It can be difficult at times to truly appreciate what’s happening to this country. We are right on the brink of a dictatorial overthrow of the government, which is exactly what’s going to happen if Trump is CLOSE in the next election. The Republicans fully believe that the 2020 election was stolen. Indeed, Rupert Murdoch will not settle the Dominion case precisely because he doesn’t want to have to issue an on-air apology and admit they were wrong. He would rather absorb the loss than lose his audience. He wants his viewers happy, and they’re happy to think that Trump actually won. In that sense, they believe they’re owed a victory in 2024. If that election is close, at all, they will claim victory and use whatever Electoral College tactics it takes to lift Trump to victory. If all else fails, they’ll fight.
Meanwhile, Democrats will stand back and ask why it is we’re FORCED to share the presidency when Democrats now always win the popular vote, next time – in my opinion – by ten million.
And we’re at this stage in our history because Merrick Garland has utterly failed on every level. I won’t tolerate hearing from anyone that “these things take time,” or that they’re doing something “big” soon. Fine. I hope so. But that doesn’t excuse that JUST NOW, Mike Pence is fighting a subpoena, and not in July 2021 but 2023, only after Trump has started campaigning!! Trump was largely HATED for months after 2021, and the vaccine was starting the economy again. That was the time to investigate Trump AND only the rioters who violently injured cops. Instead, Garland set about using massive resources to arrest people who broke windows, letting Trump go. Indeed, from the outside, it appears it was only Congress’s successful investigation that pushed DOJ into investigating Trump. After all, DOJ was asking Congress for its transcripts.
Now legendary attorney John Flannery, who often appears on MSNBC, looks like Robert Redford, you know him, has had enough. He wants Garland to resign or be fired. Garland has failed to protect and defend the Constitution. He also chastises Biden for not standing up for the judicial process, not calling out Trump to shut up about judges and the FBI. It is truly a must-see video:
Holy shit! I needed this.
Thank you for this sanity, John Flannery.
“Garland should resign or be fired.”
— Jason Overstreet (@JasonOverstreet) March 24, 2023
Nothing more to add. Resign, Garland.
****
[email protected], @JasonMiciak, SUBSTACK: MUCH LEFT ADO
I watch Deadline White House, usually daily – both hours. She has on extremely knowledgeable folks. To a person, they question why the Federal Gov’t didn’t start an investigation into 45-January 6th as soon as Biden took office. April is tomorrow. At least John Smith is on the case – let’s hope he takes it where it needs to go. INDICTMENT. Merrick Garland doesn’t seem to have the balls to be in the position he’s in JMO.
Merrick Garland hired Jack Smith. Just sayin’.
Garland has been dragging his feet since appointed. Just sayin’.
Because he had to.
Why?
They didn’t get an AG through until March. Just saying. And that was when things started really moving. (They’ve arrested a thousand people for 1/6. There are another thousand still not identified. There isn’t enough courtroom space or judges to handle more at once, plus the defendants delay and obfuscate as much as possible.)
Garland is worthless. He was a wimp when Barry put him up for SCOTUS and old Joe gave him the AG spot as a consolation prize. Every interview I’ve seen with him, he sounds like he’s about to cry.
He’s in waaay over his head, but I would have expected no less from old Joe.
BULLSHIT.
Go back to whatever RW site you came from.
813 days and counting…
Garland has been AG for two years. He’s supervising ALL of DOJ, not just the 1/6 and Trmp investigations. He’s actually DOING HIS JOB!!!
No. JP. As much as I like you, he really hasn’t been. How do we know? Trump is already campaigning again. It doesn’t take two years. I’ve been in the legal system long enough and the FBI has the resources to prosecute hundreds of window breakers, and did almost nothing on Trump until Congress and the NARA dumped shit he couldn’t ignore in his lap.
I believe some, some mind you of the criticism of Garland is warranted. At the same time fairness demands keeping a couple of things in mind. First, DOJ was hollowed out as badly as State. Other cabinet agencies too but those two are the big ones. An incredibly depressing and distressing amount of institutional knowledge and skill was tossed out the door. And as we know virtually every person bought in was a Trump/GOP loyalist. In a sense not fully “restocking” the incredible talent that was lost was an blessing in disguise BUT some of those folks are burrowed in and have Civil Service protections. Garland has had an entire, crucial agency to rebuild and the rebuilding goes agency wide – it’s not limited to the Criminal Division.
At the same time, the J6 investigation is by far the largest and most complex (with all the moving parts) investigation in DOJ history. Add in Garland is stuck with FBI Director Wray who has at best mixed (between his Federalist Society core beliefs and his legacy as in actual Justice – and he’s still a young guy) loyalties and the job has been that much tougher.
One thing Garland could have and should have done was appoint a “Czar” or Special Counsel to oversee the January 6 investigation – with powers to hire his/her own team from both existing DOJ people and from outside. That should have happened back in the summer of 2021 in my own humble opinion. Things would have moved much faster, especially with outside lawyers heading up prosecutions of some of the players who did the organizing and leading and who are finally getting lengthy prison sentences. One problem with federal prosecutors has always been they tend to be weak-kneed. They can have a mountain of evidence both written and testimony that’s unimpeachable and a defendant caught on tape (with audio) commiting the crime(s) AND sit there in an interview (on tape) with invesigators telling the lawyer to STFU and both admitting everything and STILL the typical federal prosecutor would be afraid to recommend charges!
Anyway, this is in fact a complex case when you start getting up to the level of Trump and his closest advisors. With charges that will be challenging to prosecute. That’s why I go back to what for me is the uforgiveable delay in appointing a Jack Smith or someone like him to oversee the J6 matter. Trying to rebuild an entire agency AND managing such a sprawling case was simply more than any one person could take on – much less a dyed-in-the-wool institutionalist like Garland who proceeds as if eventually following all the old procedures and customs with the traditional courtesies is the ONLY way to go.
Trying to act as if politics don’t matter was and is hopelessly naive.
And finally, I’m starting to get pissed at Smith. He needs to get on with charging Trump on the documents case. He’s got a shitload of evidence, and Trump is STILL saying he had the right to take what he wanted, even highly classified documents! What all the legal talking heads wring their hands over when it comes to rich and/or powerful people is INTENT. How many fucking examples of Trump’s intent does Smith need? He’s got the evidence and he’s got example of example of Trump personally not only conceding, but BRAGGING about his intent. he needs to be charged. Now.
Garland has NO business even suggesting to Smith to wait and file some massive case against Trump that includes not just the documents but all the other stuff. If Smith goes to Garland with recommended charges next week and Garland begs off, or asks him to “develop the case further” Smith should resign and do so the way Weisman and others did up in NY – firing broadsides.
But for now, while I’m not willing to cut as much slack as Bareshark I’m of the belief some measure of slack is warranted for reasons I’ve stated.
I always liked John Flannery and agree wholeheartedly with his opinion. My wife and I have had this discussion many times, why is Garland not very aggressively going after trump and those other criminals in congress who precipitated J6 and have continued with their seditious antics; making Ashli Babbit a martyr, visiting the jailed traitors, etc I hope Biden does the right thing before it’s too late but I fear it may be.
I just love articles wherein the author, in his “defense of democracy,” turns to arguing AGAINST the entire democratic process because things aren’t happening like a TV crime drama where almost EVERY criminal case goes from crime to verdict in an hour (maybe two hours when “sweeps month” comes along).
Did this “legendary attorney” (funny–I’ve never heard of him) happen to offer any, you know, actual suggestions or recommendations or did he just offer the kinds of platitudes that would appeal to the seemingly increasing number of liberals/progressives who want to fight right-wing authoritarianism with a left-wing authoritarianism?
First of all, I am an attorney.
Second, I know exactly when the investigation of Trump began, we all do. It was when they started asking Congress for transcripts BECAUSE THEY HAD NONE.
The very fact that only NOW is Jack Smith subpoenaing Mark Meadows tells me all I need to know about their commitment to an investigation.
I am, in fact, NOT arguing “against” the “democratic process” I am arguing that it’s not working in this one matter bc of lack of leadership and lack of priorities. The priority, above all else, for the attorney general, was to NOT ALLOW the ONE MAN who did not peacefully transfer power to ever be able to attain power again, which requires holding him accountable for his January 6th crimes.
And he didn’t even start until Congress humiliated him. Again, we know, bc he’s successfully prosecuted a very very complex case of “sedition” by Oath Keepers and Proud Boys, but at the same time, was asking for transcripts from Congress.
He did not start the prosecution of Trump until he was humiliated by Congress.
And the fact that you don’t know who John Flannery was is your problem, not mine.
I am not familiar with Flannery’s name, either. However, I did an online search, and John P. Flannery is the one in question. The following link will tell you much of what you need to know about him:
http://www.johnpflannery.com/id3.html