and quite another for them to spend time adjusting their investigations and prosecutions to fit a election timetable. However sweet that would be for those of us who loath watching the Defendant out on the campaign trail, it's not what DOJ does, or should involve themselves in.

There's plenty of evidence that whatever disagreements FBI and DOJ engaged in at the beginning of the probe, it is ridiculous to assume, as Carol Leonnig made famous, that DOJ was either unconcerned with focusing their investigation on the Trump WH, or indifferent, or negligent, just based on the fact that there wasn't an official probe announced.

Nor has it been proven that some indictment of Trump in the first year of Garland's term would have resulted in an effective conviction, given that NONE of the major figures surrounding him were talking, and no incentive for them to talk at that time. What people assume was obvious from news reports doesn't necessarily translate into successful prosecutions.

It was Garland, by himself, who appointed Jack Smith over objections that he would slow the probe, and despite accusations that he was there to divert blame from Garland for declining to indict. Turned out, the man who appointed the SC that accelerated and broadened the probe is just as interested in prosecuting Trump as the rest of us.

All the cynicism, apathy, and fear about the pace of the DOJ probe has everything to do with a political process of elections which the legal process is dubiously accountable to (non-interference), or responsible for. Whatever delays Trump can engineer, the trial eventually will move forward to a verdict.

Always amazing to me how Fani Willis isn't tagged with the same nonsense about delay that DOJ is hampered with by pundits and other critics. Here we have an arguably less complex case moving at almost the same pace as the Smith probes. Always perplexed how the Fulton prosecution effort has escaped the same hyper concerns about delay in relationship to the election. Especially with any conviction there effectively insulated from the presidential pardon process.

How about these ill-infomed, gaslighting critics use their expertise to remind readers just how complex these types of cases can be? Tell them how moneyed defendants are able to drag the process out, most often regardless of what the prosecution does. Don't just feed the cynicism.

For some reason, there's a belief out here, or the faint of a belief, that running against a multi-indicted, past election loser requires a DOJ prosecution to be successful. When did we start relying on DOJ to win elections?