Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

cadoman

(1,502 posts)
11. ok gotcha I misunderstood who you meant by "they"
Wed Jul 16, 2025, 06:51 AM
Jul 16

Thank you for the edit, but I think the point stands, right?

Nothing happened on Garland's watch. We have video and photos that strongly implicate MM and others. It seems that at a minimum, Garland could have cleared the air as to why more prosecutions were not brought, whether the reasons be statute of limitations, venue, lack of evidence, etc.?

It would have done a lot to assuage the public that every avenue of pursuit was exhausted. You say we don't know what Garland did, and that is true, but it's only because nothing was done publicly about Epstein on his watch.

Thus the only two possibilities are that Garland either did nothing, or there was nothing to be done.

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why I think Trump's name ...»Reply #11