During the Trump administration, numerous officials flouted the law to advance their ideological agenda. Now that Trump is out of office, will any of them be held accountable? It's not looking good.
I'm angry and disgusted. There is no Justice for us and these traitors skate or get slaps on the wrist. I'm really angry with Garland. I think I am going to write a letter to VP Harris about it. All during the Trump era my patriotism was strong made even stronger by what they said and did in opposition to them. Now Garland's actions and lack of action is like an acid destroying my sense of patriotism. There is tightness in my stomach and I don't like the thoughts it it creates in my mind.
I'm concerned about this heavy-handed criticism of Merrick Garland, who has spent his entire career serving the public. Rather than assuming he is acting in bad faith, is there an attempt to understand the DOJ's thinking here? Perhaps there are valid reasons for NOT prosecuting the Ross case? After all, we DO NOT have the benefit of the thinking going on at DOJ, and it's not as if the prosecutors there are doing nothing. Insurrection prosecutions, changing Trumpian policy on surveillance of journalists, etc. I'm not saying don't criticize decisions. I AM saying that perhaps we should all be a bit more circumspect and less reactionary.
I think Allison Gill summed it up best. Probably DOJ didn't have enough evidence to prove their case that Ross lied. But they should have given a statement explaining why they declined to prosecute. Without that, there are too many questions left unanswered at a time when the DOJ desperately needs to regain the trust of Americans.
"Because power corrupts, society's demands for moral authority and character increase as the importance of the position increases." John Adams Honor your office and the Constitution, please, Mr. Attorney General, if only in hindsight.
I'm starting to become disappointed in our Attorney General. It seems that any laws the former administration broke (and there are many) will just be forgotten.
When he was first appointed, and we learned that the DOJ department was still full of Trump appointees and supporters, and not summarily dismissed, I (quietly) thought that Garland seemed like "a sweet old lady who didn't want to make trouble" and that this challenge was too much for him. Does his reticence come from Biden's decision to avoid being identified as acting out of vengeance against his predecessor? Is Garland simply following Biden's directive to avoid having his administration appear as the Anti-Trump administration? I ask Biden, what is the AG and DOJ for--have we had a full response from Biden? Does he not realize about the precedent (big word in the law and courts) he's setting? Please, Judd, keep reporting on these issues.
Half (50%) our voting age population participated in 2012 Election.
One quarter (25%) of our voting age population are Evangelical Christians.
Evangelical Christians participate in elections at a rate north of 90%.
All Trump had to do to win was get the crazy vote. Because, his "Best Base" will _never_ abandon him, so long as he keeps his _specific_ promises to them.
He will win again, unless general turnout is very high.
Believe these words. And, just vote, okay? Just vote.
Garland has been a disappointment. There may be reasons for the path he has taken, and I’ve read some of them. However, I think it is wrongheaded to let so much bad behavior stand as acceptable. We now apparently agree that despicable behavior is ok and will allow it to set the standard for the future.
He has no stones and a new AG should be sought. Good reporting, Judd.
I'm angry and disgusted. There is no Justice for us and these traitors skate or get slaps on the wrist. I'm really angry with Garland. I think I am going to write a letter to VP Harris about it. All during the Trump era my patriotism was strong made even stronger by what they said and did in opposition to them. Now Garland's actions and lack of action is like an acid destroying my sense of patriotism. There is tightness in my stomach and I don't like the thoughts it it creates in my mind.
I'm concerned about this heavy-handed criticism of Merrick Garland, who has spent his entire career serving the public. Rather than assuming he is acting in bad faith, is there an attempt to understand the DOJ's thinking here? Perhaps there are valid reasons for NOT prosecuting the Ross case? After all, we DO NOT have the benefit of the thinking going on at DOJ, and it's not as if the prosecutors there are doing nothing. Insurrection prosecutions, changing Trumpian policy on surveillance of journalists, etc. I'm not saying don't criticize decisions. I AM saying that perhaps we should all be a bit more circumspect and less reactionary.
I think Allison Gill summed it up best. Probably DOJ didn't have enough evidence to prove their case that Ross lied. But they should have given a statement explaining why they declined to prosecute. Without that, there are too many questions left unanswered at a time when the DOJ desperately needs to regain the trust of Americans.
"Because power corrupts, society's demands for moral authority and character increase as the importance of the position increases." John Adams Honor your office and the Constitution, please, Mr. Attorney General, if only in hindsight.
Garland’s action as AG makes you wonder how he would be performing as Supreme Court Justice if Mitchie hadn’t stolen that away.
Also I wonder if DOJ dropping the ball on prosecuting Ross would open the door for a state AG to initiate action (yes CA I’m talking about you !) ?
Until we get ‘EVERYTHING TRUMP’ out of our politics and off the benches, we will continue the slide into fascism and away from democracy.
I'm starting to become disappointed in our Attorney General. It seems that any laws the former administration broke (and there are many) will just be forgotten.
The country certainly seems to be losing our democracy.
Is there any rationale for not prosecuting any of these? The messaging is horrible. Are they afraid to stir up a hornets nest?
Lying to Congress is now (even more) OK....
If Garland certifies Brooks's request, wouldn't TFG have good reason to believe that Garland would not prosecute him either?
When he was first appointed, and we learned that the DOJ department was still full of Trump appointees and supporters, and not summarily dismissed, I (quietly) thought that Garland seemed like "a sweet old lady who didn't want to make trouble" and that this challenge was too much for him. Does his reticence come from Biden's decision to avoid being identified as acting out of vengeance against his predecessor? Is Garland simply following Biden's directive to avoid having his administration appear as the Anti-Trump administration? I ask Biden, what is the AG and DOJ for--have we had a full response from Biden? Does he not realize about the precedent (big word in the law and courts) he's setting? Please, Judd, keep reporting on these issues.
Half (50%) our voting age population participated in 2012 Election.
One quarter (25%) of our voting age population are Evangelical Christians.
Evangelical Christians participate in elections at a rate north of 90%.
All Trump had to do to win was get the crazy vote. Because, his "Best Base" will _never_ abandon him, so long as he keeps his _specific_ promises to them.
He will win again, unless general turnout is very high.
Believe these words. And, just vote, okay? Just vote.
...and work to protect voting rights and access in all states.
Garland has been a disappointment. There may be reasons for the path he has taken, and I’ve read some of them. However, I think it is wrongheaded to let so much bad behavior stand as acceptable. We now apparently agree that despicable behavior is ok and will allow it to set the standard for the future.
But we should change the name from DOJ to Dept of Oh Well