This message was self-deleted by its author

[bigtree]

This message was self-deleted by its author (bigtree) on Wed Jan 15, 2025, 09:18 AM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

[Think. Again.]

1. The excerpt you posted does not address critics who complain the DOJ didn't move fast enough.

[HereForTheParty]

5. They only had four years

[dalton99a]

8. +1. Democrats had four years to prevent the nightmare

Bringing Trump to justice ASAP should have been the absolute highest priority

[GreenWave]

28. Absolutely, spray the mother cockroach first.

[ancianita]

23. But other legal experts did eight months ago.

You refuse to be reasonable and want only one scapegoat when your beef is with
a) Republicans who delayed DOJ appointments for 10 MONTHS -- the head of the Criminal Division itself confirmed last; and
b) the courts allowing delays under defense pretexts of "due process" frivolous filings, and
c) the SCOTUS intentional delay on the immunity decision.

[Think. Again.]

27. I don't understand how all those things...

...excuse garland for not acting in a timely manner immediately after the crimes were committed on global television.

[ancianita]

33. I don't understand how you don't know that all those things

were entirely out of the AG's control.

Television by itself is not probable cause for beginning an investigation.
Probable cause caused Congress, against whom the Jan 6 attack occurred, to immediately form investigations to hold Jan 6 hearings June 2022.
Meanwhile from Jan 6 2021 onward, the FBI under the AG investigated crimes committed against law enforcement and property from Jan 6 2021 to Jan 2025.

The AG did clean up the DOJ of Barr toadies starting the day he was finally confirmed two months after Biden's inauguration.

1. Overall,
The late-confirmed AG couldn't make the Senate confirm his Division heads.
He couldn't control the appellate and SCOTUS courts' timelines.

What the AG did do while FBI investigations, arrests and charges were brought against Jan 6 participants:

2. Four months after the AG was confirmed, six months after Biden's inauguration, Republicans finally confirm Kenneth Polite to head the DOJ's Criminal Division July 2021 -- four months after Biden nominated him for the DOJ Criminal division, two weeks before the AG's confirmation. After July the Criminal Division's work sped up.

January 6 2022: Garland states:
“So far, we have
-- issued over 5,000 subpoenas and search warrants,
-- seized approximately 2,000 devices,
-- pored through over 20,000 hours of video footage, and
-- searched through an estimated 15 terabytes of data...
-- received over 300,000 tips from ordinary citizens, who have been our indispensable partners in this effort.”

Garland handed off HIS documents case to Jack Smith.

Jan 2022
— 15 boxes found in the storage area
— the FBI found more than 11,000 government records at Maralago — of those
— 184 unique documents bearing classification markings, of those:
— 67 docs marked Confidential
— 92 docs marked Secret
— 25 docs marked Top Secret
markings reflected that docs were subject to sensitive compartments and dissemination controls
used to restrict access to material in the interest of national security, including
HCS(Humint Control system),
FISA(Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act),
ORCON (originator controlled),
NORORN (could be NOFORN, no foreign national), AND
SI(Special Intelligence)

May 10 2022
— The first 100 documents marked as classified totaled over 700 pages [National Archives letter to Trump attorney, May 10, 2022]
May 11 2022: Garland convenes four DOJ Grand juries, one for Jan 6 convened until March 2024
— Grand Jury subpoenas Trump for documents

June 3 2022
— Trump lawyer hands over 40 boxes from Maralago storage room
— 38 docs marked Classified


June 3 2022: Garland's DOJ Grand jury subpoenas Trump for remaining docs in Maralago,
lawyers for Trump "certifying" that there were no more;
Trump stole 11,000 government docs, 300 classified docs — lawyers earlier handed over even more

July 22 2022: Garland's Grand jury testimony by Marc Short, Mike Pence’s Chief of Staff, & Short's counsel Greg Jacob

August 8 2022
— FBI warrant search of Maralago
— 103 marked Classified
— 18 marked Top Secret

The law violated: —- 18 U.S.C. 793— Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information.
Penalty: Fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
More on the indictability of stolen documents:
https://www.justsecurity.org/83034/tracker-evidence-of-trumps-knowledge-and-involvement-in-retaining-mar-a-lago-documents/

Sept 2 2022: Garland's Grand jury subpoenaed testimony by Pat Cipollone,
a) one of the participants in WH meeting Dec 18 2020, that included Giuliani, Powell, Flynn, Patrick Byrne of Overstock,
b) Cipollone sat in on Jan 3 2021 DOJ official meeting with Trump, and
c) Cipollone was in direct contact with trump on Jan 6 during capitol insurrection, and did nothing when Meadows told him Trump didn’t want to interfere with rioters calling for hanging Mike Pence)
and Patrick Philbin
Sept 15 2022: Garland's Grand Jury subpoenas Mark Meadows for testimony and documents
the month of Sept 2022: Garland's DOJ issued over 40 subpoenas to people close to Trump, some of whom are
— Bill Stepien, DT’s campaign mgr; part of team to prevent certification
— Sean Dollman, DT’s campaign CFO
— Ben Williamson, Deputy of Mark Meadows,
— Boris Epshteyn, Trump's lawyer -- phone demanded; part of team to prevent certification
— Mike Lindell -- phone seized
— William Russell, WH special asst to Trump, THEN special aide to Trump in Mar-a-lago

Oct 6 2022: Garland's Grand jury calls back Greg Jacob
Oct 13 2022: Garland's Grand Jury calls back Marc Short, Pence's chief of staff

Nov 4 2022: classified docs found in Biden’s
-- Wilmington home (garage, library), (no docs in Rehoboth beach home) and
-- Penn Biden Center in DC (Richard Sauber is spec counsel to Pres Biden)
Nov 14 2022: Garland asks John Lausch (Trump appointed US Atty, Chicago) to review found Biden documents

3. Nov 18 2022 Garland appoints Jack Smith (3 days after Trump announces his candidacy for 2024), who inherits the records of the Garland DOJ's work.

By that very day, Nov 18 2022, Garland's DOJ had convicted more than 323 Jan 6 insurrectionists.

All of the above is what AG Merrick Garland and his DOJ did before Jack Smith.

We've been through these timelines many times on DU.

So what part of those things do you not understand, Think. Again.

[Think. Again.]

34. Thank you for asking....

I don't understand how garland could allow the people who organized and attempted a violent coup (that was televised) to go unarrested along with the others who participated in one small, but violent, aspect of that coup.

No AG (or anyone) could be that incompetent, which is why I believe his protection of trump was intentional.

[ancianita]

36. Reread the timeline, Think. Again. It's not about "allowing." His FBI made arrests ON Jan 6 onward.

None of what you say is evidence of incompetence. Just the opposite.

You're welcome.

[Think. Again.]

37. Jack Smith seems to disagree.

[ancianita]

41. Quote him. In context.

[Think. Again.]

42. Read his report.

[Silent Type]

2. Haven't read Smith's Report and probably won't, but I don't think the report has much new, if anything.

Here's an excerpt from and article in WP about going after charges of "insurrection."

"They [Smith's team] ultimately chose not to, however, deeming such a prosecution too risky and believing the other charges they’d lodged against Trump to be sufficient. The insurrection statute, which dates to the period after the Civil War, had not been used to prosecute anyone in more than 100 years and was untested in modern criminal courts, the report said. Prosecutors would also have had to rely on a novel interpretation of that law to match their accusations against Trump.

"“The Office did not find any case in which a criminal defendant was charged with insurrection for acting within the government to maintain power, as opposed to overthrowing it or thwarting it from the outside,” the report said."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2025/01/14/takeaways-jack-smith-trump-jan-6-report/?utm_campaign=wp_news_alert_revere_trending_now&utm_medium=email&utm_source=alert&location=alert

[choie]

51. Yeah, why read the report

when you can rely on the corporate press to decipher it for you.

[Silent Type]

52. I know what trump did. I don't need anyone to decipher it. Nor do I appreciate Smith

excusing trump from insurrection . Chalk him up a Mueller and Fitzmas.

[choie]

53. That is bs

[intheflow]

3. Garland waited two years to appoint Smith.

That is not reflected in this report, just saying that by the time he appointed Smith, Trump was ready to run for a second term which made prosecution and legal remedy nearly impossible, given the amount of counter suits and legal delays.

[brush]

4. Yep, Garland's first order of business upon taking office should've...

beeh to prosecute THE LEADER OF THE INSURRECTION TO OVERTHROW THE US GOVERNMENT. And that of course is trump. We all saw it on TV.

And Garland himself should've lead the prosecution. No special counsel needed. It was the AG's responsibility to prosecute the leader of the attempt to ovetthrow the government.

Period.

[lees1975]

6. You're exactly right.

This should have started on day 1.

The power of the Presidency was behind this, and could have moved things along much more quickly with that label on it. There is absolutely no excuse for this taking four years to prosecute.

[brush]

7. Yep, we all saw trump's guilt on TV. He should've been prosecuted...

and jailed way before he started running for president again, and also way before the corrupt SCOTUS 6 got involved with the 'immunity for official acts' BS.

It was a slam dunk case if there ever was one...the nation saw it in real time on national TV.

[dalton99a]

9. +1

[Fiendish Thingy]

10. You misunderstand the justification for appointing a special counsel. Nt

[brush]

12. You don't seem to understand one was not needed. The AG should've lead the prosecution himself immediately...

on taking office. Nothing was more important than prosecuting and jailing traitor trump as fast as possible as nothing since the Civil War has endangered the republic more.

Nothing was more important and Garland failed so badly that the traitor who tried to overthrow the government will be sworn in in a week to lead the government he tried to overthrow.

Thanks, Garland.

[bigtree]

17. you fail to mention any consequence of the appointment that delayed anything

...from the essay I provided:

"Indeed, even if the indictments had dropped six months earlier, it seems clear that it wouldn’t have mattered with this Supreme Court."

You're really just advantaging the delays orchestrated by judges and justices to blame the prosecution which had zero control over the dates of hearings deliberately set by these Trump-accomplices in the courts to prevent any trial before we voted.

Any fool should be able to see that the maze of appeals was not only designed to delay the trial until we voted, it was successfully advantaged by Trump accomplices in the courts.

The politics was always the game, but there were so many people intent on criticizing prosecutors that you couldn't have a discussion about what they were actually doing, much less a focus on the people actually delaying the proceedings.

Now, politics is still the game and these same people are still navelgazing about what prosecutors were doing, ignoring both the culprits who delayed the trials, and the actual crimes in the report they claim to be so concerned about.

It's all done with this false expectation that DOJ was going to keep Trump from office - even watching the already convicted felon not only get elected, but assuming office in a few days - and still refusing to advantage opposition to republicans and Trump from the evidence of clear criminality in the report.

Just this navelgazing disgrace of attacking the people who worked to hold Trump accountable with these falsehoods and misinformation. Nothing more, just this continued diversion from the culprits.

What to make of this? Utter stupidity, at best, imo.

[brush]

18. Whatever all that means, we all saw trump's guilt unfold in real time on TV.

A slam dunk if there ever was one.

[bigtree]

19. that's the sum of your legal argument

...what we saw on teevee.

It's laughably absurd, give all of the legal wrangling that got us to the charges. It's an argument for people who didn't bother to watch what was actually occurring in the investigations and prosecutions, echoed and coupled at this stage with these admonitions against giving heed or credence to the product of that effort.

Such a waste of advocacy, and counterproductive to the things professed to be causing so much consternation and woe.

[brush]

20. Not laughable to SC Smith as that's what his report concludes.

Last edited Tue Jan 14, 2025, 08:23 PM - Edit history (1)

trump would've been convicted if the J6 prosecution had been tried.

[MichMan]

29. Likely would have got a life sentence and would not be president n/t

[intheflow]

26. Six months earlier?

Maybe that wouldn't have made a difference. But 24 months earlier would have made a world of difference.

[bigtree]

13. Smith integrated almost seamlessly into what was described as a 'fast-moving investigation'

...he managed that feat because of the over 20 Garland prosecutors he inherited, and the evidence Garland's team had already obtained which was more than what Mueller began with at the start of his own term.

Garland not only defended most of the evidence in the indictments for years in myriad, successive courts packed with trump and republican nominated judges and justices, he successfully fought (for nearly a year, throughout his appointment of Smith) to have the privileges removed of ALL of the KEY witnesses in the indictments who were top aides and attorneys to force their testimony before the grand juries who recommended the charges.

receipts:


https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/28/us/politics/trump-investigation-thomas-windom.html


https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/11/politics/jack-smith-special-counsel-high-profile-moves-trump-criminal-investigations/index.html



From Mike Pence to ‘fake’ electors, here’s who has testified to the January 6 grand jury or met with prosecutors
https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/11/politics/grand-jury-testimony-list-january-6-trump/index.html

[ancianita]

38. By the time Garland had investigated the felons' underlings, the felon announced Nov 15 he'd run

for a second term.

Within 3 days of his announcement Garland appointed Jack Smith and turned over all his Maralago documents evidence and grand jury testimony to Jack Smith.

What Garland did before he appointed Jack Smith:

1.
Jan 2022
— 15 boxes found in the storage area
— the FBI found more than 11,000 government records at Maralago — of those
— 184 unique documents bearing classification markings, of those:
— 67 docs marked Confidential
— 92 docs marked Secret
— 25 docs marked Top Secret
markings reflected that docs were subject to sensitive compartments and dissemination controls
used to restrict access to material in the interest of national security, including
HCS(Humint Control system),
FISA(Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act),
ORCON (originator controlled),
NORORN (could be NOFORN, no foreign national), AND
SI(Special Intelligence)

2.
May 10 2022
— The first 100 documents marked as classified totaled over 700 pages [National Archives letter to Trump attorney, May 10, 2022]
May 11 2022: Garland convenes four DOJ Grand juries, one for Jan 6 convened until March 2024
— Grand Jury subpoenas Trump for documents

June 3 2022
— Trump lawyer hands over 40 boxes from Maralago storage room
— 38 docs marked Classified

3.
June 3 2022: Garland's DOJ Grand jury subpoenas Trump for remaining docs in Maralago,
lawyers for Trump "certifying" that there were no more;
Trump stole 11,000 government docs, 300 classified docs — lawyers earlier handed over even more

July 22 2022: Garland's Grand jury testimony by Marc Short, Mike Pence’s Chief of Staff, & Short's counsel Greg Jacob

4.
August 8 2022
— FBI warrant search of Maralago
— 103 marked Classified
— 18 marked Top Secret

The law violated: —- 18 U.S.C. 793— Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information.
Penalty: Fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
More on the indictability of stolen documents:
https://www.justsecurity.org/83034/tracker-evidence-of-trumps-knowledge-and-involvement-in-retaining-mar-a-lago-documents/

5.
Sept 2 2022: Garland's Grand jury subpoenaed testimony by Pat Cipollone,
a) one of the participants in WH meeting Dec 18 2020, that included Giuliani, Powell, Flynn, Patrick Byrne of Overstock,
b) Cipollone sat in on Jan 3 2021 DOJ official meeting with Trump, and
c) Cipollone was in direct contact with trump on Jan 6 during capitol insurrection, and did nothing when Meadows told him Trump didn’t want to interfere with rioters calling for hanging Mike Pence)
and Patrick Philbin
Sept 15 2022: Garland's Grand Jury subpoenas Mark Meadows for testimony and documents
the month of Sept 2022: Garland's DOJ issued over 40 subpoenas to people close to Trump, some of whom are
— Bill Stepien, DT’s campaign mgr; part of team to prevent certification
— Sean Dollman, DT’s campaign CFO
— Ben Williamson, Deputy of Mark Meadows,
— Boris Epshteyn, Trump's lawyer -- phone demanded; part of team to prevent certification
— Mike Lindell -- phone seized
— William Russell, WH special asst to Trump, THEN special aide to Trump in Mar-a-lago

Oct 6 2022: Garland's Grand jury calls back Greg Jacob
Oct 13 2022: Garland's Grand Jury calls back Marc Short, Pence's chief of staff

Nov 4 2022: classified docs found in Biden’s
-- Wilmington home (garage, library), (no docs in Rehoboth beach home) and
-- Penn Biden Center in DC (Richard Sauber is spec counsel to Pres Biden)
Nov 14 2022: Garland asks John Lausch (Trump appointed US Atty, Chicago) to review found Biden documents

By that very day, Nov 18 2022, Garland's DOJ had convicted more than 323 Jan 6 insurrectionists.

6.
All of the above is what AG Merrick Garland and his DOJ did before he -- vastly underappreciated for his wisdom for it -- appointed Jack Smith from the Hague.

[Fiendish Thingy]

11. Critical thinking is hard

And when you introduce all those pesky facts, how is one supposed scapegoat with believability?

[thebigidea]

14. I look forward to not buying his book

[bigtree]

15. didn't realize you actually read anything of substance in relation to this case

Last edited Tue Jan 14, 2025, 03:32 PM - Edit history (1)

...not really evident in your replies.

[H2O Man]

16. Recommended.

Our friends of shallow understanding will still blame Mr. Smith. Their frustrations prevent them from understanding why things happened the way that they did. Thank you for this.

[happy feet]

30. I've only seen posts blaming Merrick Garland?

[H2O Man]

32. There have been

numerous comments on OP/threads insulting Mr. Smith. Perhaps due to my living what most would deem a "boring life," I tend to take the time to read all of the comments on OP/threads regarding the cases. I should go on record here to say that there is no need to start a "Go Fund Me" page, in order that concerned DUers will donate in hopes that I could afford to buy a life. I'll be okay, I speculate, until I'm not, and in that case, it will be far too late.

[crud]

21. I still think tsf should have been arrested in the evening of Jan 6

for inciting a riot. Local law enforcement should have done it. BLM leaders have faced those charges. As proof of his guilt is the fact that after the riot started he did nothing to stop it, when he could have.

[ancianita]

39. That would have been unlawful and illegal by any standards of justice.

Still think it if you want to, but it's not how the Justice Department has ever or will ever work.

Seeing what you saw -- and you didn't see everything -- is not probable cause until real harm, loss, or damage is recorded and reported. Barr was gone by then and so there was no confirmed DOJ AG to act on it until April, over two months later.

[crud]

44. You are probably correct, I'm not a lawyer

Maybe they could have sorted that all out after he was locked up in the city jail. A guy can dream.

[ancianita]

46. There can be no "maybe's" in justice. Anything done that you want done instantly is flat out

abuse of power. He could sue the DOJ for depriving him of his civil rights and he'd win -- costing us taxpayers not only the loss, harm, and damage that he'd already caused to our Congress, but billions more in monetary penalties after winning his case. Then there'd have been none of the 10 Jan 6 hearings, nothing.

Let's dream of new ways to restructure the judiciary system and put congressional timelines on the "speedy trial" clause of the Constitution.

[crud]

47. Looks to me like there is no justice in justice either

[ancianita]

50. Only if you don't look at the "equality before the law" parts.

There's personal justice, the desire for "instant justice" that leads to vigilante justice; in a country where the civilian population has many many times more guns than the US military, what could possibly go wrong.

Don't lose hope. Hopelessness takes one to a dark place. It's not good for hearts, souls or any children, who need and deserve to have hope in life and the future. If we love children and want them to be happy, we will live in hope.

[intheflow]

56. Sorry. Justice is dead.

This was a fantastic abuse of justice. The whole thing was too polite from start to finish. They were so polite asking Trump multiple times to return stolen documents where if he was just some schlub they would have no-knocked warranted him a week after the thefts. If he had been a Black schlub, they would have shot first and asked questions later. Those examples are extreme but somewhere in between guns blazing and “Pretty please, Mr. Trump, return all the documents you stole” would have been wise.

[angrychair]

22. It's still wrong

The DOJ is not moving forward with criminal cases in which they have no doubt crimes were committed and that they could win those cases if they went to trial but are making the choice to not pursue those charges exclusively based on a internal memo that has no legal basis in law or the Constitution.
The DOJ is choosing to allow someone they factually know to be a criminal to become president

[ancianita]

40. "The DOJ is choosing to allow someone they factually know to be a criminal to become president"

You are mistaken. The courts do that. The DOJ takes our side, The People of the United States -- and the courts -- not under DOJ control -- in this case, did not give speedy justice. Nor can they under constitutional rights of due process.

[angrychair]

43. I think you misunderstood

The only reason they are not taking him to court is because he is becoming president.
The reason is due to an internal policy memo that states the DOJ should not pursue court cases against a sitting president.
That is, very literally, the only reason they are not moving forward with the cases. That memo is not backed by any law or anything in the Constitution. It's just a document someone put forth as a suggestion and the DOJ decided it sounded like a good idea

[ancianita]

45. Not really.

The reason is due to an internal policy memo that states the DOJ should not pursue court cases against a sitting president. That is, very literally, the only reason they are not moving forward with the cases.

I understand that the felon is not yet a sitting president. But is just a memo the only reason? Do you understand the reason for the memo? Do you understand that it's not just some "obey in advance" kind of memo? Do you understand what happens with this case when the felon IS the sitting president? Of course you do.

You're just not thinking this through -- and yourself misunderstand why the memo exists to begin with:
First... The new AG will dismiss the case and stop representing The People of the United States.
Second... There would be no Special Counsel Report. No historical record of this First criminal president in U.S. history.

That memo is not backed by any law or anything in the Constitution.

What does the next sitting president's new AG do that is constitutional?
He dismisses the Special Counsel who must drop the case and stop representing The People of the United States. Special Counsels exist across presidencies, and why John Durham was allowed to finish his case and report. But do you think this memo overrides the next president's directing the AG to dismiss Smith? pfffffft

It's just a document someone put forth as a suggestion and the DOJ decided it sounded like a good idea.

Someone? Who? A suggestion? Like "let's have lunch and shake hands" suggestion?

What does the current sitting president's AG do that is also constitutional and not "like a good idea"?
-- He presents the Report instead of a sure-to-fail trial even before a jury pool can even be selected -- so that the The People's case still stands in the historical record of this first oath breaking president in U.S. History.
-- He presents his Special Counsel's Report to The People of the United States, of their complete case against the felon. The People's case that otherwise would have been tossed by the next AG.


Pick one.
No DOJ memo = no case and political exoneration by default.
DOJ Memo = The People's case recorded for history and posterity.

Like Obama says ... Come ON!

[angrychair]

48. Case was already ongoing

Should not be allowed to just kill a pending case because they don't like it.
It really makes the special counsel useless unless they can resolve a case in 2-3 years at most. It also makes laws and accountability pointless if we cannot hold government officials accountable. What it does is give a sitting president a blank check to commit all the crimes they want without fear of accountability.

Lastly, the report is pointless "historical document" who the fuck cares. It means nothing. No minds will be changed. No actions will come because of it. All it does is rub our collective noses in the fact he got away with all his crimes and there is nothing anyone can do about it.

[HAB911]

24. Luigi Mangione should immediately announce his candidacy

[ancianita]

25. and eight months ago

[Joinfortmill]

31. Thank you for posting. Truth matters.

[ecstatic]

35. this has garland's fingerprints all over

He forced that bullshit into the report. His top priority is defending himself and the doj. Not the American people or our country.

Has there ever been a terrorist attack in the US where no action was taken until years later and the whole thing thrown out because the terrorist applied for and was hired for a new job?

The bottom line is, our country was attacked, and garland did nothing because he sided with the attackers.

[intheflow]

57. He sided with "the rule of law,"

namely, white men with money are given every deference to prove themselves innocent whereas, if he were, idk, some low level MAGA from Massachusetts selling nuclear secrets is apprehended, held without bail, and sentenced to prison in 18 months.
https://www.wgbh.org/news/national/2024-11-12/pentagon-secrets-leaker-jack-teixeira-sentenced-to-15-years-in-prison-by-a-federal-judge

[Hekate]

49. Downloaded from link. Amazon has it up at Kindle, but if you can download it you don't need Kindle...

Also downloading it means your copy is yours forever, for free.

Should make for interesting reading, and with any luck we’ll get Part 2 as well.

[edhopper]

54. A Garland apologist

Post a quote from another Garland apologist. It's like watching to dogs wagging their tails.

[gab13by13]

55. When the National Archives

Informed DOJ that there were classified documents at Joe Biden’s properties, the FBI searched Joe’s home 4 days later

When The NA told DOJ top secret documents were missing and believed they were Taken by Trump 11 months later the FBI searched Mar-a-Lago.