Durham was appointed by his predecessor. Garland is not in agreement of the need for a SC in this case, but is willing to let Durham find whatever he finds, a hands-off approach. Firing Durham at this point, or any point, would only raise suspicions that the JD is hiding something.
Better to let things run their course. As flimsy as the Durham indictments are, what is left standing at the end of the day will not amount to much. They will fizzle on their own.
Garland could do a lot more, such as prosecuting Trump for obstructing Mueller. Garland knows he has to hold the country together, though. An obstruction prosecution in a case that many on one side see as entirely bogus could spark further revolt than we saw on Jan. 6. I am speculating here as to his motives, but if Garland knows that a more widely supported action against Trump is coming, such as Georgia election interference, he might think it wise to let the states go first, and bring additional charges later.
Then again, Garland does seem to be building a case against Trump for 1/6, by getting Trump’s foot soldiers to testify that TFG ordered them. That would be a consequential charge, and sorely needed by the country. But so much is hidden from view, it’s hard to say where things stand. Garland’s actions look like nothing from the outside, until they’re ready to indict or drop charges. For that reason, I don’t think we can surmise that Garland disapproves of Mueller’s findings, so I dissent.
= new reply since forum marked as read
