I’m a Merrick Garland skeptic in the sense that I suspect nice old Joe Biden gave Garland the AG job as a consolation prize for having been cheated out of a Supreme Court seat via the machinations of Mitch McConnell. It was a nice gesture, and Garland is certainly qualified for the job. But is he the right person for the job in this perilous time? Is he the wartime consigliere democracy requires as Republicans go to the mattresses against the republic? To me, the jury is still out on that.
I don’t know what’s happening behind the scenes, but people who are in a position to know — people whom I find credible, like Adam Schiff and Ruben Gallego — keep expressing doubt about Garland’s DOJ leadership. So, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to be concerned. Garland wouldn’t be the first institutionalist who focused on protecting the reputation of the institution rather than fulfilling that institution’s mission.
All that said, a memo Rachel Maddow obtained and discussed on her show last night sounds like a giant nothing-burger to me: [memo]
NEW: May 25, 2022 Merrick Garland memo to DOJ on “election year sensitivities” doubles down on Barr’s policy against investigating candidates without approval. pic.twitter.com/KIQZMB34Qi
— Maddow Blog (@MaddowBlog) July 19, 2022
We don’t want Barr-like AGs who put their big fat thumbs on the scale for partisan gain, as Barr did when he deceptively pre-spun the Mueller Report and chased Trump’s paranoid deep state fantasies all over the world. We don’t want self-important jackasses like James Comey to throw out the rulebook and take it upon themselves to make last-minute announcements that affect election outcomes. The Garland memo that’s causing the furor prohibits that nonsense, and that’s a good thing.
The line that’s causing the big freak-out is the part where Garland affirms a rule outlined in a 2020 memo Barr issued during his disgraceful tenure, in which Barr required DOJ employees to run any candidate investigations past him prior to starting work. It sure sounds sinister coming from Barr, but that’s because AG Barr was a partisan hack. The rule is only as good as the person enforcing it, which is no longer Barr. In the hands of someone who seems to take his role as an impartial actor seriously in polarized times, it doesn’t strike me as unreasonable at all.
I remain concerned that Garland might decide prosecuting Trump would be too disruptive for the country. That’s every bit as much of a political decision as quashing an investigation that might harm Democrats’ political prospects. And yet, I’ve heard elite DC lawyers make that argument, including former AG Eric Holder, who eventually came around to the pro-prosecution side as the January 6 committee began to reveal the full scope of Trump’s criminal conspiracy to overturn the election.
I also remain hopeful that Garland has experienced a comparable epiphany and will overcome the institutionalist instinct. We don’t know how that will shake out yet, but the much ballyhooed Garland memo tells us nothing useful about that.
Open thread.
M31
NOT prosecuting Trump would be too disruptive for the country, how’s about that?
RandomMonster
Garland adding prosecutors seems like a good sign.
Fair Economist
I didn’t save the Twitter link where I saw it, but one Tweet pointed out how ridiculous it is to claim the memo means the DOJ won’t prosecute candidates:
The DOJ arrested Ryan Kelly, a GOP candidate for MI governor, for actions on 1/6, right after issuing the memo.
Grover Gardner
I’d be worried about
1) Making Trump a martyr before 2024;
2) Giving him a new platform for his ranting at a time when he’s steadily losing influence and visibility;
3) Re-energizing his base when they’re starting to turn on him as it is.
Bill K
Perhaps Rachel Maddow was trying to goad Garland into action?
sab
I don’t think Biden gives anyone a job as a consolation prize. He has been around since forever and he knows who is out there and available. His hires have been excellent. And many are in the categories of “who knew there were good..[blacks.. native americans..women..hispanics..] ” to be hired.
Garland is playing a long game. TV news is a day to day game. My cat has a longer attention span than tv news.
Frank Wilhoit
Here is where we see, if never before, the total corrosiveness of the Nixon pardon. If you once let anyone off the hook, then you have to keep on doing it; the only way to stop is by hard-resetting the entire system.
oatler
Garland might fear it would be one more log on the fire of civil war which the kindly old coot doesn’t know has already started.
M31
so Garland’s memo panics Trump into declaring his candidacy before the midterms, and he starts ranting and bloviating his way into the news, making a lot of his supporters head to the polls in support, but even low-info Dem voters are galvanized even more, and maybe start remembering that low-key, competent Biden and his Democratic team are better than a loud-mouthed piece of shit and his lickspittle lackeys
geg6
I don’t know what to think about Garland and his investigation. I just don’t know.
Which worries me a fair bit, I must say.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
I’m a big Maddow fan but she can get herself spun up in the emo from time to time.
The irony of Steve Benen tweeting this right about the time she went to air is notable (original article is at the WSJ and I’m not one of you savvy youths who go through paywalls like they ain’t there, dagnabbit)
zhena gogolia
@sab: Co-sign.
Nicole
Maybe I am being (uncharacteristically for me) optimistic, but I still believe that the wheels of justice turn very, very slowly and that all of the ducks need to be in a row, especially where potential criminal prosecution might be warranted. Problem of course being that there’s a ticking clock, especially if the GOP gets Congress in November. The law moves slowly, but the lawless don’t.
zhena gogolia
@Nicole: How can the GOP stop Garland even if they do win Congress in November? Which is by no means certain.
zhena gogolia
Why am I in moderation?
zhena gogolia
@Nicole: I’ll try again (I went into moderation). How can the GOP stop Garland, even if they win Congress?
Jim, Foolish Literalist
Hear, hear.
I didn’t see the segment, but Doug Jones (with Sally Yates one of the alt-timeline AGs who twitter thinks would’ve clapped trump in irons and cast him into the dungeon of the RFK building) said on the Capeheart show this weekend that much of the evidence the 1/6 committee has shown would be inadmissible in a criminal court. Emo twitter declared this was a “lie” and how dare Capeheart give this coward a platform! Cuz it’s all about “balls!”
zhena gogolia
MG has a twinkle in his eye when he says he and his attorneys are watching all the hearings.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auM-BiefCrs
RinaX
I’m reminded once again why I don’t watch Rachel Maddow.
Alison Rose
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: This little gizmo doesn’t always work, but it’s nice when it does.
(Note: I do think people deserve to be paid for their work and all that, but I use this on sites where you get like one free article a month and they have 27 ads on every page. Fuck that.)
Jim, Foolish Literalist
Just listening to the sometimes shockingly ignorant Molly Jong-Fast on her podcast (she gets good guests, and I get sucked back in) she was whining about “Merrick Fucking Garland” and before I could shut it off after the interview with Tim Miller (whose book I am somewhat interested in but not enough to buy it), her co-host says something about who WV’s non-Manchin junior Senator is, and she pipes up, “Debbie Stabenow, no, wait, she’s from Michigan”.
How this woman has been hired by three major media outlets (The Daily Beast, Vogue, and god help us The Atlantic) to discuss politics just leaves me gobsmacked.
WaterGirl
@zhena gogolia: I have no idea why that would have gone into moderation!
Leto
How about a palate cleanser: “Joe Manchin is a Hack” How A Coal Baron Killed the Climate Bill | Pod Save America Podcast (This on YouTube, so you don’t have to subscribe or anything.)
Nicole
@zhena gogolia: The GOP are very, very good at wasting time with all kinds of things- I can see them launching an investigation into the AG office because reasons, and while obv. nothing would come up, it could slow things down. Hell, it’s been Trump’s tactic for all of his adult life when he breaks the law or screws over a vendor; slow things down and he gets away with it.
Mostly, though, it’s the future of the Jan 6 committee I fear, which I do think is doing some good as everything that comes out seems to be worse than expected.
Again, I expect justice to move slowly, especially when dealing with a situation like this (come at the Orange Cheetoface, you’d better not miss and all that); I just get worried about November because it does the GOP not a whit of good for investigations to continue. But I don’t know that the answer is “work faster!” I’d prefer done right.
zhena gogolia
@WaterGirl: Things are weird today. The Atlantic crossword puzzle was already filled in, entirely incorrectly, and I couldn’t fix it. I had to go to Firefox to do the puzzle.
Starfish
@Fair Economist:
This is the thread discussing how the concern about this is overblown.
schrodingers_cat
This could have been either from the Jacobin or Brietbart. I don’t think Biden gave Garland the job as a a consolation prize. Maddow is not a lawyer. Her longwinded screeds are not evidence.
schrodingers_cat
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: I muted her Twitter account a long time ago. I also stopped watching Maddow after Obama was elected in 2008. I haven’t had cable since 2011.
As for Molly Fast and Loose with facts, having famous parents and grandparents helps.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
I’d imagine the investigation of any elected official, even down to a state legislator or big city council member, gets at least a cursory review from somebody with an office pretty close to Garland’s
Another Scott
All the evidence is that Garland is a careful lawyer and knows how to get things done.
Recall that Garland ran the OKCity bombing trial(s).
LATimes (from 1997):
He got the job done.
Prosecuting a President requires extreme care to get it right. Not getting it right would be a disaster (look at the arguments and bad feelings people still have about the Ford pardon of Nixon). I have no doubt that he’s taking that care.
We’ll see!
Cheers,
Scott.
scav
There do seem to a fair lot of people even here judging the actions and intents of the DOJ (and MG) from a purely partisan and, moreover, an electoral partisan viewpoint. I’m also in the camp that hopes the DOJ absolutely ignores those concerns and meticulously lines up its legions of ducks. I also have a preference for the ducks operating those legendary mills of fine granularity, no smashing of ducks allowed.
JPL
@zhena gogolia: Thank you for mentioning that, because I wondered if it was just me. I was able to reset the puzzle.
Betty Cracker
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: If you’re a compulsive worrywart, that news maybe isn’t so comforting because it’s July 2022 and that could be interpreted as they’re just now branching out and marshalling resources to investigate the bad actors who weren’t smashing windows at the Capitol that day? I mean, the January 6 committee, with it’s comparatively tiny staff and weak powers, has uncovered the white collar conspiracy behind the violence.
Maybe the DOJ has been quietly investigating the suits and their connections to the fascist mobs on the ground all along. I hope so! But I don’t assume it. We’ll know when we know, I guess.
J R in WV
Our current Jr Senator in WV is Shelly Moore Capito, daughter of the late Gov Arch A Moore Jr, himself a convicted solicitor of bribes and Federal felon. She voted against legislation which would have improved regulation of the banking industry, and a week or two later her husband, Mr Capito was named managing VP of Wells Fargo, WV.
Amazing coincidence, eh?
schrodingers_cat
@sab: Agreed. Imagine this scenario, the ex President is indicted and the DOJ can’t get a conviction. It will be a godsend to the Rs.
And the attack dogs on the left will give Biden zero credit for trying but failing.
They will indict him only if they are sure of getting conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. The evidence has to be watertight.
Aurona
I think we should ask Timothy McVeigh about Merrick Garland.
schrodingers_cat
How long did the Watergate indictments take for example?
JPL
The Fulton Cty DA will bring charges against those that tried to interfere in the election. My feeling is that trump’s phone call might be the “perfect” evidence against him.
Ruckus
@sab:
Biden is the long road.
SFB is the little rich boy with zero humanity.
They are absolute and complete opposites.
The long road gets you somewhere, and if that somewhere is good then this is the best trip. If it sucks then it’s the longest trip to hell.
Biden is the good long road. He’s been to hell and knows it’s the wrong way.
Baud
This post gets at the meta problem. If we let nothingburgers be a catylst for reigniting a debate, we’re going to encourage more nothingburgers and the associated breathless commentary about them.
(Not detected at this post, which is not the least bit over the top).
Omnes Omnibus
How do we feel about Doug Jones? Here is his take. https://twitter.com/dougjones/status/1549239206278418432?s=21&t=JAW0XEBDNhfUysE2lgBwhA
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Betty Cracker:
“weak powers”? I think that’s an overstatement (or an understatement? I’m falling through a looking-glass thinking about it). And whatever the relative weakness of their powers, I think it’s made up for by their not being bound by the rules of evidence and the adversarial nature of actual legal and judicial procedures.
For example, a lot of people are all aghast that, it appears, that the DoJ didn’t have Cassidy Hutchinson’s revised testimony before the public hearing. She changed her story– chose to say more than she was legally obliged to might be a better way to put it– because (per reporting) her conscience got to her, because she developed a personal rapport with Liz Cheney, and she fired the lawyer that the trumpies were paying for.
IANAL, but having watched a great deal of television over the last half century, and I believe that a witness like that, in a formal interview with the DOJ, she would have a lawyer objecting to pretty much every question, and would have carefully coached her to say as little as possible in response.
Which leads me back to a musing I had yesterday whilst listening to accounts of Bannon’s trial starting: Couldn’t he have saved himself a lot of money and aggravation, and been just as much as a martyr to his marks, by going into the Committee and just saying “Fifth” over and over again like Flynn? Lawyers?
Sure Lurkalot
My concern beyond TFG is the contempt for subpoenas and referrals whereby the bad actors continue to have their venues and spew their BS far and wide. It also lays bare that the rule of law is different for the well connected as Mr. Wilhoit’s maxim so patently expresses.
CaseyL
DoJ is also dealing with someone who’s been Mob-affiliated most of his life, was mentored by Roy Cohn, and knows how to establish plausible deniability better then he knows how to use a toilet.
Trump’s Mob (and Giuliani’s, for that matter, though his mob is the Russian variety) is also why the J6 Committee is being very protective of its witnesses.
schrodingers_cat
Shorter BC (and she is pretty representative of leftie media (legacy media and social media))
Biden is OLD and stupid. And Merrick Garland is a wimp.
Biden is old and wise, he didn’t become President by being stupid. He is also fit for his age and has several legislative achievements under his belt with a razor thin majority.
Tony G
@Grover Gardner: Good points but — in my opinion — the pro-Trump cult will not change their behavior on the basis of anything that happens in the real world. They are cut off from reality; they live in their own world. Facts and logic mean nothing to them. Many of them are evangelical religious fanatics, and those who are not have their own Trump/MAGA religion. Trump should be indicted, prosecuted and tried and, if possible, convicted and sentenced — because that is the right, lawful, thing to do. That should happen regardless of how the Trump cult might react.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@CaseyL:
I’m looking for the like button to give you five points just for that
feebog
Routine memo that goes out in some form or another in any election year. What’s different is the citation of the “Barr rule”, which as Betty pointed out is not, in and of itself, a bad thing. In my view this only affects one investigation we know about; Matt Gaetz. Greenberg was due to be sentenced in May and somewhat mysteriously his sentencing was postponed to December 1, 2022. So no Matt Gaetz indictment before the November election, but maybe an early holiday gift for all of us.
Hoodie
My sense is that, if you can get him to prosecute, Garland will get a conviction. However, some people seem to discount the effect of a failed Trump prosecution. You go after him with criminal charges, you need to win. There is a lot that several million bucks and the best defense counsel can do to prevent that from happening. Not to mention getting a hung jury or a bad judge. Maybe garland thinks it’s better to let him get convicted by public opinion by the 1/6 commission, then indict him later on lesser charges and let him spend the rest of his miserable life fighting in court while he watches the GOP move on. That and prosecute the shit out of underlings to make ambitious strivers think twice about going along with a guy like Trump. Tim Miller had some interesting insight on the psychology of the GOP functionaries ((his friends) that went full MAGA, bottom line is that there has to be a certain clarification of risk and reward for these careerist types that enable the Trumps of the world.
brantl
WE HAVE A WINNER!!!!!!!!! This is where we started letting the assholes completely off the hook, and now is the time for it to stop, completely and finally! Thanks, Frank!
piratedan
@Another Scott: understood, but it sure as fuck is maddening when the the other side is busy rewriting the rules, tilting the playing field and bribing the refs.
some of us get a tad disheartened thinking that perhaps the spirit of the game itself as a fair and honest competition is somehow in question when your not even sure that the supposedly impartial observer is actually… you know, observing.
jonas
I think Garland appreciates the significance of potentially indicting an ex-president, particularly an ex-president who commands a legion of very loyal, very violent followers. He must be accountable to the law, however, and the law does not tolerate launching an insurrection to overturn a legal election. That’s the bottom line. It sounds to me like Garland is going above and beyond to get his ducks in a row and appear as non-partisan and reluctant as possible before lowering the boom. Maybe I’m wrong, but I remember, too that he prosecuted both Timothy McVeigh and Eric Randolph, so he knows the taste and smell of radical white nationalist flesh.
lowtechcyclist
I think the Dems need to fund the DOJ through 2024 in the current reconciliation bill.
I’m willing to accept that it takes time to investigate the insurrection properly and make sure you can get convictions, so I don’t want the Rethugs to be in a position to deny funding to the investigation if they should gain control of either house of Congress in November. Because they’d do that in a heartbeat.
Betty Cracker
@Another Scott: As you say, “We’ll see!”
It’s not a particular animus toward Garland that makes me wonder if justice will be served; elite DC lawyers/judges seem to have faith in institutions (and the way things have always been done) that serves them well in some instances and poorly in others.
I mean, look how many left-of-center DC lawyers told us Barr wouldn’t be a corrupt toady or that Amy Coney Barrett’s personal fanaticism wouldn’t color her rulings. Sometimes their instincts about when we’re through the looking glass are off.
CaseyL
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Kinda proud of that one myself
Betty Cracker
@schrodingers_cat: Looks like reading comprehension really isn’t your thing, but you’re good at math, so you’ve got that going for you!
sab
@Aurona: Hard to do that since the government killed Tim McVeigh after Garland got hm convicted of capital crimes.
zhena gogolia
@jonas: like button
schrodingers_cat
@Betty Cracker: Of course that is the go to insult of Balloon Juice front pagers for me when I don’t agree with their takes. Because yes everyone has to think like a white leftist.
My reading comprehension is just fine as is my English.
zhena gogolia
@sab: I think that was the joke. Like in Hamilton, I’m super dead
Ruckus
@Nicole:
This country elected exactly the wrong, the worst person for the job.
That person was/is/hopefully never will be any official, ever again, that person is trump. A gold digging, mindless ass of human being, whose only goal and only skill is being one of the worst human beings on the planet.
Almost everything goes wrong when he’s in charge. And goes wrong in the worst way. Two and a half centuries of at least attempting to be the best country in the world, sometimes getting there and sometimes losing the script, gone in 4 yrs. Because of one man with shit for brains and greed as his only motivational process. He isn’t Scrooge McDuck, he makes Scrooge look grand in comparison. He’s a time bomb of stupid, greed and veniality. If he wasn’t a chickenshit he’d have been far worse. He blew up the country and didn’t do the world any favors either.
Baud
Back to the memo, I agree with this.
Especially as it relates to Trump, can you imagine if DOJ indicted him and Garland told Congress he didn’t sign off on it? It’s inconceivable.
ian
@Another Scott:
Thank you. This is the part I think of every time I hear ‘Merrick Garland is failing us’. If the prosecution fails, TFG turns around and uses the failed prosecution as ‘proof’ that the deep state is out to get him, and that the whole ‘swamp is corrupt’ The optics of a failed prosecution are as bad or worse than the slow drip of no prosecution.
I believe it was Ralph Waldo Emerson who said “When you strike at the king, you must kill him’.
Chief Oshkosh
@Another Scott:
People keep bringing this up. I don’t see how it helps support the contention that this previous Garland success indicates likelier success in pursuing justice against the J6 insurrection ilk. It shows that he’s careful and conscientious. OK, sure. That’s a given for success in this arena and I’m glad that he has or had those qualities.
But…compared to what’s being revealed by the J6 Committee already (with possibly more to come), the OKC bombing investigation and trial seems extremely simple. Hell, McVeigh almost seemed to WANT to be caught, prosecuted, and found guilty — he wanted to be martyred. That combined with the relative resources at hand almost assured a conviction.
I don’t think anyone thinks that Trump or any one of the dozens of his minions want to be martyrs. And there is an entire political party and movement that will do everything in its considerable power to throw sand in the gears, making the ratio of resources-to-challenge way worse than the OKC bombing case.
And as much as some don’t want to admit it, there is an expiry date to all of this, unlike the OKC case.
In the end, and FWIW (which isn’t much), I agree with Betty: the concern shown by Adam Schiff and others at that level also makes me concerned. I’m sure my hand-wringing will alter the outcome, so I’ll keep wringing! ;)
Jim, Foolish Literalist
I did not know that. And all the rest that you and Scott and Hoodie said, also, too.
Starfish
I think everyone is experiencing a lot of stress. After all the “Muller will fix it” stuff that never came to fruition, it is okay to feel a little depleted when it comes to hope and optimism.
However, today I am inspired because my FIL is a registered Republican in Georgia who is very excited about Stacy Abrams and tries to vote against the bad guys in the Republican primaries even if the bad guys win. He voted for Kemp over Walker.
Baud
@Starfish:
Old School
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
IANAL, but it seems most of the evidence has been video of the insurrection and people testifying over what they saw/heard. Why would those not be admissible in a criminal court or is something else being referred to?
PAM Dirac
@Another Scott:
Yes he did. And all the time he was working through the details, McVeigh was sitting in jail. It would have been a VERY different situation if McVeigh was still going around bombing things. I have no reason to doubt his integrity or competence as a prosecutor, but I do have my doubts that he understands how scared people are that this will turn out to be another example of how protecting the privileged is more important that justice for all.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
this really was some irresponsible bloviating by Maddow. Reminiscent of the time she claimed to have trump’s taxes and it was one page from more than twenty years ago, but will do more to stir up discord and confusion
Paul in KY
@Betty Cracker: In general, one shouldn’t make too much about what lawyers say about people who they could either be arguing a case in front of or their clients could be indicted by.
Maybe, unless they are under oath or you are paying them for their professional opinions, you shouldn’t make too much about what any particular lawyer might say :-)
oatler
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: She likes to tease out the lead story up to the brokerage commercial.
sab
@zhena gogolia: I know. I was doing an ETA that got timed out.
Burnspbesq
@Aurona:
Agreed, but I don’t have a working Ouija board.
Betty Cracker
@schrodingers_cat: You know what? I’m not getting into it with you. It’s pointless. Have a nice day!
Kent
The memo actually seems like legitimate policy. It doesn’t say they won’t investigate candidates, only that doing so requires top DOJ clearance.
Imagine the following scenario. In September 2024 a rogue FBI unit sympathetic to Trump opens up a new Hunter Biden investigation based on nothing. But the decide to investigate some sort of Alex Jones fever rantings anyway. This new investigation conveniently and deliberately gets leaked to Fox News (because that was the whole point anyway) and the right wing media carnival show goes absolutely ape shit about the new Biden corruption investigation.
That is what you DON’T want to happen, and that is why investigations of political candidates should require top DOJ clearance. It doesn’t mean you don’t investigate and prosecute Trump as that sort of decision is going to come from the top anyway, and not some regional assistant US attorney in New York or something.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Old School: found the video, and as far as I can tell he just says “a lot that we’re seeing in the January 6 committee is not admissable“, but the evidence is growing more and more compelling, but it “hasn’t been tested”
ETA: also says that trump’s phone call does not rise to witness tampering because there was no actual contact between The Beast and the witness, which makes sense
kindness
At this point it doesn’t matter when Garland were to charge Trump with a crime. Right wing media (and the MSM) would howl that it was somehow political interference with an election, one two years away no less. Sadly the MSM would repeat that endlessly.
So screw them Garland. Indict the criminal and put him in the jail cell he belongs in. Do I have faith he’ll do it? No, but I think he will.
sab
I personally think that if Maddow wasn’t gay she would be Republican.
Centrist, but Republican. A lot like my mom, who died a while back.
Baud
@Kent:
What I’m gathering is that Twitter has a less sober take on this.
Baud
@kindness:
???
Scout211
I know I am naive and all that, but I really want my unity pony.
Warning: this is a meta comment.
Criticizing other Democrats for not being your kind of Democrat is just criticizing Democrats, IMHO. Do we really need more of that right now? Ever?
Disagreeing is fine and good, but criticizing with name calling and subtle personal smears when opinions differ is not good. IMHO.
I think I may just order a pie today. My first!
Leto
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: well that’s 1 more page than Congress ever received.
gvg
@brantl: We started letting them off the hook after the civil war….but yes I do think that the Nixon pardon was bad.
Ruckus
@Betty Cracker:
“It’s not a particular animus toward Garland that makes me wonder if justice will be served; elite DC lawyers/judges seem to have faith in institutions (and the way things have always been done) that serves them well in some instances and poorly in others.”
They work within the walls of those institutions, within the structure, it’s the world they know. But if the institutions are not set up to actually do the job – the structure is too rigid to foresee all the bumps, twists and turns in it’s path and has to foresee someone like SFB actually getting elected. I hate to say it but even Nixon wasn’t as bad as SFB but he got caught playing outside the rules and knew it. SFB has played outside the rules so often and gotten away with it because of money, his vapid stupidity, plain luck, and not being an elected official, that he thinks it’s normal. I just don’t think anyone ever imagined someone as vile, dumb, outside any norm, as SFB getting elected president. But a lot of people in this country see what he is as a good thing, because they want all the things he wants.
Jackie
‘@Omnes Omnibus: Doug has such a calm, reassuring demeanor. Love his techie frustration – that, in its own way – is also calming! He’s a human!
I agree with and trust his expertise.
Butch
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: Prob’ly too late for you to see my response, but I always did like her description of “Judge” Jeanine Pirro as “a box of whine.”
Betty Cracker
@Paul in KY: That makes sense, but why weigh in at all? I’m recalling some fancy lawyer on CNN or MSNBC assuring us Barr would be better than the bullet-headed hot tub salesman he replaced as Trump’s AG. He was much worse! Blind faith in the people who run in their same elite circles really does seem to be a thing.
comrade scotts agenda of rage
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Omar said it best:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6l_9reaLz0
The Thin Black Duke
@sab: Remember how chummy Rachel was with “Uncle” Pat?
SFAW
@ian:
Actually, Emerson borrowed it (without attribution) from Omar Little.
ETA: Damn! Too late again. [Shakes fist ineffectually at comrade scott.]
Haydnseek
@Butch: Yes, she is the one to consult when looking for a fine Cardbordeax, (full disclosure, not my line but some other jackal.)
Burnspbesq
This is your periodic reminder about Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, aka the “grand jury secrecy rules.” Every Federal lawyer is indoctrinated about the inviolability of this rule starting about five minutes after they get their ID photo taken (been there, done that: I didn’t spend much of my time at IRS Chief Counsel advising the Criminal Investigation Division, but I got called on a few times).
Also too, Fani Wills doesn’t report to Garland.
Paul in KY
@sab: She is a multi-millionaire. Once you have that kind of coin, there are legitimate (if selfish) reasons to vote Republican (IMO).
sab
@The Thin Black Duke: Yes I do remember. So maybe not as centrist as my mom was. Mom detested Pat.
Ruckus
@Chief Oshkosh:
“But…compared to what’s being revealed by the J6 Committee already (with possibly more to come), the OKC bombing investigation and trial seems extremely simple. Hell, McVeigh almost seemed to WANT to be caught, prosecuted, and found guilty — he wanted to be martyred. That combined with the relative resources at hand almost assured a conviction.”
OKC was simple in comparison. In reality SFB didn’t do this alone, he’s incapable. So there are a lot of moving pieces here. The crime is not a robbery, the crime is attempting to overthrowing a government. It has a hell of a lot of moving, living parts. And the Jan 6 committee is not a court of law, it is an investigative body, searching for truth in a political world. We also have to remember what and how the moving parts work. This country has never seen this before, all of this is untested ground. Ground designed by failable humans, ground that has to work and seems to be. But this is a big case, that has to be built in front of the largest jury in the world, the US population. I think it’s going pretty damn good so far.
schrodingers_cat
Yes I do know, that saying good old someone or the other doesn’t mean that you are pointing to their age. But Biden’s age has been a stick to beat him with by his detractors. Making memes about his senility etc.
BC is a fine wordsmith that she chose the above expression is telling. YMMV.
MisterDancer
One of the best quotes from the TV show THE WIRE is about the stupidity of taking notes on a criminal conspiracy.
Another is about how, if you come at the King, you best not miss.
Even as this DoJ is reaping the benefits from criminals unable to avoid the first quote, they have to avoid falling into the trap the second quote represents.
And worse, because — bluntly — putting Trump in jail is a worthy effort, yet won’t fix our society. People like Abbot and DeSantis have learned ugly lessons from Trump. Those fights — which Garland can’t fight for us — are what we need to focus on. With all respect to Schiff and many, many other very smart people about many things, I fear they are looking at this from a very myopic viewpoint, and not the broader effort to defuse and disband the elements of Cryptofacist White Supremacy that is the work in front of us, now.
Trump in jail only helps that a bit. That’s not a “no, don’t prosecute,” to be clear! But it is a recognition that prosecuting Trump doesn’t magically fix the “rule of law.” Hell, even convicting him doesn’t patch the hole in our body politic he and his minions have and are driving thru us, right now.
We, the People, have to heal that wound. And that is, I acknowledge, a very, very hard thing to do in this moment.
SFAW
@Ruckus:
In fairness, there used to be a willingness (on Rethugs’ part) to hold them to account as was the case with Nixon (who was not especially well-loved by elected Rs). But now, elected Rs don’t just allow rule-breaking (for lack of a better term), they encourage (or at least cheer ex post facto for) it — as long as doing so hurts Dems or other groups they hate.
sab
@Paul in KY: She was what she is before she got rich.
Paul in KY
@gvg: The whole Iran-Contra whitewash was sickening. That one was very corrosive as well. I’m getting mad just thinking about it! Fucking North & that SOB Poindexter & goddam Eliot Abrams!! Grrr!!
comrade scotts agenda of rage
@SFAW:
GMTA.
oatler
Saw this on Joe My God:
https://www.joemygod.com/2022/07/liar-melts-down-over-colbert-charges-being-dropped/
On second thought not . I think BJ does not get along with my browser and gifs
Paul in KY
@Betty Cracker: Because they wanted to get it out there (on tape) that they personally were not trashing them. Maybe, I guess…
dww44
@Betty Cracker:
Yep. It didn’t take long to figure out that Sessions had far more respect for the rule of law and was less likely to bend it to suit his own or Trump’s ends than his successor. I was kinda surprised that Barr actually stood up for the Constitution and our institutions in his J6 testimony. Curious about what events or persons eventually got to him. Don’t believe it was his own principled character that did it.
Soprano2
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: Co-sign. Every week I contemplate unsubscribing, but I enjoy the guests. The rest is sometimes hard to listen to.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
OT: Not counting any chickens, but…
I can’t believe Abbott didn’t go to a single funeral (I wouldn’t want him at a loved one’s funeral under these or any circumstances, I wouldn’t even want a pol I liked at a funeral, but I suspect at least some family members would’ve welcomed him), and hasn’t been back to Uvalde.
Soprano2
@Nicole: I think the Jan. 6 committee would have to disband regardless since it’ll be a new Congress with new committees. Doesn’t mean a Dem House couldn’t have a new Jan. 6 committee.
sab
@dww44: He wanted to retain his law license. Only constraint on him.
Another Scott
@gvg: I thought it started with the Whiskey Rebellion??
Cheers,
Scott.
sab
@Soprano2: Biden will still control DOJ.
Ruckus
@Betty Cracker:
“Blind faith in the people who run in their same elite circles really does seem to be a thing.”
They like their elite circles. They are used to their elite circles. They see a lot to like in others in their circles. They wouldn’t be in the circle if they didn’t like it. We all do it. It’s human nature.
Paul in KY
@sab: Point taken.
Josie
@MisterDancer: So true and beautifully written.
SFAW
@zhena gogolia:
Maybe pull funding from the DOJ? I don’t know if that’s even possible, just throwing out random what-if/speculation.
Betty Cracker
@dww44: Right? A literal walking Confederate monument! Barr’s J6 testimony tells me his circle figures Trump is over, so now they’re in reputation rehab mode. It certainly couldn’t have been concern about the integrity of the institution, which Barr violated repeatedly during his tenure.
trollhattan
I know at least one Russian athlete who won’t be dining with Vlad, Jill Stein and Michael Flynn.
PAM Dirac
@MisterDancer:
I agree with everything you say, but I think holding Trump and minions accountable is a necessary (but not a sufficient) step in the process. If having enough money or having enough followers that will turn to violence makes the elite above the law, then there is no hope in working to elect people who will change the laws.
Alison Rose
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: I want Beto to add “that skinny motherfucker” to his Twitter bio.
trollhattan
@Betty Cracker: “I shall have it both ways until such time as I discover that I cannot. Today is not that time.”
Something like that. He got away with being an errand boy for Ken Starr, so has already proved stench can be washed off.
Paul in KY
@Another Scott: Plus VP Burr! Don’t forget ole Aaron.
raven
We just were interviewed by the reporter who did the newspaper story on Artie when she was saved!
dww44
@J R in WV:
If we could fix this power for money and vice-versa in our politics, I think our democracy just might be working for the everyday person. Make money less important and make politicians pay for accepting bribes, no matter how removed they may seem.
I’ve never believed in term limits, but just maybe it’s time to experiment with them. No more than, say,3 terms as a Senator. Give em 18 years and do the same for the Congressional Reps and for Justices all up and down the federal system.
Betty Cracker
@sab: Maddow was also known to have an occasional lunch with Roger Ailes before he kicked the bucket. (Personally, I think it’s near Q-level daft to accuse Maddow of being a stealth conservative, but if you’re going with that theory, you might as well have all the evidence.)
AWOL
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: Her mommy wrote sexy books for lonely humans, that’s how.
Soprano2
@Paul in KY: And the Christmas Eve midnight pardons that got Poppy Bush off the hook for it all. I think the pardon of Nixon was wrong and had a corrosive effect on our politics. It’s why the Reagan people thought they could get away with Iran-Contra (and mostly they were right about that!).
vatoloco
@oatler: More like a knight in shining armor.
raven
@Soprano2: But they did, didn’t they?
Paul in KY
@Alison Rose : I hope he does! Take that grudging compliment and make some hay with it.
Elizabelle
@raven: Will you put up both stories when the new one is published? Yay for Artie, rescue media celebrity spokesdog.
Leto
@Betty Cracker: our blog has it’s own levels of Q-level daftness, and it especially comes out when Maddow is brought up.
lowtechcyclist
@brantl:
To get equally bold and caps, I TOTALLY FUCKING DISAGREE. Indicting and sentencing everyone from G. Gordon Liddy all the way up to Haldeman, Ehrlichmann, and Mitchell, wasn’t “letting the assholes completely off the hook.”
Ford’s pardon let one asshole off the hook. Yeah, it was the wrong decision, but you’re not going to get very far with your criming without henchmen, and all the President’s henchmen did real time.
And I’ll still contend, as I have for 48 years, that Congress should have finished the job and impeached and convicted Nixon even after his resignation. The nearly unanimous vote of both houses of Congress would have pre-empted decades of bullshit about how he was ‘hounded from office,’ regardless of whether he was prosecuted.
The decision to not prosecute Nixon also wasn’t an institutional decision. It was Ford’s, and Ford’s alone. The Special Prosecutor was ready. What’s worrisome about the current situation are the hints of institutional reluctance on the part of DOJ to tackle the suits, let alone the President.
I’ll tell you who really let all the assholes off the hook: George Herbert Walker Bush, the so-called ‘good’ Bush, with his Christmas 1992 pardon of the entire Iran-Contra crew. Since then, it’s hard to think of anyone important who’s spent more than a couple weeks in jail, regardless of the crime.
Soprano2
@raven: That’s why I added mostly they were right. Guess you didn’t see my edit. It was disgraceful how they got away with that whole scheme, especially selling arms to Iranians, who were supposed to be our sworn enemies. People couldn’t be bothered to be outraged by that.
raven
@Elizabelle: Let’s see how it is, I think they will be naming names and, even though I way over share photos, I’m not sure about that! Here’s the first one.
Ruckus
@SFAW:
This is true. But I contend that R’s were just better at it a while back, when there weren’t quite as many TV cameras focused upon them. My congressperson, a very long time ago was a member of the John Burch Society, and yet he managed to be a decent congressperson for all his constituents. In this day and age a lot of right wing congresspeople are seeing their side lose the edge. They elected SFB for president, how’d that work out? The polls show them getting their asses handed to them, how’s that going to go over if it is actually true? They are having to play the game of hurt children here because acting any other way shows them to be who they really are. It is also who they really are but still, it’s not a good look.
This is a very difficult time for a democracy. We have to show that it can work, to stop the people who would like to undermine it and get away from being a democracy because their demands do not fit into a democracy. They want what would be loosely (and also tightly) described as a kleptocracy.
HumboldtBlue
RaflW
Related to this thread (eta: and HumboldtBlue): WTF is going on at the Secret Service.
They’re now claiming that the deleted J6 texts are completely gone. No backups? Not retrievable via forensics (tbf I don’t know what level of this has been attempted to date)?
This stinks of corruption. Dir. Murray was sworn in in 2019. What’s his background? Who are his people, and what bullsh*t is he up to?
Paul in KY
@Soprano2: Yup. GHWXYZPOS Bush was a real scumwad too. Had personal bravery for piloting off a carrier (will give him that), but a corrupt, lying craptoid as well.
Leto
@raven: They did. Only 1 person out of the 11 who were indicted served time; some of the convictions were vacated on appeal, but the rest were pardoned by Pappy Bush. And it’s not like those convicted were going to serve prison time. Most of them were sentenced to probation. Only 1 person served time (16 months) and it was because he failed to declare the full amount of his profits to the IRS for his 85/86 tax returns. Low man on the totem pole gets stuck holding the bag of shit, as usual.
I know nothing sends a stronger message than probation. Tsk tsk!
Paul in KY
@RaflW: If the phone itself has a hard drive or memory chip of some type, usually the data is still there, unless it has been overwritten by some other non-deleted data. Fill up the drive completely with other data and it is gone, as the other data overwrites it.
trollhattan
@lowtechcyclist:
The case of William Calley comes to mind.
https://www.lawfareblog.com/when-presidents-intervene-behalf-war-criminals
Leto
@HumboldtBlue: just going to say, ofc they broke the law. Just like Trumpov broke the law every time he shredded documents and they had to have two people manually try to piece shit back together (and still didn’t recover everything). Or when Trumpov took 13+ boxes of records with him to Shit-a-lago. Just like they broke the law when they refused to hand over his tax records. And guess what the consequences will be?
raven
@Leto: Did you see “The Invisible Pilot” on HBO? It’s a bit uneven but this dude was flying the guns in Contra!
HumboldtBlue
Emmanuel has let the fame get to his head
MisterDancer
And throwing Trump in jail fixes this…how?
In other words, do you think DeSantis would see Trump in jail as anything other than a green flag for his Presidential ambitions? And Trump’s failures as anything but object lessons on how to evade the DoJ, along the way?
Keep in mind that DeSantis already is hiring for his own little army.
That said: There is always hope. I keep pointing out I come from a group that, 100 years ago, people saw as without any hope for being treated as real citizens, in America. And as much as these asshats wanna use wankers like Injustice Thomas and Two-Faced Walker to roll back my rights?
I’m planning to, you know, fight. And that fight has very little to do with whatever Garland chooses to do, or not, just as it did for the Suffragettes, or Abolitionists, or the Union/Labor folx…I can go on.
Paul in KY
@Leto: You know what I think is whack here is that they didn’t have a DOD approved shredder! After the Iranians spent months piecing back together our shredded docs, we changed our shredders (this is back in 1983) to shred the documents to dust. There is no piecing back together a document that went thru one of those. Yet they still had the BS ones that make the document into long strips of paper.
Scout211
@RaflW: I am not a tech person, but I’ve read several articles in the past week that have said forensics experts can retrieve deleted texts and in criminal cases, under subpoena. I don’t expect the Secret Service to cooperate, but until a forensics expert tries and fails to retrieve the texts, I am skeptical that they are purged.
https://www.npr.org/2022/07/15/1111778878/secret-service-deleted-messages-january-6-is-that-data-really-gone
On the other hand, this would presumably be a crime:
HumboldtBlue
@Leto:
Your guess is as sobering as mine, I suspect.
PJ
@HumboldtBlue:
@Paul in KY:
Though the content of texts may not be available, the surrounding data may be: https://www.computerworld.com/article/2471232/how-long-does-your-mobile-phone-provider-store-data-for-law-enforcement-access.html
trollhattan
@Paul in KY: Is text data not stored on the network rather than the phone itself? IDK myself, but know my lengthy conversations roll over at 100 messages and seem perpetually present.
HumboldtBlue
@PJ:
Interesting, thanks.
trollhattan
@HumboldtBlue: I do not see how this meme ever gets old.
Baud
DougJ made the reddit front page!
https://www.reddit.com/r/WhitePeopleTwitter/comments/w2rxt9/its_gonna_get_worse_yall/?sort=confidence
Baud
@Scout211: i too sometimes see a professional when I’m desperate.
danielx
@Ruckus:
Help me out – SFB?
Paul in KY
@trollhattan: My experience is more with desktop computers. I know about nothing about the mechanics of a smartphone. I thought they might be like a little computer.
Edmund Dantes
@gvg: it’s on the dead thread. But wanted to post here for you too.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/354638/approval-interracial-marriage-new-high.aspx
mid 90’s is when it crossed 50% for first time
HumboldtBlue
@Baud:
Nice!
@trollhattan:
Oh hell no, she has exploded in popularity. She tweeted today that her popularity has grown so fast that she’s reeling and struggling to handle it because her manager dropped her a few weeks ago. If there are smart talent managers out there, this whole gig is a gold mine.
lowtechcyclist
They could certainly put a clause in the appropriations bill requiring that not a dime go to efforts to investigate anyone who worked at or visited the White House anytime between the election and January 7th, ditto anyone who was on the Capitol grounds on January 6th.
And they could refuse to pass any funding for the government without that clause in it.
This is why the reconciliation bill that Congress is currently considering should fully fund DOJ through the end of 2024.
Paul in KY
@danielx: Slimy Fucking Bastard? Works for me!
Baud
@danielx:
SFB = Shit for Brains = TFG
MisterDancer
Not really, if this article from a decade ago is still correct. Correcting my reading, only one Telco keeps actual text data, and that only for less than a week.
Plus, it’s unclear if Goverment-owned devices are subject to these retention policies. So I would not hold your breath that Verizon, say, would have these texts; although the metadata (who sent to whom when) might still be accessible.
Kristine
My own bs hypothesis, which is mine and belongs to me, is that MG knows he gets one swing of the bat and unless the case is a slamdunk that can survive repeated appeals, he won’t prosecute.
My own feeling is that Trump declared not guilty is way more dangerous than Trump not prosecuted.
Yes, I know if this USSC remains the same, any conviction is at risk.
Leto
@Paul in KY: I have firsthand experience with those shredders. The amount of after cleaning you have to do it quite a bit. It absolutely turns everything to dust, but it’s time consuming and there’s still bits that get hung up inside the machine. And then we still take that pulp and burn it. At least at my location we did.
Thing with all the Executive Branch records is that, I believe, most of them are to be saved. They’re part of the administration’s official documents. Circling back to a topic we spoke about a few days ago, LBJs official documents (the amount of boxes) was the size of a football field. Robert Caro said it covered that area. I think that also covered his entire career, I’m not quit remembering it correctly, but still all that shit was kept. I think that’s why we “joke” that Trumpov’s library will simply consist of his Tweets and his shitty book. That’s it.
It’s also just one more instance of him breaking the law and nothing being done about it.
Scout211
From that linked NPR article npr
The forensics expert:
C Stars
Random question for a long open thread: Anyone ever been swimming in lake Geneva in Wisconsin? Is it pleasant or icky? Looking at a rental house that doesn’t have a pool but is lakeside. We will have a bunch of wiggly kids/teenagers with us who will need to swim.
different-church-lady
The fact that Maddow is on our side does not obviate the fact that she is a cable news pundit.
patrick II
My approach would have been very different from the one Joe Biden through Merrick Garland has implemented. Joe ran on the “we can all get along” platform, the rest of the Republicans are different from Trump. Joe has known them for years.
That worked for the campaign and he is president. But as soon as Jan 6 happened, there should have been a new tone. This is a fucking big deal. Publicly hire or transfer FBI agents to specifically work on the insurrection, (if you can) appoint more judges to hear the cases, grand juries. Etc. In other words, make it a big deal because it is a big deal. The way it had been going until the amazing House hearing had been a diminishment of the gravity of Trump’s treason over time and Republican lies and Biden’s, through Garland, lassitude.
I had been wondering whether Garland was like the duck paddling like crazy underwater but unseen because the work is all unseen. The hearings have removed hope for that. For the most part, the hearing witnesses have not even been questioned by anyone from justice, and also in the NYTimes story the other day, they mentioned that the evidence during the hearings against Trump was actually mentioned by prosecutors with Garland in attendance — as if that was a big deal that it had finally happened and had been verboten up until now. That is not the outlook of a President or Justice department that is taking this seriously enough.
artem1s
Sorry but I’m finding Schiff to be less and less credible in his criticisms of Garland. As a former prosecutor he should understand the need for the DOJ to be far more prepared and thorough than a hearing committee needs to be. Also, where the hell does he think all the prep work came from so the J6 Hearing Committed knew who to focus their interviews on? The DOJ has done all the heavy lifting so far with very little credit for the pure investigative work needed for a Hearing, let alone a trial. Garland doesn’t get to offer up an uncontested, redacted and edited dog and pony show for the cameras the way Liz has.
When Schiff has to present a case in court and allow the defense time to present THEIR case too, then he might be a little more understanding of what the DOJ is having to deal with (see Bannon jury selection).
For those who are tired of the Twitter Whinging want to read about what the DOJ is actually accomplishing, I’ve found EmptyWheel to be a pretty good review of facts.
Leto
@Scout211: Part of the way the military wipes drives is 1) we have professional machines that do that and 2) a hammer. A hammer wipes it permanently. My question is, wtf are those phones? Hand over the old phones. Did you keep them? Did you toss them? How did they handle the disposal (because ofc we have regulations governing the disposal of equipment)? Can’t recover the old information? Fine. Give me the phones.
Hardheaded Liberal
Garland’s DOJ has been building cases painstakingly for over a year, but you can only see the evidence if you’ve read all/most of the voluminous documents filed in the 850+ prosecutions in federal courts. @emptywheel – Marcy Wheeler – has read all this material on PACER (online public access to federal court filings).
As a retired civil rights lawyer, I recommend that all jackals read @emptywheel if you want reports & forecasts based on facts, rather than celebrities (including Schiff) who know just enough about what DOJ is doing to be dangerous to your mental health.
the legal case Liz Cheney has laid out in the J6C hearings, emphasizing “obstruction of an official proceeding” (Congress’s tabulation & acceptance of the Electoral vote count on Jan 6) is exactly the theory that DOJ has built on for its most serious felony prosecutions. Felony prosecutions require proof, & the 140 line prosecutors on these Jan 6 cases have been accumulating dozens of cooperation agreements from rioters – including Proud Boys & Oath Keepers & III%ers – to get testimony from them against key organizers of the coup. The cooperating witnesses include “bodyguards” for Roger Stone & others, & some of these “bodyguards” we’re at the Willard Hotel command center when the riot was going on at the Capitol.
Will TFG be indicted or convicted? Too early to say. But the difference is impressive between the damning details we know now & the sketchy story we had in the second impeachment hearing. The new picture is a result of a huge amount of work by DOJ, as well as the J6C, online citizen sleuths who scoured the web for social media & other images to put names & addresses on the faces of rioters, & both MSM & Independent journalists who have kept digging for months.
This comment is already too long, but I do want to add some compelling examples. (1) Cassidy Hutchinson – why didn’t DOJ interview her? If they didn’t, probably because her Trump paid mouthpiece, Passatino, was stonewalling if DOJ made overtures. As soon as she switched to Jody Hunt, apparently a Republican lawyer who retains his integrity, he put her in touch with J6C – both as a patriot, & as a step that would likely insulate her from being investigated criminally herself.
(2) Seizure of digital devices (& online accounts) of Rudy Giuliani, Joe DiGenova, Victoria Toensing, ProudBoy chair Enrique Tarrio & probably others started over a year ago, & DOJ has methodically worked through the technical process of getting the contents reviewed to protect any attor-client privileged material. NOW all these materials are finally available to DOJ to use in prosecutions without creating obvious grounds for suppressing evidence at trialor for appeals if convictions.
Those of us who follow @emptywheel know all this nitty-gritty detail. Neither Rachel Maddow, or Andrew Weissman, or Adam Schiff mentions any of these encouraging details – all of which are from public court records.
Buddhists encourage us to avoid suffering by letting go of outcomes. But recognizing we can’t control the outcome doesn’t extinguish Hope. DON’T GIVE UP HOPE!!
UncleEbeneezer
Marcy Wheeler also compiled a list of all the DOJ activity with regards to Trump and 1/6. There are currently investigations of: Fake Electors, Capitol Storming, Fundraising for Stop the Steal, attempt to install Jeffrey Clark as AG, mishandling of documents. All active investigations focusing on: Bannon, Rudy, Stone, Jones, Tarrio, Clark, Powell, Eastman, Meadows etc. All of them with direct ties to Trump and a whole lot of potential charges for him depending on what they find. They have Eastman’s phone, Rudy’s phones, Clark’s phone, Several Oathkeeper phones, Alex Jones’ Sidekick’s phone, the Friends-of-Stone group chat. Cooperation from Oathkeepers/Proud Boys. Many of the phones only recently got legal or tech access (it took months for some of them). All of this stuff points to Trump and he damn well knows it. He knows that DOJ is proceeding steadily and that he may be charged because of it. He literally is telling people that. DOJ told us they are working from the easy stuff and then to more complex conspiracies. Everything we’ve seen aligns with that.
This memo looks like a boilerplate reminder of official policy. Like a reminder that vacation requests must be authorized by your supervisor. Given that we just watched testimony that a middling DOJ official (Clark) tried to bypass his superior (Rosenstein) in an effort to steal an election, this seems like a pretty good and relevant policy to me. It also will prevent MAGA dudes at DOJ from bringing indictments against Biden or whoever on a lark.
Twitter loves panic and anti-Dem doom posting. Russia is happy to help. Too many people are taking the bait. It’s like watching Hillary’s Emails all over again and it’s just depressing.
Leto
@raven: that’s insane! So this happened last weekend, but here’s a video of some of the planes arrivals. I used to coordinate the communication requirements for this event during my last active duty stint in England (did it from 2014-2016). There are quite a few cool paint schemes.
RIAT 2022 Best of Thursday Arrivals Day
schrodingers_cat
@Hardheaded Liberal: Thanks for sharing your expertise and your well reasoned and lengthy comment. I appreciate it.
schrodingers_cat
@UncleEbeneezer: Teri Kanefield is also another good lawyer to follow on Twitter.
FWIW I don’t think Maddow is a closet conservative but she is a media figure. And controversy sells and so does bashing Democrats in our political mediascape. It brings both engagement and $$$.
Butch
@C Stars: That’s my home town. The lake is spring fed so it never gets really warm, but it’s pleasant swimming.
HumboldtBlue
piratedan
@schrodingers_cat: true that, shit even on MSNBC during any given week, you’ll find more than a fair share of Democratic criticism as left leaning punditry extols on how those in power are doing it incorrectly or point out the “bad optics” of any particular decision made from the shitburger menu of options available.
I understand the need to not develop our own bubble to live in, but I do wish that there was some time spent to pontificate on what was done right, and how that change can be seen as a step towards progress rather than rapidly consumed but barely digested talking point.
Chief Oshkosh
@gvg: Ha! I was just going to write something stupid about “why’d we ever stop Sherman” but your briefer message is better.
patrick II
@Hardheaded Liberal:
Why just DOJ overtures? Usually, if DOJ wants to talk to someone about a crime they do, whether the lawyer wants them to or not. Cassidy didn’t change lawyers until after her first deposition with House Hearings leaders. If her lawyer didn’t want to talk to Justice I am sure he didn’t want her talking to the committee and more leverage to avoid it but it happened anyway. And Ms. Hutchinson is just one example.
Paul in KY
@Leto: That’s the one! Anyway, don’t you think it is weird that 38 years after they were in use, someone in White House was shredding on one of those old non-DOD approved BS ones?!
schrodingers_cat
@different-church-lady: GMTA. And you got there first!
JoyceH
@UncleEbeneezer:
Agree – the DOJ is doing a lot. My take on the current state of play. There are several areas where the DOJ could charge Trump today and probably make it stick – the attempts to interfere in vote count, via phone calls to Georgia and Arizona, etc. They could probably charge the fake electors scheme to him if there was evidence that Trump knew it was going on.
But I think the DOJ is going for the Golden Snitch, the item so valuable that catching it ends the game. And in this case, the multifarious election-related crimes of Trump, the Golden Snitch would be evidence that Trump had advance knowledge that the violent radical groups who had assembled in DC at his request intended to storm and occupy the Capitol. And I think they’re almost there. My guess, considering who they’ve already flipped, and the electronic devices they’ve already seized, is that they’ve managed to trace that advance knowledge to the Willard War Room. There’s only one step left to take, from the Willard to the Oval Office. There are a lot of ways to take that step, and they only have to take one, though two would be nice in a belt and suspenders kinda way.
Stone, Flynn, Bannon, Giuliani, Meadows. Flip one of them. Flip two. And – you’ve got him. Wild card is that – just my supposition, but Meadows may have already flipped.
Paul in KY
@C Stars: I have tour bussed thru Wisconsin and (in parts we went thru) everything looked really nice. Would assume the lake water will be clean & very cold.
If you are near, tour the House on the Rock. It’s like ‘what would be the result if you were a hoarder…but had $40 million dollars’.
Has some beautiful gardens.
Geminid
@Kristine: It could also be that Garland isn’t requiring a slam dunk but still wants the DOJ to bring the best case they can against trump even if that takes more time than people think it should.
squid696
I will remain deeply concerned with Merrick Garland until I see someone in “management” charged. I don’t see how anyone can feel comfortable with the way prosecutions of Jan. 6 are going until then.
satby
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: I was going to post that too. A number of lawyers seem to be in the same page as emptywheel. More
Another Scott
@lowtechcyclist: AFAIK, no future Congress can be constrained by the present Congress. Laws and budgets can always be changed.
The way to protect the DOJ is for sensible people to win elections.
Cheers,
Scott.
C Stars
@Butch: Thank you, that’s what I was hoping for.
Leto
@Paul in KY: Those types of shredders are used for the most absolute sensitive material we have. There’s a difference between, for example, our nuclear secrets and the menu for what burger the president threw at the wall that day. BUT this is also like the separation between the federal government and the states: each agency will have their own guidelines on this stuff. Most of the material the president, and his staff, generates shouldn’t be shredded and should be turned over to the national archives. But I don’t know their policies and procedures. There’s still material that needs to be shredded but doesn’t require the pulper. I don’t believe that those regular shredded materials simply go into the trash. There are proper ways to dispose of them too, but again, idk if that was accomplished during his time.
Citizen Alan
@Paul in KY:
Maddow has said on television during her show that she agrees with everything in the 1956 Eisenhower platform, which is enough to have her branded at a socialist today.
Paul in KY
@JoyceH: To me, the ‘Golden Snitch’ would be videotape of Trump being mustered into the FSB and pledging allegiance to Russia…cause you know Putin has his copy.
Yours would be great too!
satby
I wonder sometimes if people hope that THE in jail will demotivated a lot of his followers. I think it will ramp up the homegrown terrorists. Edit: to be clear, I want all of them incarcerated for a long time. But it will kick off other problems, and I think the DOJ is very aware of that, and possibly trying to defuse some of it in tandem.
Citizen Alan
@SFAW: I don’t believe there’s a single Republican in Congress who would vote to impeach Nixon today.
Paul in KY
@Leto: I did work in ComSec. I just thought they wouldn’t be that much more expensive than the ribbon ones and that every government agency would use them. whatdayaknow…
Betty Cracker
@JoyceH: Golden Snitch — I like that! Hope you are right about what’s happening behind the scenes.
Paul in KY
@Citizen Alan: I’m guessing I would agree with his 1956 platform too. Haven’t read it in a while….
Pres Eisenhower would have been a Democrat today, Lincoln & TR Roosevelt too.
trollhattan
@HumboldtBlue: Oooh, make this happen.
Another Scott
@squid696:
18 month update from DOJ:
It’s a complicated series of events and investigation. It takes time to get it right. They haven’t lost a January 6 case yet, AFAIK.
Cheers,
Scott.
HinTN
@Betty Cracker: The DOJ may also have had to ensure that the investigating team wasn’t corrupted by bad actors. That could take significant time…
Miss Bianca
@squid696: Are you basing this assertion on any actual evidence or personal expertise with prosecuting federal cases? Or is it just a cloud of ink coming out of your squidly ass? There have been plenty of Jan 6 prosecutions so far. I for one don’t doubt there will be many, many more.
zhena gogolia
@Hardheaded Liberal: Thank you!!!
James E Powell
@Omnes Omnibus:
I thought he would be the Attorney-General.
Our side has talented, professional people. The other side has TV performers.
HumboldtBlue
raven
@Leto: Awesome!
Burnspbesq
@Another Scott:
It’s probably safe to assume that all of the lawyers representing other 1/6 defendants have now read, and have briefed their clients on, the sentencing memorandum that DOJ filed in the Guy Refitt case. They are seeking an upward departure from the guidelines range, i.e.,15 years.
That may loosen some additional tongues, or further loosen some that have already been wagging.
artem1s
@schrodingers_cat:
I don’t either but she is lazy when it comes to discerning who she gives a platform to spew shit all over an issue or campaign. I think she let’s her staff bully her into inviting the wrong people on to her show and they don’t vet their guests very well. She has given way too much time to ‘guests’ and ‘candidates’ that will produce clicks and shares and likes but who provide little or no credible comments, information or policy.
Pennsylvanian
I’ve given up. Democrats never get anything they want in this country because we try to play within the system. Republicans have no such desire; they take what they want and bully the rest out of whoever they want to. Sorry, but we are just losers and the deck is so stacked against us that even when we win, we lose. Morals mean we always wind up looking like morons. No bottom and no consequences for them, no matter the issue!
I really wish I was able to leave this country, but sadly, I don’t have that kind of money or enough time to make it before I die.
Neither happy nor just endings are coming, friends.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Hardheaded Liberal: @UncleEbeneezer: thank you both for the report from Wheelerland! when I can follow Wheeler through her barely-marked paths through the deep weeds, I’m always impressed
rikyrah
@comrade scotts agenda of rage:
him whistling Farmer and the Dell….
classic
rikyrah
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
I can believe it, and he was part of the attempt to do the big con in Uvalde…when that fell apart – Beto showing up – he wouldn’t dare go back.
different-church-lady
@schrodingers_cat:
True. Not sure what that’s got to do with us, but true.
different-church-lady
@Hardheaded Liberal:
Well, Garland better have his eyes set on doing whatever he’s thinking of doing by January, because after that the odds are it’s gonna get impeded in EVERY way.
Layer8Problem
@Pennsylvanian: Got it, “DOOMED!” Thanks for your input.
Kropacetic
@Pennsylvanian: Did anti-abortion activists give up when they didn’t get what they wanted after one election? Two? Twenty five?
Some are ready to give up with zero elections having transpired since Dobbs.
UncleEbeneezer
@schrodingers_cat: Yes. Kanefield has a lot of good insights too. I follow her, Wheeler, Barb McQuade, Joyce White Vance, Jill Wine Banks, Daniel Goldman, Harry Littman, Renato Mariotti and a couple others. Between them I feel like I get a decent range of views from former DOJ people and a very good look at all the details of the cases brought so far.
squid696
@Miss Bianca: I was specifically referring to prosecution of “management”. I could have been more specific, but i meant people in the White House, Congress, Roger Stone, Gosar, Flynn, Eastman, etc., not the “muscle” of January 6. I am glad they have charged and convicted a lot of the insurrectionists who were there on January 6th, but seriously, that is the lowest of low hanging fruit. I am glad they have charged some of the leadership of the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys, but again, they are more in the “muscle” category, rather than the “brains”. I hope this leads to charges against the brains behind January 6, but I don’t see how anyone can feel comfortable with where we are in prosecutions until we start seeing that actually happen.
Miss Bianca
@Kropacetic: I know, and it makes me crazy. The eternal paradox of the right-wing’s fanatical dedication to using the tools of democracy to destroy democracy, contrasted with left-wing whinging about how it’s just TOO HARD to expect them to even vote in more than one election – because, “look, I voted this one time and nothing changed, OK?!” – while democracy is being destroyed, just makes me feel really stabby sometimes.
OK, almost all the time, really.
Miss Bianca
@squid696: OK, fine. You’re part of the “go directly to jail” crowd. Useless to engage, in other words.
Geminid
@squid696: The DOJ has indicted “middle management” like leaders of the Proud Boys and Oathkeeopers. The search narrows after that. Roger Stone may have been the only conduit to trump above them if career criminal trump maintained operational security.
different-church-lady
@Kropacetic: I got a funny feeling a whole lot of the “why did I bother to vote?” crowd didn’t actually vote.
Kropacetic
Brains, huh?
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@different-church-lady: or wrote in Harambe. Or Susan Sarandon.
Kropacetic
@different-church-lady: The “why should I vote?” crowd, which I encountered for the first time Sunday as my sister watched The Young Turks, drains my energy as badly as Fox News and the breed of institutionalist Democrat that is outright hostile to the idea of outreach to the left.
UncleEbeneezer
@Hardheaded Liberal: Great comment and thanks for the detail and analysis.
In addition to what you wrote, there are two really obvious answers to “why hasn’t Trump (or whoever) been indicted yet?”
1.) Prosecutors want to have ALL THE EVIDENCE before bringing charges. The subpoenas are out and being battled in court now. So clearly there is a ton of stuff DOJ needs to see before pulling the trigger on indictments.
2.) From defense atty Mark Beichel: Once an indictment is filed, the government cannot use that indictment to develop more discovery or trial prep. That’s an illegal use of a grand jury. Because the defense can’t use their own grand jury, once an indictment is made, the prosecution can’t keep subpoenaing documents and people to testify.
Those two right there provide plenty of reason for why we haven’t seen indictments of high-level people in Trump’s orbit. They are still collecting evidence/testimony.
As for Obstruction and other crimes detailed in the Mueller report (usually framed as: well, why hasn’t Garland indicted on all these charges that were already tee’d up?) I would note that:
1.) Whatever we think of Bill Barr, his decision not to bring charges and his dishonest defenses of some of them in his written report, could be enough to provide just enough reasonable doubt to make them not worth pursuing by Garland’s DOJ.
2.) Garland may look at those decisions by Barr as final and wants only to bring charges on stuff that happened later (like 1/6 and investigations into Bannon, Stone etc.) rather than digging into his predecessor’s mess.
3.) He doesn’t have unlimited resources. We know they needed to hire more lawyers for 1/6 investigations. DOJ not only inherited the largest criminal conspiracy case in US history, but also all the civil/voting rights fights, abortion rights fights etc., mass shooters etc. DOJ is very busy and it’s entirely possible that Garland believes prosecutions 1/6 crimes is more important than trying to indict Trump for breaking the Emoluments Clause.
Omnes Omnibus
I love that some people’s basic attitude is to assume that they will somehow be sold out by any Dems in power.
Kropacetic
@Omnes Omnibus: Elected Dems have records. We know approximately which will sell us out and which won’t. The ones who will are still better than Republicans, to a one.
The ones who won’t need reinforcements and we have a chance to send them in November.
I sort of understand the notion that one vote doesn’t generally count for much. But I like to turn it around.
“Yes, it’s the least you can do.” Please make any other contributions you want. Volunteer. Donate. It doesn’t have to be only candidates. Find a way to help the community or an organization that is doing so. But also vote, every time.”
livewyre
@Omnes Omnibus: That’s the goal of the opposition to voting in principle or practice, as I understand it – to make it entirely a question of moral standing and betrayal in terms of which named figures to trust. That’s why there’s so much effort to cast doubt on the innermost feelings of Biden and Garland and all the rest. Never mind what they do. At all costs, never mind that, or else they might be able to do anything, and that would make oil sad.
Bill Arnold
@HumboldtBlue:
The Secret Service needs to be purged. All agents who were sympathetic with and/or might have been corrupted by D.J. Trump should be fired. We must assume that criminal insurrection-supporting/planning messages were purged unless there is evidence otherwise.
VP M. Pence did not trust Secret Service members outside his own detail.
UncleEbeneezer
@Omnes Omnibus: Yup. That’s one of the things driving me so nuts about the never-ending bashing of Garland/DOJ. It’s coming from the same emotional place as the assumptions that Hillary was corrupt or didn’t really mean the good things that she said and ran on. And Obama sold us out. And Biden needs to step aside, etc. etc.
It’s fucking exhausting how much our side has to constantly shit on good people who devote their lives to public service.
Bill Arnold
@Pennsylvanian:
I’ll mentally categorize you in the “Sad Nazi Sympathizer” bucket, then.
Another Scott
The Senate is doing a procedural vote on the CHIPs bill (that is still being written).
https://www.c-span.org/video/?521802-4/senate-session-part-2&live – live
RollCall has more – basically Republicans will decide on how much more gets added to it besides the support for semiconductor manufacturing, etc. Schumer wants 15 GQPers.
It’s 43:26 at the moment.
We’ll see!
Cheers,
Scott.
Bill Arnold
@Geminid:
Trump probably tried, but he’s not competent let alone consistently competent, and I am fairly sure stuck to old-school methods taught by the likes of Roy Cohn. Stone is somewhat more competent, though annoyingly arrogant and way overconfident, and it is very easy to make OPSEC/COMSEC errors. (I’ve watched Stone make one on video.)
Bill Arnold
@UncleEbeneezer:
In a two party system, people who regularly shit on Democrats are working to increase the power of Republicans, by attempting to suppress votes for Democrats.
prostratedragon
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: One of her helpful specialties is the timeline, which greatly helps comprehension. I’m sure this one will eventually be added to the topic heading at emptywheel blog.
Another Scott
@Another Scott: It’s 64:34 and they’re supposedly still voting, but I think only one senator has voted in the last 30 minutes. I guess the only mystery is whether Chuck will get 65 and it’s looking like he will or it will be very close.
Good, good.
Cheers,
Scott.
J R in WV
@Bill Arnold:
I don’t think he trusted his own detail out of sight of the media. I agree that many Secret Service staff should be investigated, esp those who can’t provide their cell phone data in use in January, 2021. If they can’t provide their msg history, they should be indicted for loss of data due to the Archives at least. Lose their job AND their pensions.
I track Emptywheel,com pretty well, not the twitter threads, but her web site. IANAL so I lose track sometimes of where she’s going, but the most encyclopedic coverage of Jan 6 insurrection out there.
I like Rachael Maddow too.
dww44
@UncleEbeneezer: maybe you can send this message to Jason Joghndon on MSNBC.? He was on Joy Reid Show really screaming about Biden running again when he was so unpopular with in his own party
Ella in New Mexico
I have spent the past 6 or so years waiting for the big shoes of justice to drop on Trump and his cabal and finding myself continuously let down. Mueller failed us miserably, in spite of all the most obvious law breaking ever seen by a President and his Administration–and that was BEFORE Ukraine 1.0, Jan 6 and everything in between. So I’m not optimistic things will go the way they really should go, with FatTangerine’s ass behind bars. However there are some smart people who sound very hopeful that Justice is doing its job, meticulously and unimpeachibly in order that nothing be easily over turned and so this is taking time. Be patient and have faith say the “Sister’s in Law”.
But my God, if you have any questions or doubts about whether Garland’s Justice department is at all withering on this issue, please, for the sake of all things sane, do NOT express those views over at emptywheel or MW’s bulldog bmaz will figuratively rip your face off in the comments then ban you to the dumpster. The guy’s insufferably bellicose.