What is with the Dem bashing?

[sheshe2]

Now Merrick Garland? Covering up for the GOP. Why" He hasn't told us everything he knows." WHEN HAS A PROSECUTOR ever reveled their case before hand?

He was sworn in on March 11. Three months ago and here we have cover up conspiracy theories right here on DU.

This is why we lose elections.

[In It to Win It]

1. We're bashing Merrick Garland now?

About what?

[Generic Brad]

4. Everyone punched themselves out yesterday trashing Manchin

So it’s Merrick Garland’s turn today.

Democracy is always hanging by a thread and it’s entirely the fault of two or three people.

[sheshe2]

11. Yes.

cover up...three months in.

[canetoad]

2. Remember 2009

When, according to *some people, Obama could do no right?

[sheshe2]

3. I remember it well.

Not on DU until 2016...

Yet read it here and elsewhere.

Lol........we never learn

[Mad_Machine76]

7. Pepperidge Farms remembers

And I remember that some of the Bush DOJ-era leftover litigation igniting a lot of controversy during Obama's first few months in office as well, not unlike what is happening now.

[sheshe2]

22. Yes.

And Obama had to first clean up a near depression and Joe has to clean up a pandemic of epic proportion. Millions suffered and died from both.

Then the whining starts a few months after they take office...they promised me!!!! Oh, and they both had Mitch and an obstructionist GOP to work with.

WE ALWAYS have to clean out the litter box after they leave and never get credit for doing so.

[Fiendish Thingy]

5. There are a few Dems who deserve bashing, but AG Garland isn't one of them. Nt

[sheshe2]

6. Agreed.

[malaise]

8. Divide and rule

Rec

[malaise]

9. Divide and rule

Rec

[H2O Man]

10. Recommended.

I sometimes wonder of it is purposeful, or that some people are without a clue how the justice system works.

[sheshe2]

12. A combination?

a little bit of this and that to.

[H2O Man]

61. Right.

I think that it is a lot of this and a little of that. As our Good Friend StarfishSaver points out in posts below, the DOJ is acting not to protect Trump, but to protect the institution of the presidency. This appears to confuse those who did not pay full attention in their junior high social studies' class, where the three branches of the federal government were an important topic. This resulted in their not grasping the more robust discussions in high school regarding the healthy balance of interactions between the three branches, and likely prevented further study in a college/university setting. Today, the addiction to communications via memes and texts is no substitute for those early learning opportunities.

Justice on the federal level should not be mistaken for a TV dinner that can be zapped in a microwave oven. It's a slow process, that can be a tad frustrating for even those who fully understand and appreciate it. This, again, is rooted in that balance between the branches. And it isn't the long arm of coincidence pulling itself out of socket that the Trump cult's primary goal has been an attack upon the institutions in our country that -- while imperfect -- allow for the opportunity for democracy and social justice.

[Hekate]

15. I think a lot of it actually is purposeful & a smaller number are just (searching for a word...

…that won’t get this post zapped) ignorant.

When I open up a thread that has post after post demanding why Trump and all his enablers plus all the insurrectionists are not now at this moment tried, convicted, and in prison — it wears me out. That many people at DU can’t be that dumb, can they? That leaves intent, which is just depressing.

[sheshe2]

53. Wears me out too, Hekate.

Fact is the FBI has been on the insurrection since day one. They have arrested hundreds and many have been indicted.

Are people willfully trying to play games here? Hm HOW LONG DID IT TAKE FOR GEORGE FLOYD's MURDERERS TO BE CONVICTED. ONE YEAR!

GAH!

[H2O Man]

62. I agree 100%

[sheshe2]

51. Perhaps both.

[gab13by13]

13. Maybe someone can explain this?

According to BuzzFeed News, the Department of Justice is continuing the efforts to take over the legal defense of former President Donald Trump in a defamation case from advice columnist E. Jean Carroll, who has alleged the former president raped her in a department store in the 1990s.

Last year, a federal judge ruled the DOJ could not take over Trump's defense; however, the litigation over the matter is ongoing.

[StarfishSaver]

14. Because DOJ needs to protect its institutional prerogatives

Last edited Tue Jun 8, 2021, 12:27 AM - Edit history (1)

In the future, presidents who are not criminals could be targeted in lawsuits and DOJ may want to have the option to step in to defend them, if necessary.

[gab13by13]

17. even when a federal judge ruled otherwise?

[StarfishSaver]

18. Yes.

That's the point of the appeal.

[dflprincess]

46. Except he is no longer president and the accusation

predates his presidency by many years.

It makes no sense for the DOJ to continue to defend him.

[StarfishSaver]

48. The behavior forming the basis for the suit - his slander against her - occurred when he was preside

She's not suing him for the rape.

[Poiuyt]

59. Are there any other cases, criminal or otherwise, regarding trump raping Carroll?

Has it passed the statute of limitations for trump's actions?

[StarfishSaver]

60. The statute of limitations for sexual assault passed years ago

[questionseverything]

16. As it turns out,the doj believes they are the president/x president's lawyer

Even if he’s a rapist

[StarfishSaver]

19. No, they don't

This really isn't about Trump. It's about future presidents who aren't rapists

[StarfishSaver]

25. No, it doesn't

Defending a president in a lawsuit does not mean they think he's above the law. In fact, it's just the opposite. If they believed he was above the law, they wouldn't be talking about defending him in court - they'd be arguing that he couldn't be sued at all.

But I doubt anything I say is likely to change the mind of anyone determined to read the absolute worst motives - akin to those of Trump's and Barr - into everything that Biden's attorney general and DOJ does.

[sheshe2]

27. You have the patience of a saint.

Over and over again you explain.

[StarfishSaver]

30. As do you

We're either patient or insane.

[sheshe2]

37. Some days I opt for insane.

[Shellback Squid]

20. trolls

[FoxNewsSucks]

21. Not everything is "Dem bashing"

A lot is legitimate criticism. We rightfully condemn the MAGAt lemmings who fall in line and blindly follow their republicon leaders, we mock the sheeple and ridicule them for it. Why then, should we ignore what appears to be even a little of that same thing if it's a Democrat? When legitimate and appropriate, we NEED to be able to point out Democratic mistakes for the purpose of correcting them.

On the topic of Garland, I think it's as simple as an expression of MAJOR frustration. Not only has there been no accountability, no consequences, no jailing, no indictments of any of the tRump crime family, now we learn Garland is defending MF45?? Defending Barr???

I've seen the posts admonishing "to be patient", "they're working on it" etc. For the sake of democracy and our future, I sure hope that's the case. But after four years of MF45, you have to understand that the public needs to see consequences and accountability. And SOON. Republicons jumped all over Benghazi even though there was nothing there. Action was seen. Yet our side appears to sit back and allow IOKIYAR. Details don't need to be released yet, but if action is being taken, that desperately needs to be made clear.

Because the impression of doing nothing which is what is being given/reported, right or wrong, is what will actually cause us to lose elections.

[sheshe2]

26. 3 Months Garland has been in office.

FBI have arrested hundreds and grand jury's are indicting them. It does not happen overnight and if you believe it does then you have no clue how the system works.

Did you know that when you are called for grand jury service that you have to serve for 18 months? 18 months. 1 day a week for 18 months, minimum and that is without a trial. Long process.

The walls are closing in on Trump, for real this time

https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-the-walls-are-closing-in-on-trump-for-real-this-time-20210608-xupq77xjfvhntmqdvvkgsob6im-story.html

Tish James got this.

Fact is, I am not an attorney or special prosecutor nor do I pretend to play one on DU. I don't presume to know what goes on behind closed doors. I do know it is a long process and the I's need to be dotted and the T's crossed.

[StarfishSaver]

28. Exactly

Too many people see this all as entertainment and they're angry that Biden and Garland aren't dancing fast enough and haven't thrown red meat and flowers into the audience yet, so they're booing, hissing, and hurling tomatoes at the stage.

[sheshe2]

40. Yep.

It's not like we have a stupid pandemic to deal with on top of it all. I mean really. I am so over the silly pandemic...not. Like with Obama, near depression...so where is my stuff.

[FoxNewsSucks]

34. I get that,

and don't really disagree. But you have to understand that in the context of "Mueller Time" and "Fitzmas", I and many others are so paranoid that the criminals will escape again. If nothing else, statutes of limitations on many things will be soon closing in.

I'm not a lawyer either, and didn't know that one day a week for 18 months thing. That actually makes the 6 month grand jury a more relevant point even though most peoples' first thought was "6 months?? We were told that states would be waiting outside the WH with warrants at 12:01 pm". Instead the news reports that the DOJ is continuing to defend MF45 and Barr. We here read explanations for that, but the non-political public doesn't. Or have awareness that a 6 month GJ is in fact a fast thing.

Unfortunately, the fact is, no matter what is being done, it is what the public thinks is being done that will sway votes.

[LymphocyteLover]

33. I share your worries but frustratingly, justice moves incredibly slowly and our system gives

a lot of leeway to the defendant.

[FoxNewsSucks]

36. I completely agree with making sure

that "the system" doesn't steamroll a defendant.

But we're talking about a crime family who we all saw operate brazenly right out in public. So a slow response to that is maddening.

[StarfishSaver]

39. The fact that you don't see exactly what they're doing in real time

doesn't mean they're responding slowly.

I just don't get why people assume that if they don't see it, it's not happening. Maybe it's the 24-7 news cycle, on-demand social media structure we live in that makes us believe we're entitled to have every piece of information right now and if we don't get it NOW it must mean that someone isn't doing their job or they're corrupt.

[FoxNewsSucks]

44. I know that,

and it's two things.

For many people, if it isn't on TV then it didn't happen.

I don't fall for that, but after Fitzmas and the Barr coverup of the Mueller report, yes. I do need to see that there will be action before I will relax. I know that doesn't mean that someone isn't doing their job or they're corrupt, but we've taken the bait too many times to just have blind faith in anyone.

[StarfishSaver]

47. Merrick Garland isn't Fitzgerald, Mueller or Barr and he isn't operating under the thumbs

of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney or Donald Trump, so the Fitzmas/Mueller comparisons are completely irrelevant.

Why do you "need to see that there will be action before" you will relax? What harm would come to you or anyone else if you relaxed now, waited to see the outcome?

Does staying on edge and stressed out now do you or anyone else any good? It certainly not going to change the outcome in any way. So why go out of your way to buy yourself anxiety over something you have no control over anyway?

Why not relax and wait to see what happens? If it's bad, THEN you can get yourself worked uo. But if I'm right and the outcome is fine, you wouldn't have wasted a lot of time and energy worrying about something that never happened.

I just don't get the need of people here to speculate and assume the worst and then cause themselves so much agony.

[betsuni]

52. +1

[LymphocyteLover]

41. Absolutely... but unfortunately we don't have much option right now

I just have to hope that he's been so brazen in recent years that justice has finally caught up with him.

[Grasswire2]

58. well said

The frustration is boiling over. And as I keep saying, every disappointed Dem has a proper voice, an opinion, and a vote. Mock at your (our) peril.

[ShazamIam]

23. I am guessing Garland stepped up to head a DOJ in total disarray since the departing AG showed such

tiny interest in seeking justice, much effort in obstructing, and conspiracy driven investigations of Trump's political enemies. He is known to be thorough and organized, I am willing to wait a little longer, not sure how long before I start yelping.

[sheshe2]

31. Thanks for giving him some time.

He has a hell of a lot on his plate.

[Budi]

29. No shit! Been seeing some doozys of RW talking Points around here

Its become obvious & hard to determine which extremist anti-Democratic fringe is ramping up their list of Democrats to bash.

It's weird seeing that kind of baseless Dem bashing propaganda around here.

It needs to stop.

[sheshe2]

32. You made some great points there.

Ummhmm...some very great points.

The fringe.

[Budi]

43. Yup. Extremist fringe cults. Money & Media. Millionares & Billionares moving a message of division

And they've all got PACS & PR pros, & their anti-Democratic message easily fits in a copy & paste rapid retweet of mass messaging.

Compliments of the Movers & Shakers of Big Tech High Dollar power positions where deals are made & personal data is bought & sold like a black market swap.
The mission of those who will never miss the Democracy they're destroying, because they make millions running their rapid repeat messaging on a steady 24/7 loop.

They don't need Democracy, they're the Silicon Valley based big tech millionares & billionares with a populist sales pitch & a fandom online cult & someone else to blame when it all goes to shit.

Go figure 🙄

[FoxNewsSucks]

35. Which points do you consider "baseless"?

I'd certainly like to avoid those if possible.

[ShazamIam]

38. Yes, I have seem some straight from the script conserv. talking point comments.

[betsuni]

42. I'm fucking sick of it. Excuse me for being vulgar, but it makes me very cranky.

Media could be full of stories of how long and why Republicans are 100% blocking everything, even what they like. Garland is a perfect example. But no.

All these insinuations that Democrats aren't trying hard enough, don't really want anything to change, all the crying about Biden breaking promises:

Yesterday I saw a Tweet saying the Democrats have full control of government and nothing happens, how can you justify voting for them again? The long comments section full of stupid things about capitalism, that Democrats pretend to care but really only care about power, both sides are fascists and ruling class, anything not getting done now is because Democrats don't want to do it -- Republicans are irrelevant, they're done voting.

It's so stupid.

[Budi]

45. I hear ya, betsuni.

Loud & clear.

Some didn't get the free shit they were promised & I guess they still haven't figured out that there 'never really was going to be any".

Its hard breaking up with a cult. We get it.
We just don't get how they got so gullibly snookered into such a cult in the 1st place.

YOU WERE LIED TO.
YOU NEVER WERE GETTING ANY FREE SHIT. K? BUT YOU SURE DID MAKE A BUNCH OF POPULIST SILICON VALLEY MILLIONARES & BILLIONARES EVEN RICHER BY REPEATING THEIR BULLSHIT MESSAGING 24/7.

[sheshe2]

49. Vulgar?

I say it all the time. Not vulgar, it's anger when oh darn doesn't do it anymore.

Won't even comment on the comment section...yet this

Yesterday I saw a Tweet saying the Democrats have full control of government and nothing happens, how can you justify voting for them again?

Full control? It is 50/50 with our VP it makes us 51. Full control my ass. People are so stupid it terrifies me. Nothing happens? It has been less than 5 months and everyone is giving up?



I am not giving up and neither is OUR flotus.

[betsuni]

56. It will be what we hear until the midterms.

Rules of trolling to depress the vote:

Always assume the worst possible motivations of Democrats and never give them the benefit of the doubt

When Democrats can't do something good because of lack of votes, it's because they didn't really want to do it anyway

Insist that Democrats stand for nothing, nobody has any idea what Democratic issues are, it's a big mystery

Democrats lose elections to Republicans because they aren't progressive enough and voters are teaching them a lesson

Always assume Democrats are sitting around eating canapés doing nothing if you don't hear about it

Republicans are irrelevant -- it's up to Democrats to stop them and fix things and if they can't only they are to blame

Criticism of those who publicly bash Democrats or their policies, vote against them because "it's not good enough" and call them "corporate Democrats" is "punching to the Left" or "hippie-punching"

[TomDaisy]

50. E. Jean Carroll is being victimized again

[C Moon]

54. How about everyone here who wanted Cuomo to step down?

[sheshe2]

57. Who is everyone?

I didn't.

[Hekate]

63. I think he meant just the usual bunch in the circular firing squad who wanted to Franken the gov...

It was fascinating how fast the topic was dropped when some other shiny object came along.

[fescuerescue]

64. Conspiracies theories? here?

Come on.

That NEVER happens.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

65. Putin is no doubt very happy with all of the bashing of Democrats