myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Time to fire AG Garland,

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 12982
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Mon Jun 14, 2021 7:49 pm    Post subject: Time to fire AG Garland, Reply with quote

IT IS TIME TO FIRE THIS IDIOT WHO THINKS YOU DO NOT FIRE ALL THE TRUMP IDIOTS.

For him not to have known within the first few weeks of the surveillance on the dems and not to lift the gag order and get to the bottom of it right from the get go shows he just is to naive to be the top law enforcement person in the USA. This is dereliction of duty to the extreme.

I had noted this when he was appointed that I bet he wanted to be a supreme court justice still and would not make right wingers who had violated laws pay their price to society. I was spot on.

Shame on him stopping people from suing trump like the ones he raped. How dare he hold back memos Barr used to lie about the russian investigation that a Judge ordered be made public. How dare he not release the mueller investigation and documents to congress and the public.

nyt

On Politics: Where Bidenís Justice Department isnít breaking from Trump


Quote:
View in browser|nytimes.com



June 14, 2021


By Giovanni Russonello


Attorney General Merrick Garland during a news conference on Friday.Tom Brenner for The New York Times

The political news cycle hit home in rare fashion today as the attorney general, Merrick Garland, met with newsroom leaders from The Times, CNN and The Washington Post to discuss how the administration was responding to revelations that Donald Trumpís Department of Justice had secretly sought information on reporters and their sources.

When a Justice Department gets into the business of seizing reportersí phone records and trying to track down leakers, while putting gag orders on the news organizations whose records itís seizing, itís hard not to wonder about the health of the First Amendment.
So with the revelations now public, Garland vowed to act. Speaking to members of the Senate Appropriations Committee at a budget hearing last week, Garland pledged that he would institute new policies that were ďthe most protective of journalistsí ability to do their jobs in history.Ē

In todayís meeting, the leaders of the news organizations pushed Garland to pursue accountability for the administration officials who had worked to target journalists and whistle-blowers; Garlandís responses were kept off the record.
But legal watchdogs and advocates of criminal justice reform say this is far from the only area of concern. They are pointing to a few major areas in which Garlandís Justice Department has elected to defend Trump-era policies, particularly those orchestrated by former Attorney General William Barr.

Garland has stepped up enforcement of civil rights laws, and he is leading investigations into some major municipal police departments suspected of systematic misconduct. He announced last week that he would take aggressive steps to protect voting rights.



But on a range of other issues, there are gripes coming from within the presidentís own party. Some critics have expressed worry that his Department of Justice was rubber-stamping policies that sought to expand the presidentís legal immunities, turn back progressive action on racial justice and restrict immigrantsí ability to enter the country legally.

Trump, E. Jean Carroll and presidential protections
During Trumpís presidency, Barr sought to help Trump try to fight off a sexual assault accusation from the journalist and advice columnist E. Jean Carroll.

After she publicly made the allegation, in 2019, Trump said in an interview from the Oval Office that Carroll was ďnot my type,Ē and that heíd never assaulted her. She then filed suit, accusing him of slandering her.
Barr argued in court that Trump had been acting as an employee of the federal government when he made the comments, and was therefore shielded from charges of slander and libel.

Continue reading the main story


ADVERTISEMENT





The case was still pending when President Biden took office. And this month, Garlandís Justice Department lamented Trumpís ďcrude and disrespectfulĒ remarks, but it said that his administration had been right to argue that he could not be sued over them.
Muellerís findings and the ĎBarr memoí

Prominent Democrats had also urged Garland not to fight a federal judgeís ruling demanding that a classified report that Barr had requested be made public. Known as the ďBarr memo,Ē the document argues that he should tell the public that Trumpís efforts to impede the Russia investigation ó as lain out in the report by the special counsel, Robert Mueller ó cannot be charged as obstruction of justice, and offers legal analysis in support of that claim.
Trumpís foes scored a major victory last month, when, in a blistering decision, Judge Amy Berman Jackson of the U.S. District Court in Washington ordered the memo to be made public, accusing the Trump administration of ďdisingenuousĒ reasoning. In a public letter last month, Democrats on the Judiciary Committee asked Garland not to appeal Jacksonís decision, ďin order to help rebuild the nationís trustĒ in the Justice Department.

But Garland soon announced that he would indeed appeal it, seeking to keep secret most of the memo ó the portion laying out the legal analysis for why none of potential obstruction episodes in the Mueller report rose to a chargeable crime ó and citing ďthe irreparable harm that would be caused by the release of the redacted portions of the document.Ē
Continue reading the main story



ADVERTISEMENT




Much like Barack Obamaís choice, in 2009, not to systematically pursue accountability for members of the Bush administration over their invasive surveillance policies, or the mistreatment of military prisoners during the war on terror, the Biden administrationís move on the Barr memo was seen as an attempt to protect the narrow institutional interests of the Justice Department and to move on.

Gun prosecutions in D.C.
Many proponents of racial justice were dismayed this spring when Garlandís Justice Department announced it would continue Trumpís policy of using the federal courts to prosecute gun crimes in the District of Columbia, not the cityís own justice system.

That policy, enacted in 2019, had reversed decades of tradition in the nationís capital, where the lead prosecutor is a federal appointee but most crimes are typically tried in city courts.
At a moment when the D.C. Council had been passing laws to undo the effects of mass incarceration, the Trump administrationís move disproportionately affected African-American men, as Black people account for a vast majority of those brought up on gun charges in the nationís capital. Average sentences for these crimes are roughly twice as high in the federal court system.

ďThatís why itís so surprising that the administration stuck with it: because this is an issue that touches on mass incarceration, racial injustice and D.C. rights,Ē Andrew Crespo, a Harvard Law School professor who has been involved in the effort to roll back the Trump policy, said in an interview.
A group of 87 former federal prosecutors signed a letter in May urging the Justice Department to abandon the practice, but so far it hasnít changed its position.

Immigration policies
Garlandís Justice Department has also continued some Trump policies that prevent immigrants trying to enter the U.S. from having access to certain legal rights.

One policy, which was enacted at the end of Trumpís presidency by the departmentís immigration review office, concentrates decision-making power underneath a political appointee and can prevent immigrants seeking to remain in the U.S. from presenting certain evidence that could help them from being deported.
Lawyers for Garlandís Justice Department have repeatedly argued to uphold the rule, resisting lawsuits from proponents of immigration rights in two separate district courts.

Biden administration lawyers have also argued in court on behalf of a policy that prevents immigrants with temporary protected status from gaining green cards with the support of their employer. The Biden administration has also sought to end protected status for hundreds of thousands of people from El Salvador and other countries.
Lee Gelernt, the deputy director of the American Civil Liberties Unionís Immigrantsí Rights Project, pointed to the fact that Garlandís Justice Department had agreed to defend former members of the Trump administration, including Jeff Sessions and Stephen Miller, in lawsuits seeking damages for harm caused by the family-separation policy.

It is customary for former federal officials to have access to Justice Department representation, but Gelernt said that the family-separation policy went beyond the pale, and suggested a need to re-examine old precedent where some of the Trump administrationís policies are concerned.
ďFor the Biden D.O.J. to choose to represent the people who did the family-separation practice is deeply troubling,Ē he said. ďTheyíll say this is just an institutional decision, that doesnít mean we agree. But on the other hand theyíre putting the entire force of the Department of Justice behind the family-separation policy.Ē



_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wsurfer



Joined: 17 Aug 2000
Posts: 1457

PostPosted: Fri Jun 18, 2021 9:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Patience is a virtue Exclamation Exclamation Exclamation Laughing Laughing Laughing

Perhaps he will have the last laugh while abiding by the rule of law!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 12982
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Sat Jun 19, 2021 8:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wsurfer wrote:
Patience is a virtue Exclamation Exclamation Exclamation Laughing Laughing Laughing

Perhaps he will have the last laugh while abiding by the rule of law!


sorry as noted by the head of FBI, he noted there is not one investigation going on about trump and the Jan 6 insurrection.

ya his last laugh is when by not going after all trump corruption he gets the approval of the right wingers to be a supreme court judge.

Again the justice department has argued in favor of not releasing the justice department memos a judge ordered released because the former justice department as she noted lied to the court about Barr and the memo giving advice that trump broke no laws about the russia investigation. She wants it released because she is clearly stating this is a lie. And garland is allowing this lie to be hidden for no reason. The Judge (upholding the LAW has said it is to be released).

Again release the Mueller report to congress right away and what can be to the public. Starr released all this information to congress including grand jury testimony. This moron can do this tomorrow.

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 12982
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Mon Jun 21, 2021 9:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/merrick-garland-ve-great-justice-073751875.html


Merrick Garland Wouldíve Been a Great Justice. Heís Not a Great A.G.


Quote:
Moving Merrick Garland off the federal bench to make him Attorney General seemed like a stroke of genius at the time. Heíd gained a reputation over more than 20 years as a fair-minded judge, liked and respected by all those who dealt with him. Who better to become the nationís top law enforcement officer at this troubled time of division than a man whose ability to bind up the nationís wounds had been tested in the courts of law?

For Democrats, his appointment had the added allure of sticking it to Mitch McConnell, the GOP leader who had trashed the norms and traditions of the Senate to personally deny Garland a seat on the Supreme Court in 2016. Becoming Attorney General would be the consolation prize for getting cheated out of the job heíd been groomed for, righting a wrong that was searing for Democrats and for the country in cementing a conservative majority Court at a time of progressive change.

But less than five months later, questions are swirling about whether Garland, a self-effacing public servant, is miscast in his new role. Naming him was inspired, but for some Democrats, mainly progressives, heís been a disappointment. Being a fair-minded judge sitting in his chambers isolated from public pressures is qualitatively different from taking over a corrupt and demoralized DOJ and clearing out the miscreants.

Dems Rage at Biden DOJ: Your Moves ĎMake No Senseí

They are two different skill sets, and the AGís job requires an aggressiveness that Garland has been slow to project. That may be changing as Garland adjusts to being judged in the political arena on an almost daily basis on how far he is willing to go to rebuild the DOJ and to pursue the misdeeds and outright criminality of former President Trump.

Heís no Eric Holder, his Democratic predecessor, who relished confrontations with Congress and was at home in the political arena. A man who is cautious by nature, Garland has begun in recent days to more vigorously address the Trump hangover in public policy. With little fanfare, he doubled the size of DOJ staff dealing with voter suppression measures and ordered immigration judges to stop following Trump-era rules that made it harder for immigrants particularly from Central America and their family members to seek asylum based on domestic or gang violence.

Garland also officially closed the criminal probe initiated by Trumpís DOJ into former national security adviser John Boltonís book, vindicating Boltonís claim that Trumpís lawyers ďacted illegitimately.Ē Published after Bolton left the White House, the book, ďThe Room Where It Happened,Ē discusses Trumpís call with the Ukrainian president that triggered his second impeachment.

These recent actions should help quiet critics whose bill of particulars against Garland include his decision to continue defending Trump against libel charges brought by a woman he allegedly raped, his lackluster efforts to combat Trump-era DOJ subpoenas of the cell phone records of prominent lawmakers and journalists, and his appeal of a court ruling that DOJ release the internal memo that former AG William Barr used to justify not charging Trump with obstruction of justice.

Liberals Need To Stop Whining About Merrick Garland Defending Trump

This is not what the Democratic base thought it was signing up for with Garland, but taken one by one, they can be explained as what any AG might do to protect the prerogatives of the Department and to uphold the traditions he is trying to restore. First among them is impartiality from one administration to the next so that the AG is the peopleís attorney, and not an arm of the White House. That has been particularly important to President Biden, who claims to have been blindsided by Garland allowing Trump-era subpoenas to stand.

It appears that Garland is doing exactly what Biden wants him to do, and that is to leave the heavy lifting on Trump to the Southern District of New York, which is expected to wrap up its investigation into Trumpís business dealings by the end of the year.

This rankles progressives, but the cautious Garland embodies Bidenís strategy of conveying a centrist, non-ideological image while quietly pursuing significant policy changes. After winning the White House, President Obama famously said he did not want to look into the rear mirror and exhume his predecessorís post-9/11 policies, notably on torture. Democrats donít want Biden to repeat that mistake. They want Trump to face consequences that go beyond a possible indictment on bank fraud in New York.

Garlandís success hinges on Bidenís success, and whether this nice guy approach to the job pays off in significant change on issues that matter beyond revenge. This is Garlandís second time around at DOJ. He was the lead prosecutor in 1995 on the bombing of a federal building in Oklahoma that killed 168 people and wounded hundreds of others, including children at a daycare center. Timothy McVeigh, a white supremacist, got the death penalty.

The shock of this enemy within was a wake-up call for the country. Americans looked to Washington for solace, and President Clinton rose to the occasion and rallied the country. Soon after, in 1997, Clinton nominated Garland for the United States Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia, the second most powerful court and a stepping stone to the Supreme Court. He was 63 when Obama nominated him to fill the vacancy created by Justice Scaliaís sudden death in February of 2016.

Obama chose Garland on the advice of former Senate Judiciary chairman Orrin Hatch, a Republican, who said the GOP-controlled Senate would confirm someone of Garlandís centrist caliber and relatively advanced age. The Republicans would never confirm a forty-something radical, Hatch said.

When it turned out McConnellís senate wouldnít confirm any Democrat of any age, Garland stayed on the court, where he served with distinction for 24 years until 2021 when he assumed the post of Attorney General.

The jury is out on whether Garland will meet the moment these extraordinary times demand in upholding the rule of law and rebuilding its citadel in Washington.

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 12982
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Wed Jun 23, 2021 1:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

here Garland allowed right wingers to lie and tell people they were from the gov in finding out about their vote.

Garland should have gone after them immediately and arrested everyone involved if accurate.

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/documents-appear-to-show-doj-warning-on-voter-intimidation-tactic-not-heeded-by-az-gop-115304005543?cid=eml_mra_20210623&user_email=e73377d3e40790eecbf6a99203e1476ea2a23c644c2045abd739b8f9e629a73b


Documents appear to show DOJ warning on voter intimidation tactic not heeded by AZ GOP


Quote:
Rachel Maddow shows how documents obtained by the watchdog group American Oversight appear to show Arizona Republicans associated with a door-knocking campaign that the DOJ warned in a letter could constitute voter intimidation.

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 12982
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Thu Jun 24, 2021 12:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/did-trump-press-justice-dept-push-back-against-comedians-n1272117?cid=eml_mra_20210623&user_email=e73377d3e40790eecbf6a99203e1476ea2a23c644c2045abd739b8f9e629a73b


Did Trump press the Justice Dept to push back against comedians?



Quote:
The revelations last week were jarring: materials brought to public light from the House Oversight Committee showed Donald Trump and his White House team, leaning on the Justice Department late last year to help undermine the 2020 presidential election. The revelations served as a reminder that the former president saw federal agencies as extensions of his political machine, to be used against perceived enemies.

But related revelations continue to come to the fore. The Daily Beast reported yesterday:

According to two people familiar with the matter, Trump asked advisers and lawyers in early 2019 about what the Federal Communications Commission, the court system, and -- most confusingly to some Trump lieutenants -- the Department of Justice could do to probe or mitigate SNL, Jimmy Kimmel, and other late-night comedy mischief-makers.

As unsettling as a report like this is, it's not the least bit surprising.

As regular readers may recall, during his presidential transition period, Trump lashed out at "Saturday Night Live," condemning it as "biased," and suggesting he and his team should be given "equal time." In 2018, the Republican did it again, blasting the NBC comedy show as a "spin machine," and suggesting that the broadcasts may not be "legal."

In February 2019, Trump upped the ante, raising the prospect of "retribution" against comedy shows. A month later, the then-president started referring to specific levers of federal power he'd consider using to punish comedy programs that hurt his feelings.

It's what makes this new reporting so easy to believe: it suggests Trump was doing in private exactly what he was doing in public.

Recommended

MADDOWBLOG
'Something needs to change': Conventional wisdom on filibusters shifts

MADDOWBLOG
Wednesday's Campaign Round-Up, 6.23.21
Yesterday, the former president went to the trouble of denying The Daily Beast report -- though as the outlet added, Trump also confirmed, in the same statement, "that he believes the show was engaging in Ďillegalí activity by making fun of him."

Several years ago, when the Morsi government went after Bassem Youssef because the authoritarian leader felt insulted by the satirist, the Egyptian president's crackdown had the opposite of the intended effect: Morsi looked weak for wilting in the face of unflattering comedy.

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 12982
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Sat Jul 31, 2021 4:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

as I said... fire garland...

these people agree with me the potential if garland does not go after trump crimes... the norm for the right wing will be more Barrs who let trump get away with constant crimes for right wing causes.

We now see the Barrack arrest, which should have been done a long time ago.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihX7_Lkyi5Q


Mystal: Who Are The GOP Congressman Trump Reportedly Said Were Going To Help Him Steal The Election?


and here is the notes and Rosen and DOJ idiot who just testified and would not admit to telling about this, he should be held in contempt.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayE4qBUryfw

Hayes: Letís Call It What It WasóTrumpís Failed Coup

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 12982
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2021 8:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

no excuses for Garland not putting a grand jury on Right wing hero Bannon. Watch the video. And good news this judge ordered all the trump documents to be released to the other branch of government that needs them to find out if as it appears Trump and his people were involved in trying to overthrow the government, which resulted in 100s of millions of dollars of damage and deaths of people including officers, with no evidence of min or maximal or massive vote fraud except by right wingers to date.

Garland needs to be replaced...


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/federal-judge-refuses-trump-request-to-block-jan-6-records/ar-AAQwB6O


Federal judge refuses Trump request to block Jan. 6 records


Quote:
WASHINGTON (AP) ‚ÄĒ A federal judge rejected former President Donald Trump‚Äôs request to block the release of documents to the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

FILE - President Donald Trump listens during a "National Dialogue on Safely Reopening America's Schools," event in the East Room of the White House, on July 7, 2020, in Washington. A federal judge has rejected former President Donald Trump’s request to block the release of documents to the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan on Tuesday, Nov. 9 declined to issue a preliminary injunction sought by Trump’s lawyers. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File)© Provided by Associated Press FILE - President Donald Trump listens during a "National Dialogue on Safely Reopening America's Schools," event in the East Room of the White House, on July 7, 2020, in Washington. A federal judge has rejected former President Donald Trump’s request to block the release of documents to the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan on Tuesday, Nov. 9 declined to issue a preliminary injunction sought by Trump’s lawyers. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File)
In denying a preliminary injunction, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan said Tuesday that Congress had a strong public interest in obtaining records that could shed light on a violent insurrection mounted by the former president’s supporters. She added that President Joe Biden had the authority to waive executive privilege over the documents despite Trump’s assertions otherwise.

Barring a court order, the National Archives plans to turn over Trump’s records to the committee by Friday. But Trump’s lawyers swiftly promised an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The case will likely eventually head to the U.S. Supreme Court.

‚ÄúAt bottom, this is a dispute between a former and incumbent President,‚ÄĚ Chutkan wrote. ‚ÄúAnd the Supreme Court has already made clear that in such circumstances, the incumbent‚Äôs view is accorded greater weight.‚ÄĚ

Trump ‚Äúdoes not acknowledge the deference owed‚ÄĚ to Biden‚Äôs judgment as the current president, Chutkan said. She noted examples of past presidents declining to assert executive privilege and rejected what she said was Trump‚Äôs claim that executive privilege ‚Äúexists in perpetuity.‚ÄĚ

‚ÄúPresidents are not kings, and Plaintiff is not President,‚ÄĚ she said.

According to an earlier court filing from the archives, the records include call logs, drafts of remarks and speeches and handwritten notes from Trump‚Äôs then-chief of staff, Mark Meadows. There are also copies of talking points from then-press secretary Kayleigh McEnany and ‚Äúa draft Executive Order on the topic of election integrity,‚ÄĚ the National Archives has said.


Video: Federal Judge: Trump can’t keep records from Jan. 6 committee (MSNBC)

Federal Judge: Trump can’t keep records from Jan. 6 committee
Click to expand
Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., who chairs the House committee, said in a statement after the ruling that the records are crucial for understanding the attack and ‚Äúin my view, there couldn‚Äôt be a more compelling public interest than getting answers about an attack on our democracy.‚ÄĚ

On CNN, Thompson said Trump should stop behaving like a ‚Äúspoiled brat.‚ÄĚ

The nine-member House committee is investigating not just Trump‚Äôs conduct on Jan. 6 ‚ÄĒ when he told a rally to ‚Äúfight like hell‚ÄĚ shortly before rioters overran law enforcement ‚ÄĒ but his efforts in the months before the riot to challenge election results or obstruct a peaceful transfer of power. The committee has interviewed more than 150 witnesses and issued more than 30 subpoenas, including ones announced Tuesday to McEnany and former top adviser Stephen Miller. It is unclear, so far, whether the lawmakers will eventually call Trump to testify.

Trump has repeatedly attacked the committee’s work and continued to promote unfounded conspiracy theories about widespread fraud in the election, despite the fact that Biden’s win was certified by all 50 states and his claims have been rebuked by courts across the country.

In suing to block the National Archives from turning over documents, Trump called the House panel‚Äôs request a ‚Äúvexatious, illegal fishing expedition‚ÄĚ that was ‚Äúuntethered from any legitimate legislative purpose.‚ÄĚ Allowing the House to get access to his records would also damage executive privilege for future presidents, Trump‚Äôs lawyers argued.

But Chutkan said the ‚Äúthe public interest lies in permitting ‚ÄĒ not enjoining ‚ÄĒ the combined will of the legislative and executive branches to study the events that led to and occurred on January 6, and to consider legislation to prevent such events from ever occurring again.‚ÄĚ

Trump spokesperson Taylor Budowich tweeted late Tuesday that the case ‚Äúwas destined to be decided by the Appellate Courts.‚ÄĚ He added that ‚ÄúTrump remains committed to defending the Constitution & the Office of the Presidency, & will be seeing this process through.‚ÄĚ

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 12982
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2021 10:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

https://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/-cowardice-elie-mystal-slams-ag-garland-s-lack-of-urgency-with-bannon-case-125744709941?cid=eml_mra_20211110&user_email=e73377d3e40790eecbf6a99203e1476ea2a23c644c2045abd739b8f9e629a73b


‚ÄėCowardice‚Äô: Elie Mystal slams AG Garland‚Äôs lack of urgency with Bannon case


Quote:
‚ÄúIt speaks to cowardice. He is happy to indict the foot soldiers‚ÄĒbecause that is easy. It is comparatively harder to investigate, and prosecute, and charge the people who planned it, the brains behind the operation,‚ÄĚ says Elie Mystal on AG Merrick Garland. ‚ÄúHe doesn‚Äôt seem to have the gumption to do it.‚ÄĚ

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group