Wait, What?

[sheshe2]

A few days ago I read here, right here that Justice Garland should be FIRED.

And here he is suing Georgia over restrictive voting right laws.

This is only beginning. Patience grasshopper, be has only just begun.

[johnp3907]

1. Wasn't long ago I read here that Michael Avanati should be our presidential nominee.

[sheshe2]

2. Lol.

[Hekate]

3. This place gets nutty sometimes, I swear

[madaboutharry]

6. Yeah, that is true.

Usually if you give it 48 hrs or so things calm down.

[Ocelot II]

7. There are those who want it all, and they want it now.

[Talitha]

40. Like that greedy little girl in Willy Wonka...

[smirkymonkey]

42. Veruca Salt

[rownesheck]

43. I'll admit it.

I'm one of the annoying Veruca Salts. I do want everything to happen NOW. I've never had patience. And my anxiety grows with each passing moment that what I want to happen isn't happening. It's not a comfortable way to exist, but that's just the way I'm built.

[smirkymonkey]

45. I must admit, my patience is wearing thin.

We do not have the luxury of time here. The midterm elections are in a little over a year and if we don't have this voting issue dealt with by then, we are screwed. They will cheat their way to power if they are not held accountable for EVERYTHING, and we can kiss democracy goodbye.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

16. Yup, we've been infiltrated.

[Hekate]

19. Sure feels like it

[wnylib]

59. There have been times when it sermed that way to me.

[ZZenith]

63. Lmao!

[George II]

72. By whom?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

73. Paid staffers? Or worse... Haven't figured that out yet.

All I know is that it's NOT normal to be 1 million percent blind faith for ANYONE. Red flags pop up when there is zero nuance and pouncing and swarming when anyone even slightly disagrees.

[GoCubsGo]

51. Yeah, there's a knee-jerk "So-and-So for President" contingent here.

You see it every time somebody does or says something big or bold, even if they're not eligible to be President, or doesn't share a bunch of other Democratic ideals. Former GOPer Ana Navarro comes to mind with the latter. I saw calls for "Ana for President" when she started bashing Trump, in spite of the fact that, like the Lincoln Project, Joe Walsh, Joe Scar and others of her ilk, she contributed to the climate that gave us Trump. I don't think much of it is serious, but it's pretty much inevitable.

[StarfishSaver]

12. Seriously?

[johnp3907]

15. Not sure how serious they were.

But yeah, they were saying “Draft Avanati!” He’s the type we need!”

[FoxNewsSucks]

21. Yes, I remember that.

I don't think it started here, but it was definitely a "thing"

Mainly, because at the time, he was perceived as the only one really standing up to MF45.

If he hadn't been a corrupt weasel. . . .

[Blue_true]

32. No.

There were people here praising him to high heaven. Calling him a principled fighter.

[soldierant]

38. If one is the only one standing uo t TOT, one no doubt appears to be a principled fighter.

Certainly by comparison it looks that way.

Give it 48 hours is probably a good guide.

[mcar]

48. Oh yeah

[GoCubsGo]

52. I don't remember him being urged to run for President, but

he was sure put on a pedestal early on. He fooled a lot of people initially, but most were onto him pretty quickly. And, I think that a lot of folks weren't really fooled, so much as they were desperate for a hero at the time.

[stopdiggin]

61. but "desperate for a hero at the time"

is an extremely dangerous impulse. Agreed?
We need thinkers and principled positions - not 'knee jerk' impulses and 'heroes.'

[GoCubsGo]

62. Sure, but we're only talking DU here.

Just because a handful of people make impulsive posts on occasion, it doesn't mean the vast majority of us do.

[Ocelot II]

22. I remember that well,

because I and a few others got slagged for suggesting that he was just a sleazy publicity whore, which is exactly what he soon turned out to be - and then some.

[BannonsLiver]

54. This is such a great reminder of how reactionary and weird this forum has become

I remember the bizarre, totally moronic Avanti love fest as well.

[GulfCoast66]

75. I got my hand slapped for posting what a crazy idea it was.

Just let the crazy train run itself off the track after that. It took maybe 2 weeks.

[Skittles]

64. I remember

I thought he - and his client - were sleazy grifters.

[Fullduplexxx]

4. And maybe the outcry made him change his mind and move on something

[Hekate]

8. Or maybe it was in the research and writing stage before this

[sheshe2]

9. Nope.

He has a lot on his plate and neither you or I know all that involves. After trump he and his department are buried in the filth that Sessions and Barr left behind.

It was a stupid outcry. He was only confirmed in late March. It takes time to build a case and seek justice.

[StarfishSaver]

13. Um, no ...

[Grasswire2]

36. Waiting for public outcry is a good strategy.

That way, accusations of political retribution are made null.

And so, hollering at rank and file Dems to stop demanding adjudication is not useful.

[mcar]

49. Kinda think a lawsuit of this magnitude takes some time to put together

[George II]

66. I make a point of not second guessing our administration officials, especially our AG.....

NONE of us knows what's going on in the background.

[EYESORE 9001]

5. Some people should have that knee-jerk reaction looked into

[sheshe2]

11. Good point.

[George II]

69. My nurse wife agrees:

[Me.]

10. Looks LIke Fat Nixon No Longer Has A DOJ Lawyer

[marble falls]

14. Sometimes I worry about some of us.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

18. So you saw too? A DUer literally say the Garland should be fired?

[niyad]

25. Yes to both. And not all that long ago.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

28. Link? Did it get hidden?

[LiberalArkie]

35. Do a search for fire garland at the top of the page

https://upload.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=15516940

[Laura PourMeADrink]

37. Read top 10 posts and nothing.

[ShazzieB]

74. I think it's implied rather than stated directly.

Post #7 implies it pretty strongly, imo. There are several others that are extremely negative about Garland as well, without actually saying the words "fire him."

[Laura PourMeADrink]

76. Thanks, I got it. In other words, people are not happy

with Garland. And others think that you can't express this no matter what. You can offer constructive criticism but you just have toe the party line no matter what.

Yikes, what does that sound like?

[electric_blue68]

46. I also saw it and I was shocked...

Yes, I sometimes have an 'I want it now' attitude, but I try to restrain it because I know things usually don't happen that way.
(now that's sometime because of political will, or lack of enough people that support x etc)

I also know AG Garland has a hell of a lot on his plate.

[sheshe2]

20. ya....me to.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

17. Link?

[sheshe2]

23. Read DU.

[USALiberal]

24. Most provide a link! Nt

[sheshe2]

26. Most provide a link?

It was several conversations and comments on DU. I have no clue where each comment was made. I read DU.I saw them.

I sincerely hope you are not calling me a liar. Others here seem to know what I am talking about and read the comments.

[TreasonousBastard]

29. Woo-Hoo! Calm down, both of ya. I had enough alerts for...

one day already.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

31. To me anyone who accuses a fellow DUer should provide

A link. So sick of this trashing people and then when someone asks for a link .. crickets. Same with ALL the accusations about DUers personally trashing Pelosi. Links were asked for and none provided. Surely if someone said Garland should be fired it was hidden.

[Wednesdays]

55. See reply #41 below. nt

[George II]

71. Easy to find, especially for regular DUers.

[mcar]

50. I saw them, you saw them

The link or it didn't happen people are being disingenuous. Wonder why?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

60. I never saw such a thing. the brave person came forward

Just trying to keep people honest who continually accuse others & never will say who they are

And it worked

More importantly, people should be able to express their opinions without being harassed or belittled.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

33. Guess it's heresay:)

[Laura PourMeADrink]

34. Stop fanning flames. If you are accusing someone

Post the link. If true than post would be hidden.

[NH Ethylene]

65. If a general sentiment was expressed on DU, and most of us remember it,

I don't see the need to pull out the dirty laundry and air it again. Nobody is pointing fingers at individuals, nor should they be, and pulling up old links would do exactly that. I'm sure most people who advocated for Avanti soon regretted it.

This is rather like demanding links if someone says passions here were high during the primaries. Ridiculous.

On edit: However, if you are talking about a 'fire Garland' post, which was recent and involved one individual, then asking for a link when it's discussed would be acceptable.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

77. What??? Don't pull out dirty laundry??? Have you seen the OP??

[ret5hd]

27. I think we should all step back...

and stop giving opinions/speculations/theories/etc. If it is not a factual statement, don’t say it. We should strive to make this site as bland as that sheet cake you get at the office birthday party.

“President Biden made a statement today. Here is a link to the video.”

“Thank you.”

End of thread.

Not picking (too hard) on the OP, but if I feel like gritching about something I probably will. Case in point: this post right here.

[gab13by13]

30. Let's talk turkey,

the main criticism of Garland came from the Arizona fraudit. The only action taken was a stern letter for Qanon Cyber Ninjas who are violating Title 52 - Voting and Elections - Subtitle I and II. In the stern letter was a warning for Cyber Ninjas not to go door to door intimidating voters urging them to sign affidavits regarding election irregularities. The Cyber Ninjas ignored that warning.

I'm pleased as punch that un-American election laws are being challenged in court. I am not a lawyer but I would bet anyone who wants to bet that these voting law suits won't be adjudicated until after the 2022 election, which still makes it critical to get S1 passed, to get the filibuster axed or reformed. There is no guarantee that these DOJ law suits will be won, especially since a former more liberal Supreme Court already gutted the civil rights act.

The Pa. AG has the right approach, he publicly stated that he would charge people who knowingly use untruthful "data" in passing voter suppression laws. Politicians who are passing these un-American voting laws need to be held accountable.

If none of the above works then an effort needs to be made to increase the size of the SC.

Challenging these laws is a must but more needs to be done.

[quickesst]

39. I believe most of the time...

.... most of the over-the-top, dumb shit found on here are people who are desperately seeking the coveted kudos of the liberal majority.

[Eyeball_Kid]

41. Whoever said that Garland should be fired?

Well, I did.

While any law enforcement action is better than none, Garland is falling short in the PR department. And that can’t be shrugged off as silly putty when a whole populist movement is successfully instilling doubt and division about the very viability of the justice system.

The majority of the country wants Trump to be held to account for his massive portfolio of crimes, but Garland wants to DEFEND Trump against civil lawsuits??? What?

From a PR point of view, Garland lost his voice. Yeah, I’d love to see equal justice under the law. And Garland needs to make it abundantly clear Trump will be treated like an ordinary citizen. It’s a major issue with no statements of assurance.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

57. Kudos to you! You're the first one

Where a post trashing the unnamed and then refusing to identify you was true!!! Things are looking up!!!

I take this as a good first step. We can express our opinions with solid reasoning and constructive criticism even though others disagree.

[malaise]

44. Hehehehehehe

[mcar]

47. Yeah, all those "he's gotta go" sorts are quiet now

I'll never understand how people who are as immersed in politics as DUers are can be so clueless about how things actually work.

[sheshe2]

53. I hear you, mcar.

[czarjak]

56. Ship-righting never includes course-staying.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

58. Amen

[Cary]

67. It's a lot of work

[KPN]

68. My patience is exhausted. Nevertheless, I think you are right.

[sheshe2]

70. Thank you.

I am a pretty patient person most of the time. Sure, sometimes I blow up at times. However after taking care of a soon to be 95 year old 24/7 for 3 and a half years you learn patience and how to pace yourself. It takes time to make it all work. Not easy.