Bashing Garland for the election? Spell out the evidence he supposedly had that he could have used to convict Trump

[bigtree]

8. if it's not in the Smith indictment, it doesn't exist

...and the indictment Smith ultimately obtained from the grand jury hearing the evidence he presented to them was enabled by the testimony he got from top White House aides and attorneys.

It was GARLAND who waged those fights in court, well after Smith's appointment before several appeals judges fights over privilege which Garland's team actually WON, enabling that evidence to be used to make the charges contained in the election interference indictment.

The COURTS, the JUDGES set the hearing dates, not Garland or Smith. Almost all of the evidence that was worth a damn in the prosecution, from the KEY witnesses described in the indictment, as well as the co-conspirators, was put through a LENGTHY and often successive process of appeals in several venues.

If you're just talking about GARLAND in isolation, or even as some key figure in the prosecutions, you're blowing smoke, or just don't know what this investigation and prosecution involved.

That's glaringly obvious because ZERO of the complaints come with ANY explanation of the evidence, and tell us that, ridiculously, absurdly, that DOJ could prosecute him from what they saw on teevee.

Oh, my freaking god, what the stupid hell.