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

[Tadpole Raisin]

79. Lawrence Tribe said that Garland was a very cautious and deliberate person and

stated or implied that he could take forever to decide something (no I didn’t save a link but remembered him saying it).

Many people who had previously worked in DOJ expressed surprise at some of the things he was doing or not doing and it wasn’t as if it was a 90/10 split.

DOJ historically doesn’t want Congress to get ahead of their investigations and tells them nicely to back off. This time they were fine with J6 getting ahead of them.

Same thing with state investigations - feds want to go first which is why state AGs referred cases to DOJ cuz apparently that’s how it’s done, but getting no guidance or action in 1-2 years they took the cases back.

I can’t remember which states I read about this but I know watching Nicolle Wallace that she had blocks about it with former prosecuters like Claire McCaskill on and former state AGs being totally mystified as to what was going on and that it was so out of character. I expect statements from current AGs to be far more diplomatic (just like retired senators are more honest about what is happening then the pablum from current members).

Is that proof? No. People in the know are pretty good about not leaking. But there are a lot of anomalies that don’t square with how DOJ supposedly works. I hope to live long enough to read the books about what happened but they may not come out for a long time.

But yes I do believe the enthusiasm for looking at wrong doing in the previous administration was lacking and I wouldn’t be surprised if an institutionalist like Garland would feel doing so could set a precedent he was not comfortable with.

That’s all I got