Advertisement

Find answers, ask questions, and connect with our community around the world.

  • Merrick Garland for Attorney General

    Posted by btomba_77 on January 6, 2021 at 10:22 am

    [b]Biden Picks Merrick Garland for Attorney General[/b][/h1]  
     
    President-elect Joe Biden to name federal appeals court judge Merrick Garland as attorney general, the [link=https://twitter.com/MikeDelMoro/status/1346867775395008512]AP[/link] reports.

     

    kaldridgewv2211 replied 1 year, 5 months ago 8 Members · 62 Replies
  • 62 Replies
  • kaldridgewv2211

    Member
    January 6, 2021 at 10:32 am

    bad idea unless they can start getting appointing the judges.  I can’t tell if Georgia is over and done.

    • btomba_77

      Member
      January 6, 2021 at 10:36 am

      GA is over.   
       
      This Biden pick cofirmed that his team knows it’s over. (He obviously was waiting until Senate control was determined)

      • clickpenguin_460

        Member
        January 6, 2021 at 10:58 am

        Honestly, Garland is a good moderate choice.  He might have passed even without 50/50 senate.  There are 100s of Lefty people he could have picked.

        • btomba_77

          Member
          January 6, 2021 at 11:07 am

          Quote from Cubsfan10

          Honestly, Garland is a good moderate choice.  He might have passed even without 50/50 senate.  There are 100s of Lefty people he could have picked.

          I think it tells you where the Biden DOJ is headed….. Domestic right wing terrorism.
           
          He’s not just getting Garland the judge… he’s getting Garland the prosecutor who went at the Oklahoma City bombers.
           
           

          • kaldridgewv2211

            Member
            January 6, 2021 at 11:11 am

            If thats the goal hes going to be busy. Some of these proud boys etc… are loons.

            • clickpenguin_460

              Member
              January 6, 2021 at 11:34 am

              As long as he goes after both left and right wing terrorism then great. We still have plenty of antifa rioting to prosecute.

              Terrorism of any kind by anyone should not be tolerated by any government.

              I hope the soft words from trump on right wing violence are not echoed by soft words from biden on left wing violence.

              • btomba_77

                Member
                January 6, 2021 at 11:40 am

                xxxxx

                • btomba_77

                  Member
                  January 6, 2021 at 11:41 am

                  The consensus agreement of US intelligence is that Right Wing terrorism is the greatest domestic threat

                  There is no reason to use up limited resources in a false equivalency both sides

                  • clickpenguin_460

                    Member
                    January 6, 2021 at 12:02 pm

                    What’s this called if not terrorism?
                     
                    [link=https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/532365-portland-mayor-blames-antifa-anarchists-following-nye-riot]https://thehill.com/homen…sts-following-nye-riot[/link]
                     
                    I know the brief you’re referring to be we are actually seeing Left wing violence everyday whereas the right wing violence is mostly speculative.  Sometimes they both occur together as in the antifa vs. proud boys stuff a few days ago.
                     
                    So, you’re saying you want the government to focus entirely on speculative right wing violence and left antifa riots continue?  I just want to be clear on your point.
                     
                     

                    • btomba_77

                      Member
                      January 6, 2021 at 12:14 pm

                      No. I’m saying that you don’t have to pretend that all sides are equal in the level of domestic terrorism..
                       
                      Most of it comes from the right. So you will get greater value in developing programs are allocating resources towards that greater volume/severity of criminal behavior.
                       
                       
                      It’s like after 9/11 the US didn’t start spending billions of dollars trying to equally prevent US based Hindu, Methodist and Buddhist terrorism to same degree they looked at Islamic terrorism.

                    • btomba_77

                      Member
                      January 6, 2021 at 12:14 pm

                      No. I’m saying that you don’t have to pretend that all sides are equal in the level of domestic terrorism..
                       
                      Most of it comes from the right. So you will get greater value in developing programs are allocating resources towards that greater volume/severity of criminal behavior.
                       
                       
                      It’s like after 9/11 the US didn’t start spending billions of dollars trying to equally prevent US based Hindu, Methodist and Buddhist terrorism to same degree they looked at Islamic terrorism.

                    • clickpenguin_460

                      Member
                      January 6, 2021 at 12:19 pm

                      So in the last year, there has been more rioting, violence, property damage etc by the right wing terrorists than left wing ones?

                    • btomba_77

                      Member
                      January 6, 2021 at 12:25 pm

                      The threat of domestic terrorism … as needs to be addressed by the DOJ ,… yes. There has been much more from the right.
                       
                       
                      Protests and property damage do not generally falls into the category of terrorism.

                    • btomba_77

                      Member
                      January 6, 2021 at 12:27 pm

                      “far-right terrorism has significantly outpaced terrorism from other types of perpetrators, including from far-left networks and individuals inspired by the Islamic State and al-Qaeda. Right-wing attacks and plots account for the majority of all terrorist incidents in the United States since 1994, and the total number of right-wing attacks and plots has grown significantly during the past six years. Right-wing extremists perpetrated two thirds of the attacks and plots in the United States in 2019 and over 90 percent between January 1 and May 8, 2020. ”
                       
                      [link=https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating-terrorism-problem-united-states]https://www.csis.org/anal…-problem-united-states[/link]
                       
                       
                      That’s what the DOJ under Garland is going to go after.

                    • kayla.meyer_144

                      Member
                      January 6, 2021 at 1:24 pm

                      Yes, lets look at the Antifa violence on TV in DC right now!

                      Both sides is laughable.

                    • kayla.meyer_144

                      Member
                      January 6, 2021 at 1:26 pm

                      Attempted putsch.

                    • clickpenguin_460

                      Member
                      January 6, 2021 at 1:58 pm

                      lol you guys are unbelievable.
                       
                      The “threat” of terrorism is more dangerous and important than actual terrorism happening almost everyday since June.
                       
                      I don’t give a crap which “side” it is.  If you can’t see that the violence and rioting from antifa is bad, terrorism and needs to be addressed, then I can’t help you.  I would say the same if the proud boys were rioting everyday too.

                    • kaldridgewv2211

                      Member
                      January 6, 2021 at 2:00 pm

                      ah yes.  Antifa is storming the castle.   It’s not Bubba Gump with his traitorous confederate flag.  

                    • clickpenguin_460

                      Member
                      January 6, 2021 at 2:07 pm

                      It’s all bad!  That’s my point.

                    • btomba_77

                      Member
                      January 6, 2021 at 2:20 pm

                      Turns out the big concern isn’t Antifa …. it’s fa

                    • clickpenguin_460

                      Member
                      January 6, 2021 at 2:37 pm

                      I don’t know what fa is but I would say it’s all concerning.  You and your buddies on here haven’t denounced antifa once.  I’m happy to forcefully denounce all right wing violence.

                    • kayla.meyer_144

                      Member
                      January 6, 2021 at 4:00 pm

                      Quote from Cubsfan10

                      I don’t know what fa is but I would say it’s all concerning.  You and your buddies on here haven’t denounced antifa once.  I’m happy to forcefully denounce all right wing violence.

                      fa=Fascist Duh
                       
                      Last time I looked no one from Antifa invaded the Capital, physically threatened elected officials, had shootouts w police, planted IEDs in government buildings, etc. Using explosive devices is a right wing nut thing, like Timmy McVeigh. 
                       
                       

                    • clickpenguin_460

                      Member
                      January 6, 2021 at 5:02 pm

                      Still won’t denounce them.  Okay.
                       
                      Shooting Congressmen at a baseball game is a left wing thing then huh? Come on.  I’m asking a simple question of you all to denounce all violence.

                    • Unknown Member

                      Deleted User
                      January 6, 2021 at 5:08 pm

                      If anti fascist fights against the KKK and white supremacy groups

                      Then I am standing with anti fascist

                    • Unknown Member

                      Deleted User
                      January 6, 2021 at 5:09 pm

                      Real simple

                    • clickpenguin_460

                      Member
                      January 6, 2021 at 5:12 pm

                      So you support the rioting, violence, and damage caused by Antifa?  Yes or no.

                    • Unknown Member

                      Deleted User
                      January 6, 2021 at 5:25 pm

                      What damage

                      What riots?

                    • clickpenguin_460

                      Member
                      January 6, 2021 at 6:06 pm

                      Have you been dead for 6 months?  Come on man.  Don’t play dumb.  Yes or no.
                       
                      Here’s 1 of 100s of examples and this is called out by a liberal Portland mayor.
                       
                      [link=https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/532365-portland-mayor-blames-antifa-anarchists-following-nye-riot]https://thehill.com/homen…sts-following-nye-riot[/link]
                       

                    • Unknown Member

                      Deleted User
                      January 6, 2021 at 6:12 pm

                      If they are fighting white supremacy I would help them

                      Needless violence against innocent people or businesses

                      No I wouldnt support that

                    • Unknown Member

                      Deleted User
                      January 6, 2021 at 6:16 pm

                      [link]https://apple.news/AYapXZ-WiSfG_uZXvDX_wGQ[/link]

                    • clickpenguin_460

                      Member
                      January 6, 2021 at 6:50 pm

                      Quote from Chirorad84

                      If they are fighting white supremacy I would help them

                      Needless violence against innocent people or businesses

                      No I wouldnt support that

                       
                      Okay so almost all of what antifa does is the latter so you officially denounce them?

                    • Unknown Member

                      Deleted User
                      January 6, 2021 at 6:56 pm

                      Needless violence against innocent people or property

                      Yes I certainly would denounce that

                      But I would be the first one to hit a klansman with a brick or a bat

                    • clickpenguin_460

                      Member
                      January 6, 2021 at 6:57 pm

                      You can hit as many klansman as you want.  I just want you to denounce all of the violence from the Left as well.

                    • Unknown Member

                      Deleted User
                      January 6, 2021 at 7:15 pm

                      Yeah I do

                      But very little violence arises from the left

                      This aint no apples to apples debate

                    • jennycullmann

                      Member
                      January 6, 2021 at 6:19 pm

                      Quote from Cubsfan10

                      Have you been dead for 6 months?  Come on man.  Don’t play dumb.  Yes or no.

                      Here’s 1 of 100s of examples and this is called out by a liberal Portland mayor.

                      [link=https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/532365-portland-mayor-blames-antifa-anarchists-following-nye-riot]https://thehill.com/homen…sts-following-nye-riot[/link]

                       
                      Why do you bother arguing with liars?

  • btomba_77

    Member
    February 9, 2021 at 5:23 am

    [link=https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/08/politics/leftover-trump-us-attorneys/index.html]https://www.cnn.com/2021/…s-attorneys/index.html[/link]

    [h1]DOJ to ask 56 Trump-appointed US attorneys to resign[/h1]

    Justice officials have scheduled a call with US attorneys around the country to discuss a transition that is expected to take weeks. The Justice official didn’t say when the resignations would take effect.The changeover of US attorneys is routine, but is often fraught with political overtones. In 2017, then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions [link=https://www.cnn.com/2017/03/10/politics/us-attorneys-resignation/index.html]asked 46 Obama-appointed US attorneys[/link] to submit their resignations. A handful were allowed to stay on for a brief period, but most had to leave immediately.

    {The} turnover {is} expected to spare two top prosecutors in [link=https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/09/politics/hunter-biden-tax-investigtation/index.html]Delaware[/link] and [link=https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/01/politics/special-counsel-barr-durham-fbi/index.html]Connecticut[/link] overseeing two sensitive Trump-era investigations, a senior Justice Department official said.

    In a call Monday night, acting Attorney General Monty Wilkinson asked Delaware US Attorney David Weiss to remain in office, where he is overseeing the tax probe of Hunter Biden, [link=http://www.cnn.com/specials/politics/joe-biden-news]President Joe Biden’s[/link] son. John Durham, appointed as special counsel by former Attorney General William Barr to reinvestigate the origins of the Trump-Russia probe, will also continue his work, but he is expected to resign as US attorney in Connecticut, the Justice official said.

    [/QUOTE]
     

    • ruszja

      Member
      February 9, 2021 at 6:54 am

      That’s normal.

      • btomba_77

        Member
        February 10, 2021 at 4:53 am

        [h1]Merrick Garland Finally Gets His Confirmation Hearing[/h1]  
         
        [link=https://www.politico.com/news/2021/02/09/senate-merrick-garland-confirmation-hearing-468218]Politico[/link]: The hearing, scheduled for Feb. 22 and 23, sets Garland up for a March 1 vote out of committee and comes after Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Ranking Member Chuck Grassley (R-IA) reached an agreement for the schedule.
         

  • btomba_77

    Member
    February 20, 2021 at 8:02 pm

    [link=https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/20489415/merrick-garland-sjc-testimonyfinal.pdf]https://assets.documentcl…sjc-testimonyfinal.pdf[/link]

    Merrick Garland prepared remarks for AG hearing:

     DOJ independence + respect for career employees
    Civil rights
    Combatting extremism + dealing with Capitol insurrection prosecutions

    Almost a century later, the Civil Rights Act of 1957 created the Department’s Civil Rights Division, with the mission “to uphold the civil and constitutional rights of all Americans, particularly some of the most vulnerable members of our society.”
    That mission remains urgent because we do not yet have equal justice. Communities of color and other minorities still face discrimination in housing, education, employment, and the criminal justice system; and bear the brunt of the harm caused by pandemic, pollution, and climate change.

    150 years after the Department’s founding, battling extremist attacks on our democratic institutions also remains central to its mission.

    From 1995 to 1997, I supervised the prosecution of the perpetrators of the bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building, who sought to spark a revolution that would topple the federal government.

    If confirmed, I will supervise the prosecution of white supremacists and others who stormed the Capitol on January 6 — a heinous attack that sought to disrupt a cornerstone of our democracy: the peaceful transfer of power to a newly elected government. That critical work is but a part of the broad scope of the Department’s responsibilities.

    DOJ protects Americans from environmental degradation and the abuse of market power, from fraud and corruption, from violent crime and cybercrime, and from drug trafficking and child exploitation.

    [/QUOTE]

    • btomba_77

      Member
      July 29, 2022 at 5:45 am

      [b]Justice Department Resources Are at a Breaking Point[/b][/h1]  
      Its the most wide-ranging investigation in Justice Department history: the unprecedented manhunt for hundreds of rioters who stormed the U.S. Capitol on Donald Trumps behalf on Jan. 6, 2021, and the criminal inquiry into efforts to stop the peaceful transfer of power, [link=https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/jan-6-probe-expands-officials-worry-doj-resources-are-breaking-point-rcna40208]NBC News[/link] reports.
       
      Its also a logistical nightmare.
       
      As cases against Capitol rioters work their way through the court system and a federal grand jury hears testimony about Trumps role in Jan. 6, some federal officials are raising concerns that it could bring the already stretched investigation of Jan. 6 to a breaking point.

       

  • btomba_77

    Member
    March 3, 2021 at 7:27 pm

    [link=https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/541542-garlands-ag-nomination-delayed-by-gop-roadblocks]Garland’s AG nomination delayed by GOP roadblocks[/link]

    • ruszja

      Member
      March 7, 2021 at 9:25 am

      Quote from dergon

      [link=https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/541542-garlands-ag-nomination-delayed-by-gop-roadblocks]Garland’s AG nomination delayed by GOP roadblocks[/link]

       
      They can never let an opportunity pass to expose themselves as petty sore losers.
       
      I am still hoping that if Clarence Thomas kicks the bucket during Bidens term, he just pushes through Garland in a abbreviated confirmation process. It would mean that he has to sit out a lot of the initial cases, but just to correct the historic wrong.

      • btomba_77

        Member
        March 7, 2021 at 12:42 pm

        Quote from fw

        Quote from dergon

        [link=https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/541542-garlands-ag-nomination-delayed-by-gop-roadblocks]Garland’s AG nomination delayed by GOP roadblocks[/link]

        They can never let an opportunity pass to expose themselves as petty sore losers.

        I am still hoping that if Clarence Thomas kicks the bucket during Bidens term, he just pushes through Garland in a abbreviated confirmation process. It would mean that he has to sit out a lot of the initial cases, but just to correct the historic wrong.

         
        After the GOP left the Senate once the American Rescue Plan passed, Schumer invoked cloture and set up final votes on Garland, as well as Marcia Fudge (HUD) and Michael Regan (EPA), as there were not enough (any?) GOP members present to object.
         
        That’s one way to get around the silly delay tactics of Tom Cotton and the others. Should be AG Garland by Tuesday or Wednesday now.

      • jennycullmann

        Member
        March 7, 2021 at 5:16 pm

        Quote from fw

        Quote from dergon

        [link=https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/541542-garlands-ag-nomination-delayed-by-gop-roadblocks]Garland’s AG nomination delayed by GOP roadblocks[/link]

        They can never let an opportunity pass to expose themselves as petty sore losers.

        I am still hoping that if Clarence Thomas kicks the bucket during Bidens term, he just pushes through Garland in a abbreviated confirmation process. It would mean that he has to sit out a lot of the initial cases, but just to correct the historic wrong.

         
        That would make for a “diverse” court. Of globalists.

        • btomba_77

          Member
          March 11, 2021 at 5:26 am

          [link=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/merrick-garland-attorney-general-senate-confirmation-70-30/]Senate confirms Merrick Garland as attorney general in 70-30 vote[/link]

  • btomba_77

    Member
    June 10, 2021 at 5:07 am

    [h1][b]Garland Underscores Justice Departments Independence[/b][/h1] [b]
    [/b]
     [link=https://www.wsj.com/articles/merrick-garland-responds-to-criticism-from-white-house-democrats-11623276591?mod=politics_lead_pos10]Wall Street Journal[/link] –
     
    Attorney General Merrick Garland on Wednesday defended the Justice Department after its continued support of some Trump administration legal positions drew criticism from fellow Democrats and the White House.
     
    The disagreementwhich some legal observers said President Biden courted by selecting an attorney general committed to operating independentlysurfaced this week when the Justice Department announced it would continue its defense of former President Donald Trump in a defamation suit stemming from a decades-old rape allegation by journalist E. Jean Carroll.
     

  • btomba_77

    Member
    June 11, 2021 at 12:06 pm

    Merrick Garland to Detail Plans to Protect Voting Rights:

    Attorney General Merrick Garland on Friday plans to announce steps that the Justice Department can take to secure voting rights, the New York Times reports.

    Mr. Garlands plans, expected to be announced Friday afternoon, come as Republican-led state legislatures push to enact new restrictive voting laws.

  • btomba_77

    Member
    June 12, 2021 at 9:05 am

    [h1][b]Garland Announces Major Expansion of Voting Rights Unit[/b][/h1]  
    [link=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/merrick-garland-voting-rights/2021/06/11/47906eda-cad1-11eb-81b1-34796c7393af_story.html]Washington Post[/link]: Attorney General Merrill Garland said the additional trial attorneys, which he plans to hire over the coming 30 days, will scrutinize new laws and existing practices across the nation for potential discrimination against Americans of color, including in new measures GOP state lawmakers are pushing. They will enforce provisions of the Voting Rights Act by challenging such laws or practices in court and prosecute anyone found to intimidate or threaten violence against election officials.
     
    The expanded unit will also monitor the growing number of post-election ballot reviews being called for around the country by supporters of former president Donald Trump in search of signs of violations of federal laws, Garland said, and will watch over upcoming redistricting efforts to call out discriminatory practices.
     

  • btomba_77

    Member
    July 22, 2021 at 4:45 am

    [h1][b]Garland Orders Restricted Contact with White House[/b][/h1]  
    Attorney General Merrick Garland issued a long-anticipated directive restricting Justice Department contact with the White House as a firewall against potential political interference, [link=https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/07/21/doj-restricts-white-house-contact-pivot-trump-politicization/7466982002/]USA Today[/link] reports.
     
    The order, which reaffirmed some policies of previous administrations, marks a sharp pivot from the Trump era when the former president casually broke with institutional norms, repeatedly calling on the department to launch investigations of his political rivals, including Biden, Hillary Clinton and former FBI Director James Comey.
     

    • kaldridgewv2211

      Member
      July 22, 2021 at 8:47 am

      IMO Garland has been stinking it up.  You get these nuggets of he’s doing the right thing.  However, Wilbur Ross get’s to skate.

  • btomba_77

    Member
    August 6, 2021 at 8:11 am

    [link=https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/08/05/merrick-garland-voting-rights-act-anniversary-congress/?utm_campaign=wp_opinions&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter]https://www.washingtonpos…amp;utm_source=twitter[/link]

    [b]Opinion: Merrick Garland: It is time for Congress to act again to protect the right to vote[/b][/h1]

    While the Voting Rights Act gave the Justice Department robust authority, it also imposed checks on that power. Jurisdictions had the option to go to federal court to show that their voting changes were lawful. This ensured fairness and accountability, but without the inefficiencies and ineffectiveness that existed prior to 1965. It was a balance that worked and received broad support: Congressional reauthorizations of the act were signed into law by President Richard M. Nixon in 1970, President Gerald Ford in 1975, President Ronald Reagan in 1982 and President George W. Bush in 2006.
     
    That invaluable framework was upended in 2013, when the Supreme Courts decision in [link=https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-96_6k47.pdf][i]Shelby County v. Holder[/i][/link] effectively eliminated the acts preclearance protections. Without that authority, the Justice Department has been unable to stop discriminatory practices before they occur. Instead, the Justice Department has been left with costly, time-consuming tools that have many of the shortcomings that plagued federal law prior to 1965.
     
    Notwithstanding these setbacks, the Justice Department is using all its current legal authorities to combat a new wave of restrictive voting laws. But if the Voting Rights Acts preclearance provision were still operative, many of those laws would likely not have taken effect in the first place.
     
    In a [link=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/30/opinion/john-lewis-civil-rights-america.html]column[/link] published after his death, Lewis recalled an important lesson taught by Martin Luther King Jr.: Each of us has a moral obligation to stand up, speak up and speak out. When you see something that is not right, you must say something. You must do something.
     
    On this anniversary of the Voting Rights Act, we must say again that it is not right to erect barriers that make it harder for millions of eligible Americans to vote. And it is time for Congress to act again to protect that fundamental right.

    [/QUOTE]
     

  • btomba_77

    Member
    September 1, 2021 at 11:24 am

    [link=https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-issues-guidance-federal-statutes-regarding-redistricting-and-methods]https://www.justice.gov/o…istricting-and-methods[/link]

    [b]Justice Department Issues Guidance on Federal Statutes Regarding Redistricting and Methods for Electing Public Officials[/b][/h1]  
     
    The right to vote is the right from which all other rights ultimately flow, said Attorney General Merrick B. Garland. Discriminatory redistricting schemes or election practices threaten that fundamental right and are illegal. The guidance issued today makes clear that jurisdictions must abide by federal laws when redrawing their legislative maps and that the Justice Department will vigilantly assess jurisdictions compliance with those laws during the redistricting cycle. 
     
     
    Our goal this redistricting season is simple: to ensure that new maps for city councils, school boards, county commissions, state legislatures, Congressional house seats and more do not discriminate on the basis of race, color or membership in a protected language minority group, said Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke of the Justice Departments Civil Rights Division. The Department of Justice is using every tool in our arsenal to protect the right to vote for all Americans and to ensure that officials comply with federal voting laws during the decennial redistricting cycle now underway. This official guidance helps jurisdictions comply with the Voting Rights Act when redrawing electoral maps to ensure that all people have an equal and fair opportunity to elect representatives of their choice.
     
    The guidance document discusses how the department will conduct its review of these redistricting plans and methods of electing governmental bodies to evaluate compliance with Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The guidance document also describes how the department applies well-established case law while investigating and bringing enforcement actions under Section 2.
     
    Todays announcement follows Attorney General Garlands [link=https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-merrick-b-garland-delivered-policy-address-regarding-voting-rights]recent commitment[/link] to expand the Justice Departments efforts to safeguard voting rights.
     

    • kaldridgewv2211

      Member
      September 2, 2021 at 10:31 am

      I think many people are getting fed up with Merrick

  • btomba_77

    Member
    May 29, 2022 at 1:26 pm

    [link=https://thehill.com/news/administration/3505538-garland-urges-public-service-in-harvard-address-democracy-is-under-threat/]Garland urges public service in Harvard address: ‘Democracy is under threat’

    [link=https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-merrick-b-garland-delivers-commencement-address-harvard-classes-2020-and]https://www.justice.gov/o…rvard-classes-2020-and[/link]

    [/link]
    There is one particular reason that makes my call to public service especially urgent for your generation. It is an urgency that should move each of you, regardless of the career you choose. It is the urgent need to defend democracy. (Applause.)
     
    Both at home and abroad, we are seeing the many ways in which democracy is under threat.
     
    I want to start with democracy abroad, as I am well aware of the international students in this audience. Harvard has come a long way since my day when you were counted as geographically diverse if you came from the Midwest. (Laughter.)
     
    When I was graduating from college, there were many things to worry about in the outside world, including the threat of another land war in Europe. But with the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, that threat seemed to recede from the possible to the improbable.
     
    Now that land war is upon us. Russias unprovoked and unjust invasion of Ukraine this February has been accompanied by heart-breaking atrocities: murders of civilians, the shelling of hospitals, the bombing of a theater in Mariupol where hundreds had sought shelter, the demolished residential apartment buildings of Bucha and other cities.
     
    There are, and there will be, many lessons to draw from the current conflict.
     
    But if anything can pull us together as a country and as an international community and make clear the stake we all have in the success of democracy both at home and abroad this heinous invasion by an authoritarian government is it. (Applause.)
     
    At home, we are also facing threats to democracy different in kind, but threats, nonetheless.
     
    We see them in efforts to undermine the right to vote.
     
    We see them in the violence and threats of violence that are directed at people because of who they are or how they serve the public.
     
    We saw them when a violent mob stormed the United States Capitol in an attempt to prevent the peaceful transfer of power.

     

    • kaldridgewv2211

      Member
      May 29, 2022 at 7:18 pm

      What a joke. Democracy is under threat so public service. Hes an empty suit. How about democracy is under threat prosecute some people who threaten it.

  • btomba_77

    Member
    June 13, 2022 at 3:42 am

    The Jan 6 hearings most important audience member …. Merrick Garland

    [link=https://apnews.com/article/capitol-siege-adam-schiff-government-and-politics-presidential-elections-d87892379e7e81c2907edef81a3b2b86]https://apnews.com/articl…7e81c2907edef81a3b2b86[/link]

    Lawmakers indicated that perhaps their most important audience member over the course of the hearings may be Attorney General Merrick Garland, who must decide whether his department can and should prosecute Trump. They left no doubt as to their own view whether the evidence is sufficient to proceed.
     
    Once the evidence is accumulated by the Justice Department, it needs to make a decision about whether it can prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt the presidents guilt or anyone elses, Schiff said. But they need to be investigated if theres credible evidence, which I think there is.
     
    Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., said he doesnt intend to browbeat Garland but noted the committee has already laid out in legal pleadings criminal statutes they believe Trump violated.
     
    I think that he knows, his staff knows, the U.S. attorneys know, whats at stake here, Raskin said. They know the importance of it, but I think they are rightfully paying close attention to precedent in history as well, as the facts of this case.

    [/QUOTE]
     

  • btomba_77

    Member
    August 12, 2022 at 4:25 am

    It’s now clear that Garland’s approval of the raid at Mar-a-ago was just a fission expedition.

    • adrianoal

      Member
      August 12, 2022 at 11:26 am

      To all of those publicly expressing horror at the raid: Do you really think Trump didn’t do anything wrong and will come out of this looking like a victim? 
       
      Seems like a bad bet. I’d at least keep quiet for a while and see what shakes out.

  • btomba_77

    Member
    August 21, 2022 at 9:12 am

    [link=https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/08/21/merrick-garland-hard-questions-trump-investigation/]Merrick Garland faces a plethora of tough decisions

    [/link]
    [b]Whether to indict isn’t nearly as hard as how to indict.[/b]

    Does Garland grant immunity to obtain cooperation from a close Trump associate (either before or after indicting such people)? Some witnesses credibility may be so weak as to be worthless in front of a jury. (Lets be honest who will believe anything Rudy Giuliani has to say?) Others testimony may be invaluable, but their own conduct is so serious that any deal would still have to include substantial jail time. That decreases the likelihood of many being willing to cooperate. (The personal fear of the mob if one testifies should not be underestimated, either.)

    Does Garland break off and pursue separately a possible indictment relating to the documents or wait until he has every possible charge ready to go? It may be too much for any one jury to hear all the sundry charges he may bring against Trump. Moreover, given the potential for an incoming GOP Congress and the time it may require to try Trump and complete the inevitable appeals, it might be years before Trump is held accountable for anything. It therefore might be advisable to start on at least one case well in advance of the 2024 election. On the other hand, the expense, jury selection and expenditure of personnel for multiple Trump trials over years may simply be too much for the Justice Department to manage.

    Does Garland make every effort to obtain an indictment (perhaps under seal) before the midterm elections? Garland has vowed he will not be rushed or rattled. He wont make a precipitous decision on something this grave. On the other hand, considering the firestorm that may await him if Republicans return to power, it might be helpful to get at least part of the prosecutorial effort underway before January

    ….

    Does Garland indict on every possible theory relating to the coup (up to and including seditious conspiracy), or only indict on the cleanest, easiest cases to prosecute? Every prosecutor faces this dilemma, but in the case of Trump, it takes on added importance. If Garland levels the single most explosive charge  [link=https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2384]seditious conspiracy[/link]  and cannot make it stick, the rule of law, the Justice Department and our democracy will be seriously wounded. Garland would have to have a rock-solid case to bring such a grave charge. At the other extreme, it hardly pays to indict Trump for minor, common crimes (e.g., aiding and abetting destruction of public property). If you are going to take the awesome step of indicting a former president, it better be for very serious reasons.

    [/QUOTE]

    • ruszja

      Member
      August 21, 2022 at 10:08 am

      Once the report of the items found during the raid is in, he has to make a decision: indict or let it slide. His ability to sit on the evidence is quite limited. Timing an indictment would open him up to the accusation of meddling in the political process.

  • btomba_77

    Member
    August 30, 2022 at 1:39 pm

    [link=https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/08/30/garland-justice-political-appointee-hatch/]AG Merrick Garland bans political activity for DOJ appointees before midterms

    [/link]

    Justice Department political appointees cannot participate in campaign-related activities in any capacity, Attorney General Merrick Garland said Tuesday, describing the change as necessary to maintain public trust and ensure that politics both in fact and appearance does not compromise or affect the integrity of our work.

     
    As Department employees, we have been entrusted with the authority and responsibility to enforce the laws of the United States in a neutral and impartial manner, Garland wrote. In fulfilling this responsibility, we must do all we can to maintain public trust and ensure that politics both in fact and appearance does not compromise or affect the integrity of our work.
     
    In his memo, Garland outlines how political appointees should adhere to the [link=https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/7323]Hatch Act[/link], which prohibits civil servants from running for partisan office or using their title or government resources while engaging in political activities though most civil servants still have a First Amendment right to political expression on their own time.

    [/QUOTE]
     

    • kaldridgewv2211

      Member
      May 15, 2023 at 12:58 pm

      sent the Durham report to the judiciary committees today.  And just as I thought.  Total exoneration of one Donald J Trump from the crooked FBI.  Just kidding.  The limited reporting now looks like a who gives a F.  one headline is the FBI shouldn’t have investigated Trump campaign, but slow walked Clinton accusations.  Not sure how that can even slightly be true considering the whole Comey blabbing about the emails a couple weeks before the election.  
       
      Queue the GOP.  We want to talk to Durham.