When does the DOJ announce investigations?

[boston bean]

The Division often receives questions about why it announces some, but not all, investigations. In general, the Department of Justice does not publicly announce investigations or investigative findings. There are several reasons for this policy. Announcing an investigation of some civil or criminal violations could make it more difficult to obtain witness cooperation or gather evidence. It also could result in the unfair identification of an individual as a person of interest to the federal government. The Department's policy is described in the United States Attorneys Manual and regulations.

The Departmental regulations allow exceptions to its policy when the matter under investigation results in an indictment or some type of enforcement action. The Department can make exceptions to this policy when the issue under investigation has already received a lot of publicity, or where the community needs to be reassured that the Department is investigating the incident, or where announcing the investigation is necessary to protect the public interest, safety, or welfare. The Division follows Department policy and regulations when deciding which investigations and investigative findings to announce publicly. Most commonly, the Division publicly announces investigations involving law enforcement agencies, prisons and jails.

In voting matters, the Division also complies with the Department's long-standing policy not to make announcements or take action that could influence the outcome of an election. That policy is described in the Criminal Division's manual of Federal Prosecutions of Election Offenses.

https://www.justice.gov/crt/when-does-division-announce-investigations

I think the DOJ can let us know what they are investigating. It is in the public interest to protect our interest, safety and welfare and we need to be assured they are investigating the planner/founders/organizers of the insurrection. How much more publicity does one need to use this exception. We saw it with our own eyes and there has been wall to wall media publicity and reports.

I don’t need every detail. I need to know they ARE investigating Brannon Giuliani Trumps Meadows Navarro, etc.

[uponit7771]

1. K&R, It took less than a year for a Special Prosecutor for break into a Watergate hotel room

[Ocelot II]

3. It took two years for the culprits to be tried and convicted.

[boston bean]

11. So?

[uponit7771]

19. +1, I think people are missing the optics here and optics when it comes to justice is important IMHO

[Ocelot II]

2. If they are concerned that the targets of an investigation

are likely to destroy or falsify evidence, intimidate or bribe witnesses, or leave the jurisdiction, they will keep it quiet - for obvious reasons. Investigations of mob bosses, for example, or terrorists, are typically kept under wraps to be sure the process is not compromised. As a prosecutor AG Garland supervised several high-profile domestic-terrorism cases, including the Oklahoma City bombing, the Unabomber, and the Atlanta Olympics bombings. There were no leaks during those investigations.

[boston bean]

4. This is BS. They have had a year to burn what they can. Plus one can't erase a digital trail.

[Ocelot II]

5. Well, you'd better let AG Garland know that he's doing it wrong.

Maybe you could take over for him.

[boston bean]

6. You have his direct line so I can send a text?

[Ocelot II]

7. 202-353-1555

[boston bean]

10. Ok, thanks.

[Scrivener7]

8. You're right, of course.

[boston bean]

13. We already know what they did. I want to know if. there is an official investigation.

Why can’t we know this?

[Scrivener7]

14. It is perfectly clear to any thinking person that there needs

to be an investigation into the organizers. There is no reason in the world why they can't say they are investigating the organizers.

Which makes it seem an awful lot as if people like Adam Schiff are right: they aren't investigating the organizers.

[boston bean]

15. Ayup.

[mzmolly]

12. Mob bosses or terrorists...

both are apt to describe the culprits responsible for 1.6.21.

Here's hoping every last one of them, is placed behind bars.

[WarGamer]

9. Haven't they been investigating and prosecuting 100's since 1/6?

[Just_Vote_Dem]

18. Shhh don't confuse some with facts n/t

[uponit7771]

20. Hundreds of minions, we all know this already. Historically we're pussy footing with 1/6 violence

[WarGamer]

21. Minions?

What's the opposite of a minion? A maxion?

Has the FBI identified anyone?

I've only heard them say this was a random attack with little to no planning. Although the FBI could be wrong of course

[pecosbob]

16. Or, sometimes, once in a great while, when they just feel like torpedoeing a presidential campaign

they will release information in such a manner as to mislead the public ten days before an election.

[boston bean]

17. Or two. Remember Clinton.

I can’t help but think they are just hoping we will forget.

They do not deserve all the time in the world to get it perfect. We need to know they are doing their jobs.

If they can’t at the very least,state there is an investigation into planners/organizers/funders , they do not deserve the benefit of the doubt. Because the longer we remain silent the easier it is for them to do nothing.