NanceGreggs: My Two Cents - FWIW

[dutch508]

Star Member NanceGreggs (26,904 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100216557573

My Two Cents - FWIW 

“Justice must not only be done, but must also be seen to be done”.

The January 6 Select Committee is planning public hearings, replete with testimony that will establish the timelines of the January 6, 2021, assault on the Capitol, along with who was involved in pursuing, supporting, and participating in an insurrection against our democracy.

AG Merrick Garland would be insane to not wait for these hearings to play out before acting. Allowing justice to be "seen to be done" by exposing the corruption of the Trump administration and its minions is the surest way to assure the public that Trump et al are being pursued for their crimes, and not as the result of some political "witch-hunt" based on party affiliation.

It is not enough to claim that justice is being done according to a single man appointed by a Democratic president. It must "be seen to be done" by tying Republicans to their crimes, their actions - and ultimately their corruption.

I, for one, am awaiting the January 6th committee to reveal what they know, and to expose the criminals in our midst. I suspect that AG Garland is doing the same.

If, however, AG Garland does not act after the Fat Lady Sings, his removal from office is not only justified, it is mandatory.

Until then, I am putting my confidence in the idea that President Biden did not appoint an AG who had neither the spine nor the inclination to see not only that justice is done, but is seen to be done.

Your mileage may vary - and Garland's seeming inertia is a valid cause for concern. But I'm sticking with Joe, and his ability to choose wisely when it comes down to who is on the side of the American people.

 

Star Member gab13by13 (9,063 posts)

1. Nice post, I like your thought process,

Merrick garland is a good, honorable person, was a good judge/prosecutor. With that said, being AG of the United States is another animal. If Merrick Garland turns out to be a fantastic AG that can be tied to president Biden, but if Merrick Garland is not good at his job that can't be tied to president Biden. It's a new job for Garland, politics are involved in this new job that weren't involved in his other jobs, if he can't handle it, that's solely on him. There have been many excellent college football players who have been a bust in the NFL, hopefully Garland fulfills president Biden's expectations.

 

Star Member FalloutShelter (8,767 posts)

2. I agree with you, Nancy.

I personally think that the DOJ is planning an October surprise for the short attention span public. I think they plan to “Comey” the GQP right before the election.

Revenge is a dish best served cold.
Just MHO.

 

Star Member uponit7771 (83,988 posts)

6. THIS POST is part of the reason I've been on DU nearly half my life. People on DU have ability to

... see multiple side of things and come to reasonable, practical and progressive go forward

Star Member paleotn (12,936 posts)

7. Very valid points...

Even appearing like one is applying the power of the judiciary to political enemies just because they're political enemies is about as taboo as it gets in American political life. Let Congress spell out all the crimes for everyone to see. Dems completely control that narrative, since McCarthy stupidly didn't want to play ball. Then formally prosecute. Personally, I'd like to see the whole lot of them frogged marched in chains to the executioners block on Tower Hill and their heads literally lopped off...yesterday. But I do get your point.

Star Member KS Toronado (6,768 posts)

8. Merrick Garland's DOJ is going after everyone involved in Jan 6th

Took 2 years to get Nixon for Watergate, there's no instant gratification with our justice system.

Star Member Hoyt (53,143 posts)

9. If the Select Committee has hard evidence, Garland will have no choice but to act. If the evidence

is soft, like most -- if not all -- that has been released or discovered by investigative reporters so far, Garland may continue to sit on his rear and take flak.

I too have confidence in Biden to do the right thing, which might include not putting the nation through a bunch of "connect millions of dots, among fizzling bombshells." type trial. If they find hard evidence, go all out.

Star Member Emile (3,260 posts)

10. Watching Trump on live TV orchestrating the insurrection is not enough?

didn't happen

Star Member Emile (3,260 posts)

11. 8 hour gap in White House phone records is not enough either?

also, didn't happen

Star Member Emile (3,260 posts)

16. Again it's hard to gather evidence if you're not calling and questioning these bozo's under oath.

McCarthy says he called Trump on Jan 6, but no phone records because Trump failed to release over 7 hours of phone records is not evidence?

 

Star Member Hoyt (53,143 posts)

21. At this point, if they don't have anything hard, probably time to get back to concentrating on

needs of people rather than trying to find something, anything.

What do you think they are gong to find in phone calls, trump telling the 3rd Infantry of Proud Boyz to storm the east gate? Sorry, that ain't going to happen.

Obviously, trump's big lie spurred the Proud Boyz, etc., to show up on Jan 6th. It's immoral, unethical, Presidential incompetence, etc., but I'm not sure it's illegal.

Atticus (12,802 posts)

34. Are not all recent POTUS's required to exclusively use the SECURE phones provided for them---

or is that just a common sense "custom" or "norm"?

Does not the use of UNSECURED phones risk ---insure?---security breaches?

If some of these UNSECURED communications do actually constitute evidence of Trump's criminality and "IF" Putin or Xi or whoever has recordings, is that not the definition of "kompromat"?

What about all that outrage about "Hillary's texts" on an unsecured Blackberry?

 

Star Member Hoyt (53,143 posts)

13. Orchestrating what? Storming the Capitol or a legal protest (even if based on a lie). It ain't

that easy.

Now, if you have a video of trump taking a Sharpie and drawing entrance ways into Capitol for the rube militias, we've got him.

I will agree that just about everything trump did while in office is evidence of why only an ignorant rube should ever vote for him, but not sure it's evidence of a crime.

Star Member Emile (3,260 posts)

17. Orchestrating a riot is against Federal Law!

Star Member Hoyt (53,143 posts)

22. Howz about showing how he "orchestrated" a riot that would hold up in court?

Star Member Emile (3,260 posts)

24. Did you watch his speech that day?

Star Member Hoyt (53,143 posts)

26. Yes. He did what I would expect from trump, relish the support from a LEGAL protest that later

morphed into a group of insurrectionists who stormed the Capitol.

Despite facing jail time and financial ruin, not a one of the hurndreds of Capitol insurrectionists has offered evidence that trump -- or even a close trump aide -- called/texted/paid them to storm the Capitol. Clearly, there are some leaders from Proud Boyz, 3%ers, Rubes from Ohio, etc., who are repsonsible.

But, don't see any evidence of trump directing the storming of Capitol. Sorry. However, if you find that evidence, I'll celebrate too.

Star Member Emile (3,260 posts)

27. Why is he ignoring the Jan 6 committee subpoenas to gather evidence you say we need?

Star Member Hoyt (53,143 posts)

29. What the Committee needs to do is find hard evidence, trump directing Proud Boyz say,

and then ask trump to comment on it.

As much as I despise trump and pray voters don't reelect him, I don't blame him for not showing up at a roast still looking for evidence.

There's plenty of evidence that trump is the worst Prez ever, he's a POS and racist buffoon, he's greedy, etc., but that is not illegal.

Star Member c-rational (2,062 posts)

33. Didn't tRump direct the mob on 1/6 to march to the Capital, and tell them you need to fight like hell.

Star Member Emile (3,260 posts)

37. Yes he did! He orchestrated a riot (not a protest) on live TV, but I guess that's not enough

evidence for some. Over 7 hours of phone records lost is not enough evidence either.

Star Member Hoyt (53,143 posts)

52. Not hard evidence, Emile. The 7 hour gap is laughable, since he was involved in speeches for 4 hours

or thereabouts. The rest of the time, it's been reported that he was tweeting, storming around the WH, being chased by staff trying to talk sense into him, etc.

I can see the prosector now, "Your honor, we just know trump was up to no good, so he's guilty."

Likely true he was up to no good, but that ain't enough to convict anyone, especially a former Prez -- no matter how pitiful -- who has/had support of 45+% of voters.

Star Member Mr. Ected (8,279 posts)

12. If Merrick Garland pulls an Alvin Bragg and, after seeing the damning evidence, shuts it all down

Then I think we may have a little problem that ordinary measures cannot remedy. We stand the risk of becoming Russia...and most of us here on DU would be Ukrainians in this scenario.

At that point, we may need to decide: Is democracy worth fighting for?

Please, AG Garland, do not waver in your decisions. We are already going through this now because we didn't throw Nixon in prison. If there are no legal impediments for our leaders to break the law, why would they abide it if they themselves are rotten to the core?

Star Member NanceGreggs (26,904 posts)

18. Garland serves ...

... at the pleasure of the President. He can be dismissed at any time.

If you believe that President Joe will back down and NOT get rid of a spineless AG, you've not been paying attention.

Biden knew going into the presidency that Trump's crimes would have to be dealt with on his watch. He would never have chosen an AG who wasn't aware of that fact, its implications, and its ultimate consequences.

Star Member bucolic_frolic (30,539 posts)

15. Agree but we are still in a precarious place

Racist, xenophobic, authoritarian white nationalism tendencies - separately and together - were rampant in the population before TDFG tapped into them. Driving them back underground and rendering them peaceful and irrelevant politically will remain a huge task even if the Rule of Law prevails.

Star Member jalan48 (12,866 posts)

25. I think we will look back on this time and regret the inaction by Garland, Bragg and any others

who had the power to hold Trump accountable and chose not to do so. If Trump evades responsibility and is re-elected in 2024 I have a feeling we're going to hear a whole lot of "I wish..."

Star Member Midnight Writer (15,105 posts)

41. Perhaps we could start with the 15 boxes of material, some classified, he stole.

We have witnesses who saw him take the material, he admitted he took the material, it is illegal for him to take the material, he had the material in his possession, and he tried to hide the material.

Then we could move on to the phone call, on tape, in which he threatened the Secretary of State of Georgia with legal harassment if he didn't "find" enough votes to overturn the election results in Georgia.

These are not speculative cases, this is not circumstantial evidence, there is no question of ignorance of the law or intent or motivation.

These are unassailable facts. We all know what would happen to T C Mits under the same circumstances.

Looks like a slam-dunk case against the fellow who has been bellowing "Lock Her Up!" for the last seven years.

 

ymetca (958 posts)

64. I'm still scratching my head

why Gore and HRC didn't litigate the crap out of their stolen elections, and force this mess to the forefront back when it really could have mattered. The nation did not "heal" from either of those grave injustices, despite all the MSM gloss-over-ing propaganda.

Nixon never went away. Same crowd, same players even, "reared their ugly heads" once more.

And we still haven't put enough "coffins on top of coffins" on old Ronnie Ray-Gun either. That vampire still rises, again and again.

Star Member brooklynite (77,090 posts)

65. Clinton's election wasn't stolen...

You can argue about the role Russia played in biasing voters' choices, but people got the candidate they voted for.

As for Gore, he argued up to the Supreme Court. How do you propose he litigate beyond that?

ymetca (958 posts)

67. Oh yeah, well not "stolen"

so much as stolen by our decrepit Electoral College.

Should have clarified that.

But yeah, really not much they could have done .. other than raise a GIANT STINK everywhere they went, having rallies claiming they actually won, over and over, ginning up a Left Wing Mob, waving flags, painting ALL Republicans as Fascists, and so on.

But, yeah. That would have been pretty ugly, and probably would not have helped, so...

Yeah, I'm just venting here.

Star Member Meowmee (3,108 posts)

71. Gore should have litigated

He had terrible advice from lawyers. And then the sc annointed w. All of this including lack of accountability for Nixon and others is why we are where we are today. I have 0 faith there will be any real accountability this time either. Dump has been a criminal for many years. He no doubt paid off and threatened many people in NY and elsewhere for years and yet even though we knew he was a criminal he was allowed to run for office while inciting violence as the media gave his nazi campaign rallies free non stop coverage. He has murdered over a million people here and more and is still walking free. The fact that many people are ok with this is a big part of the problem.

Star Member Stuart G (33,344 posts)

74. So, You think you have seem it all? Well, There is always more, and more..and even MORE!!!!!

NO, I think there is more coming. More of this, and more of that. What will it be? One thing is for sure...and this we

all know, "Trump is a liar extraordinaire!!! He lies about everything, and he tries to cover up everything too. So, in my

honest opinion, there is more coming. What will it be? I don't know...Maybe you know.

.....I watched Watergate from beginning to end. Tricky Dick said, "I am not a crook" ..But he was a crook. And Donald
Trump is a crook too. And yes, there will be more, and more and more. Time to hide...

How do I know? ...

The plot is the same, but the names have been changed. Just the facts, just the facts."

 

[SVPete]

"Two Cents"? that was a



and a

[ADsOutburst]

'FWIW" (for what it's worth)...

I think we know  the answer to that...

[67 Rover]

Star Member uponit7771 (83,988 posts)

6. THIS POST is part of the reason I've been on DU nearly half my life. People on DU have ability to

... see multiple side of things and come to reasonable, practical and progressive go forward

Loser. 

[enslaved1]

Star Member NanceGreggs (26,904 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100216557573

My Two Cents - FWIW

That about covers it. 

[DefiantSix]

That about covers it.

$3.49 for $1.00 worth of monopoly money "pennies"... 

"I did that!"

[CollectivismMustDie]

You know they're well and truly around the bend, when hoyt becomes the voice of reason.

[3rd-try]

Nance even with Biden's inflation your post doesn't get on the plus side of zero.

[USA4ME]

You know they're well and truly around the bend, when hoyt becomes the voice of reason.

Agreed. Someone should tell that idiot to shut up before he screws up their fantasy and our entertainment.

.

[SVPete]

Star Member NanceGreggs (26,904 posts)

My Two Cents - FWIW

Nance's word-salad screeds are never worth two Zimbabwean cents.