Whatever the reason, AG Garland was ineffectual: he was slow out of the gate and clearly chose the wrong strategy (the proof is sitting in the White House)
Whatever the reason, AG Garland was ineffectual: he was slow out of the gate and clearly chose the wrong strategy (the proof is sitting in the White House)
The Attorney General has a responsibility to not let politics rule over doing justice. Suggest you read the Special Counsel's final report. I expect all that are complaining about the AG's actions have never actually tried to get a criminal case investigated and go to trial or result in a plea of guilty. I have and it is extremely difficult and if you look at the • https://www.justsecurity.org/89122/clearinghouse-january-6th-election-interference-case-district-of-columbia you will see all of the obstacles that have placed in front of the prosecution of the case that led to it never coming to trial.
Speaking of people who have “never actually tried to get a criminal case investigated” that would include Garland himself as he came to the DOJ. You’re not arguing that the AG wasn’t ineffectual, you’re arguing that it’s not his fault.
The DoJ objective was not to make him unelectable. The objective was to gather evidence and use that to hold him accountable. Have you read the Supreme Court decision? Do you recall when the Court decided to accept the case? The decision was issued on 1 July, the very last of the Court's term. It is almost as though they knew that they were preventing a trial before election.
The issue is that the AG Garland did, in fact, fail to hold Trump accountable. And, In failing to do so, Garland highlighted the ability of the wealthy and the well connected to evade justice. It’s my personal belief that Garland is a good to great judge and a poor to average prosecutor. You seem to be arguing that no one could have succeeded under these circumstances, and I believe it was the AG’s job to develop a prosecutorial strategy that would. The American system of justice has failed its citizens when we needed it the most.
Whatever the reason, AG Garland was ineffectual: he was slow out of the gate and clearly chose the wrong strategy (the proof is sitting in the White House)
The Attorney General has a responsibility to not let politics rule over doing justice. Suggest you read the Special Counsel's final report. I expect all that are complaining about the AG's actions have never actually tried to get a criminal case investigated and go to trial or result in a plea of guilty. I have and it is extremely difficult and if you look at the • https://www.justsecurity.org/89122/clearinghouse-january-6th-election-interference-case-district-of-columbia you will see all of the obstacles that have placed in front of the prosecution of the case that led to it never coming to trial.
Speaking of people who have “never actually tried to get a criminal case investigated” that would include Garland himself as he came to the DOJ. You’re not arguing that the AG wasn’t ineffectual, you’re arguing that it’s not his fault.
The DoJ objective was not to make him unelectable. The objective was to gather evidence and use that to hold him accountable. Have you read the Supreme Court decision? Do you recall when the Court decided to accept the case? The decision was issued on 1 July, the very last of the Court's term. It is almost as though they knew that they were preventing a trial before election.
The issue is that the AG Garland did, in fact, fail to hold Trump accountable. And, In failing to do so, Garland highlighted the ability of the wealthy and the well connected to evade justice. It’s my personal belief that Garland is a good to great judge and a poor to average prosecutor. You seem to be arguing that no one could have succeeded under these circumstances, and I believe it was the AG’s job to develop a prosecutorial strategy that would. The American system of justice has failed its citizens when we needed it the most.