Former US Attorney: Garland Critics Are 'Silly'

[babylonsister]

https://crooksandliars.com/2022/01/chuck-rosenberg-merrick-garland-doj


Former US Attorney: Garland Critics Are 'Silly'
Chuck Rosenberg, who should know, praised Garland and the DOJ as working "rather rapidly" in the investigation into the insurrection.
59
By Aliza Worthington — January 5, 2022

snip//

"Well, I actually think, Hallie, they're moving rather rapidly," said Rosenberg. "I think criticism that they're not moving quickly enough is silly."

He elaborated, "I mean they've charged 725 people in under a year. As I mentioned before, they have 300,000 tips to work through and 15 terabytes of data. Also, we don't know what they're doing behind the scenes."

Then he explained why Garland is proceeding exactly as he should be. "Because he's saying, 'We're on it. We're working. Be patient. Justice takes time.' The worst thing you could do, Hallie, is rush to charge somebody. You have to charge when you have the requisite facts and the law supports the charge, when you could bring a case in court, and you can win it, and sustain it on appeal. And that takes time."

If Chuck Rosenberg called me "silly" I'd be embarrassed and ashamed. He is the calmest, sanest, and easily one of the most knowledgable people on the planet when it comes to prosecuting cases in this nation. He headed the Drug Enforcement Agency, spent years as a U.S. Attorney, was a top official in the FBI, and was chief of staff to a Deputy Attorney General of the United States.

If Chuck Rosenberg tells me to calm the f*ck down, I'm gonna calm the f*ck down.

This is your reminder that Merrick Garland’s investigation of Timothy McVeigh, Terry Nichols and the Unabomber had zero leaks before indictments,100% convictions and no turnovers on appeal. Sometimes you have to have a little faith in the process. Happy Wednesday.

— 𝐁𝐞𝐤𝐬 (@antifaoperative) January 5, 2022

[Sherman A1]

1. My concern is not the speed of the investigation

It is the (in my opinion) very light sentences being handed out often at the suggestion of the DOJ prosecutors.

Seems like an attempt to overthrow the government and constitutional process gets one about 20 minutes in jail if that.

[Deminpenn]

15. It's understandable

There are over 700 cases to prosecute. The least serious, ones that essentially amount to trespassing, are being cleared first. There have been jail sentences and restitution. While you might not think 30 days or so in jail is much, it must be traumatic for someone who has never been a defendant in a criminal case. When it's been reported that most Americans don't have $400 saved for an emergency, a $500 restitution order might be a significant penalty and that's on top of legal fees.

[NurseJackie]

24. Thank you very much for your intelligent and reasonable comments! I hope that others learn...

... something from you.

I often get the feeling that for many of the most chronic complainers, they'll only be satisfied if every person who attended the rally ends up swinging from the gallows, or faces a firing squad in front of their own mass-grave trench.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

30. And it's not about the worker bees, it's about the queen bee

[Deminpenn]

65. Two of the recently sentenced defendants

are from my PA county. There was a story in the local paper that both expected no jail time. They were probably surprised to learn they'll be spending 30 days in jail plus paying a $500 fine.

[Joinfortmill]

2. 👍

[Emile]

3. Seeing how we watched TFG on live TV orchestrating the traitorous

insurrection to overturn our democracy one year ago, justice is moving pretty slow.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

35. Need to find that quote from one of those people from the capital police who testified

At the beginning. He thought it was urgently important to find the head of the mob who orchestrated this travesty! That's who I'm listening to. The brave people who were left short-manned, left to bleed, through no fault of their own

[Emile]

52. I heard him saying it too! The cops want him arrested now!

[Laura PourMeADrink]

57. Recapping.

Isn't there hard evidence that FG did all these things?

Continually fueled the fraud that he really won when he didn't

Invited people to rally

TOLD people to go to Capitol

Watched the violence on TV and didn't stop it ! despite frantic pleas from his own party.

[Emile]

58. That's it! +1

[jaxexpat]

4. If I remember correctly, "Timothy McVeigh, Terry Nichols and the Unabomber"......

were in custody by this point in those investigations. I'll believe there's nothing to get excited about regarding the justice department when I see MTG and Gym Jordan in jail. And that ain't happening, obviously. Delay is defeat.

Screw people who recommend patience when offering unequivocal examples to justify their advice. It smells of dishonesty because it is just plain dishonest. The fear of reality and the stench of Trump seems to have numbed the brains of people in high office, especially if they think their little pep talks somehow assuage the concerns of rational people.

[Alexander Of Assyria]

5. Screw ppl who counsel patience? Disagree. Patience is the touchstone of justice, and

not knowing such is what is irrational.

Some really don’t understand how complex criminal investigations work, and some don’t care to find out, cause that’s a lot of amateur research in the Facebook thing.

[Escurumbele]

10. "Some really don't understand how complex criminal investigations work" You are correct, but...

what I believe has many of us frustrated is knowing there is so much evidence to put the buffoon and his gang behind bars. There are videos, audios, emails, witnesses, etc...so much material that one has to wonder why is it taking so long?

For example, there is a full hour and a few minutes of the phone conversation the buffoon, Mark Meadows, et al had with the Secretary of State from Georgia, and other people, where he asked several times "find me 11,780 votes, just one more which is what we need to win"..."FIND ME..." how is it they have to investigate that so thoroughly? It is as clear as clean air, what is it they are investigating? It is there, it is an audio, there are witnesses, one of them the Secretary of State of Georgia who was part of the call...What else is being investigated? I don't get it, I am frustrated there are no indictments from that call.

[Alexander Of Assyria]

66. Point of order. Can you imagine organizing and collating all that material, only some of

which is publicly known, to prepare for a conviction, proof beyond a reasonable doubt?

Example…730 charged in the insurrection day riot…can u imagine the work, on a criminal law standard, not a Twitter law standard.

[atreides1]

17. Patience is the touchstone of justice

Here's one example of "Patience is the touchstone of justice"!


https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/homer-plessy-separate-equal-case-195549502.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

[jaxexpat]

19. Respond to the whole sentence. You've cherry picked. Why?

"Screw people who recommend patience when offering unequivocal examples to justify their advice." That's the whole sentence.

Changes the meaning doesn't it? After conducting a complex investigation, I have leads to an answer for that and, like Garland, I'm not pursuing the issue to a conclusion because......reasons.

[Alexander Of Assyria]

67. Looking into others minds and motivations and the future with such precision is a real skill.

I see words and then actions….recent words from Garland…will pursue the investigations where the facts and law lead…I believe him and believe that road will soon lead to indictments slightly slower than the speed of sound on the internet. That’s all….not radical at all.

[jaxexpat]

68. Garland. Much depends on his success, his intent.

I cannot predict the future nor discern the motives of others but I do have a working knowledge of time and its passage. I understand the prosecution of such unimaginably high level crimes MUST be precise or it will fail in court. I contend that, ultimately, the courts are not an adequate venue for the justice required to meet today's challenges.

I watched Watergate unfold what seemed like forever. It was not the threat of prosecution that Nixon feared which brought him to the point resignation. It was the advice of colleagues who told him he did not have their support and they were not prepared to see the nation and its government go down just to save his reputation. There are no such realistic, conscientious or patriotic republican voices these days. The deal that was struck allowed Nixon to "retire" with some dignity instead of allowing the American people to hear the actual truth in the list of outrageous crimes he committed. That's why alternate facts abounded for decades. That tradition is how Reagan's handlers were able to hide the facts of treason by his administration behind bald faced lies and denials which further confused and divided the public, leaving only uncertainty. People were inclined to doubt the evidence of, though second hand, their own eyes.

It hasn't gotten any better since. The only way that I see to remedy the situation is to make every provable fact of crime available to the public. Jail every party for whom guilt is already provable with existing evidence, especially the higher ups. Let the evidence knock down every item of dissenting propaganda as it inevitably rears its head. This is no time to play legal/lawyer/delay games which only increase public cynicism. We are starving for successes. As we starve, they gain strength.

I don't see this so much as a legal issue as a PR challenge. The single most important item now, on the cusp of a civil war, is refusing the enemy any increase in sympathy. The enemy is still numerically weaker than we. That is our advantage which we must maintain, cultivate and increase. There are some out there who could still go either way but who will, in the end, follow the path which offers the most believability. Believability requires straight talk delivered in a timely fashion. If the pendulum of public opinion, the gauge of societal stress, has swung beyond a certain point before the 2022 mid-terms, all hope of a peaceful outcome which favors Democrats in 2024 will be lost.

So, my friend, the only tolerable allowance for patience, in my view, is its use as a facade, a demeanor, a source of internal strength, while we tirelessly and desperately race against the turning worm to retain and enlist support from the general population. Garland is the current leader for our side (if you will) in this race, in much the same way as Barr was Trump's front man, his protector.

Garland is running against a headwind. Will that be the inscription on his headstone?

[Alexander Of Assyria]

69. Nicely written. However I see the prosecutions of he ringleaders as very much a complex legal

issue, the DOJ is nonpartisan, so it has to be only legal.

PR is for the politicians.

[liberalgunwilltravel]

6. Only by luck

McVeigh was in custody only because he was arrested on a firearms charge in a routine traffic stop. While he was in custody and before he could make bail, a police sketch made him as a person of interest in the bombing. Nichols was detained as a material witness because of that. So, your example is not particularly relevant. That's not to say that a lot more people shouldn't already be in jail, but I want to see the charges stick and stick hard.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/oklahoma/stories/chron.htm

[MyOwnPeace]

32. "I want to see the charges stick and stick hard."

Me too!

But I'm afraid I'm like a kid waiting for Santa - no matter HOW HARD I WISH FOR IT, December 25 NEVER gets here any sooner - I gotta' wait......

I SO badly want to see Donald J. Trump being marched out of Merde-A-Lardo in HANDCUFFS, but I know that I've just got to be patient - so I'll continue to 'be good' and hopefully see that day arrive!

[we can do it]

31. Took 17 years to catch unabomber, you're a little off.

[jaxexpat]

55. This is getting ridiculous. As I stated, my point was that by this stage, blah, blah, blah.

The "stage" has a definitive criterion. One of the most important of which was that the suspect be identified. None of those guys were allowed to run around salting the wells of justice after their identities were known. In the current case, the participants are surely identified, yet only the small fry, the capitol attacking minions, are in jail, and too damn few of them.

[we can do it]

60. Your words " If I remember correctly...Unabomber"......were in custody by this point..."

It is ridiculous. You’re correct on that point.

[ProfessorGAC]

38. A Few Things

First, Nichols & McVeigh left an evidence trail that glowed in the dark. They also didn't have to prove a tops down conspiracy. They had to prove: a). They built a bomb; b) they planted a bomb; c) they had a stated motive. They didn't have to prove a conspiracy in which those 2 were not DIRECTLY involved in the actual execution of the crime. They didn't have to prove intent. That was self-evident.
The Unabomber is also a bad example. Kaczynski committed those crimes over a span of 18 years. It's not like they caught him in a few hours.
I understand your anger, and share it somewhat. But, your examples don't make sense to me.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

46. Best line yet! "(People who) think their little pep talks somehow assuage the concerns

of rational people"

Bookmarking. Bravo jaxexpat!!!

[oasis]

7. Chill folks. Het got this. nt

[Scrivener7]

8. I'll believe it when I see it. So far, I don't see it.

People are all over the speech.

He said he's going to go where the evidence leads.

What else did everyone think he was going to say?

I liked the bit about voting rights, but there was nothing he said about the investigations that we couldn't have predicted before the speech.

And as for whether he will actually get the people who planned and executed an attempted coup?

I'll believe it when I see it.

[we can do it]

33. How fast can you go thru a terabyte of info?

Maybe you should offer to help.

[Scrivener7]

36. Oh, Lord.

The "What are YOU doing to help Merrick Garland" schtick has never made much sense.

[we can do it]

40. Cute

Neither do the I know what’s going on behind the scenes diatribes.

[Scrivener7]

47. Not sure why you are saying that to me, because nothing I have said

was even remotely that.

[we can do it]

44. Cute

Neither do the I know what’s going on behind the scenes diatribes.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

48. It makes sense when ya got nuttin :)

[gab13by13]

9. What is missed in this post,

is that there are 2 main events, 2 main crimes committed.

1. The attack on the Capitol, which Garland addressed yesterday. he explained in detail his plan to investigate anyone and everyone who was involved in the physical attack on the Capitol and who was involved in planning and funding the attack on the Capitol. He did not address crime #2, the much more important crime.

2. The attack on our democracy, the attempt to overthrow our election, the attempt to change votes, all of which was planned immediately after the election and it continues today. The written documents that laid out the process to not transfer power to Joe Biden, which involved members of Trump's cabinet, which involved Congressmen. Is Garland willing to investigate Congressmen who gave Capitol tours to people who invaded the Capitol or will that look partisan?

What scared me was Garland's statement about his not being a partisan AG, and that is a given. It scares me that he had to even bring that up. It makes me wonder if Garland will investigate a former president, or will that make him look like he is being partisan? I wonder if Garland will investigate members of Trump's cabinet, will investigate Congressmen if that's where the facts lead?

Maybe a tell will be the criminal referral for Mark Meadows? Today is day 22 since he got the referral. Is Garland willing to indict a member of Trump's cabinet, even if it is just for ignoring a subpoena?

There is no indication that Garland has been investigating crime #2. The evidence is out there plain as day. The call to Raffensperger, the several written documents that describe how to do a coup. The information about Jeffrey Clarke getting election officials to change votes in states to show that trump won. John Eastman's document.
Let me quote what Dan Goldman said last night. He said he doesn't know if Garland is investigating crime #2, but he hopes he is. he said if Garland were delaying investigating crime #2 it is not a good idea because people's memories change, evidence gets destroyed, people get their stories to align. Merrick Garland is doing a fantastic job on crime #1, the jury is still out on crime #2.

I'm waiting on the Meadow's referral. If Garland indicts Meadows I will feel a lot better.

[Escurumbele]

12. "What scared me was Garland's statement about his not being a partisan AG..." I believe he felt

he must clear that up because he has been accused of inactivity due to his party affiliation. I understand he is a republican?

[gab13by13]

16. I have no idea what party he is,

his background would lead me to believe he is a Democrat, but then again, Mike Lee was the one who suggested Garland's name for SC to president Obama.

[Kablooie]

37. He would have to say this no matter what.

When nearly all the indictments fall on one party for their politically motivated actions he has to explain that his reactions are not politically motivated.

[Deminpenn]

20. Yesterday on Deadline:WH

one of the guests, a reporter iirc, said Garland was viewed inside DoJ as a "small c" conservative. Because of this, the inside DoJ employees weren't sure Garland would act on the criminal referral for Bannon.

Maybe don't be surprised if Meadows, a much more powerful WH insider, isn't indicted.

[gab13by13]

23. If he fails to indict Meadows then crime #2 goes unpunished.

If he fails to indict Meadows he will never ever go after a former president.

[jaxexpat]

26. The impediment to this is that there are no Democrats to equalize the prosecution.

Trump and all his minions would already be in orange suits if Obama and other prominent Democrats would just take one for the team. The bothsiderism maw MUST be fed or it's not gonna be "fair". Come on Nancy, you're already oldish, do the right thing. You could rest in prison. I can't believe our elected leaders, who send men to their deaths in the name of national security, can't see the simple logic that necessitates their ultimate sacrifice.

Could this be an indication, a clue if you will, of some essential flaw which propels the nation toward totalitarianism?

A hint, there's some hidden in the preceding.

[2naSalit]

11. Instant gratification nation...

Just has to wait. That instant gratification stuff only works out on teevee, in movies and other fiction.

[gab13by13]

18. Crime #2 has only grown stronger since the election.

Fraudits were not stopped, the intimidation and threats to election officials and school board members have not stopped, states continue passing voter discrimination, voter suppression laws. Steve Bannon has been the only person indicted involved in crime #2 and every day he is on his pod cast pushing the Big Lie.

[uponit7771]

49. Watergate had special prosecutor less than a yr after plumber arrest. J6 Concerns are rational

[OldBaldy1701E]

13. Justice should not 'take time'.

There is no metaphysical energy keeping the DOJ from at least putting some of the instigators in jail. Not the grunts, they are being dealt with, if very gently. I mean those who stood on that platform demanding action. Those sitting members of Congress who actively participated in this attempt. But, here we sit while they continue to do what they want. I am betting that 'being patient' and 'justice takes time' was never an issue with most Americans when 'justice' decided to go after them. If my non-rich ass committed a crime anywhere near the severity of what happened on Jan.6th of last year, I am pretty certain that I would not be treated with such kid gloves. Why delay now? Justice delayed is justice denied. But, we shall see... won't we?

[gab13by13]

21. I'm not asking the DOJ to put people in jail,

I'm asking DOJ to investigate them.

Do you believe that Garland will investigate if a sitting member of Congress, if she gave tours of the Capitol to the insurrectionists? That is being partisan. Jeffrey Clarke should have been investigated by DOJ by now, plenty of evidence is out there to just warrant an investigation.

[OldBaldy1701E]

50. I was under the impression that they were investigating.

I was 'investigated' once as well. For the fact that I was driving a car that had an out of date inspection, as well as not having a valid drivers license. (Broke, homeless, living in my car due to massive depression and suicidal tendencies. Had to drive around as I had no where to park the car for any length of time.) Did they allow me to roam around while this was going on? Absolutely not. They put m in a jail cell. (I will never forget the ADA when he got to my two traffic tickets. The arresting officer was sitting right beside us when the ADA asked me to explain, and I said that, after I was bailed out of jail by a friend, I wanted... he interrupted me with an incredulous look on his face. "You were put in jail for this??" he exclaimed. I said, yes, I was there overnight. I then showed him my new license and informed him that I had no car anymore, so the inspection sticker thing was moot at this point. He looked it all over, and then said, "Case dismissed." The glare he got from the arresting officer was only matched by the HUGE grin I gave her as I walked out of the door. But the simple fact is, incarceration should not have happened at all.) There was no call for 'patience' then. And, I was guilty of far less than some of these 'fine upstanding members of Congress'... but I was tossed into a jail cell immediately. They are still going to parties and sleeping in their mansions. They can investigate all they want. But, there is a distinct double standard in our justice system, and if those within that department don't stop applying it we are going to see some interesting times ahead. Because it is being applied right this moment to this very investigation. If they want those of us who are skeptical to become believers, then treat all those under the glare of 'justice' in our country the same. Otherwise, just stop with the theatre already...

[deelee]

14. What these apologists never seem to want to tell us

Is WHEN we should no longer be patient. This is just going to get stretched out till it goes away....while we show "patience". Two sets of rules.......and Garland and Biden are all in

[gab13by13]

22. If a Republican wins the presidency in 2024

will he/she pardon everyone? Oh that would never happen, that would be a partisan act.

[Scrivener7]

42. No question they would.

[Emile]

25. +1

[hlthe2b]

27. Look, I like Rosenberg and largely agree with him, but I'd be remiss not to mention his Bill Barr

laudatory comments (when first nominated for Trump AG) that suggested he would "rise to the occasion," and not become a Trump flunky--despite what history had already shown of Barr's willingness to cover for RW misdeeds (google Iran Contra pardons).

Again, I largely agree with Chuck R now and I think highly of him. But, he has a blind spot when it comes to his defense of DOJ and those who rise the ranks sometimes. On this, I believe (hope) he is right.

[gab13by13]

41. Some of those people interviewed still have friends working at DOJ.

Maybe that should be considered a conflict of interest when they give opinions about DOJ?

[Scrivener7]

43. This is STILL the best we can do: hope that there will be justice at some point.

The speech didn't change that.

[Mr. Sparkle]

28. Well, one year on and the ring leaders are still running around scot-free

If somehow us Dems did this, do you think our leadership would have had the same indifference? i dont think so.

[NQAS]

34. Scrolling down the NYT website

No reference to Garland’s speech yesterday. It may be in some other section but not on the landing page in the NYT app.

[uponit7771]

39. FACT NOT IN DISPUTE: There was Watergate special counsel less than a year ...

... from the arrest of the plumbers.

That was for a break in to a hotel !!

America is now just getting a statement for the nations AG that Jan 6 terrorism was wrong.

The speech yesterday was part bare minimum ... AND... a blew up the GQP notion that they can keep up with anti democracy measures without resistance which is the part I think is mostly missed.

[gab13by13]

45. To me Garland's speech was a request for more time.

[Emile]

56. To me the only reason he came out was because of all the criticism

he is getting. Apparently his little speech worked because it seems the majority of the people here think it was a good speech. , I don't think it was unrealistic to expect more from him, after all it's been a year. There is more than enough evidence to arrest TFG!

[Snackshack]

51. I disagree.

What Chuck Rosenberg forgets is we live in a 24hr news cycle society. We want everything done…right now because that is what we hear all the time. Mr. Rosenberg has been in Justice all his life he is used to the time Justice takes. Most of us not in the world of justice have difficulty with understanding why after a year and what most view as solid evidence. (Find 11,780 votes) no charges have been brought when everyday the news amps us all up with their “danger Will Robinson” format of info delivery.

[The Jungle 1]

53. Remember no one was executed for treason after the Civil war.

Davis was not even tried.
We cannot repeat that mistake.

[ecstatic]

54. 2 weeks ago, Chuck was sounding the alarm

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=16156068

I'm glad he's had a change of heart, that's reassuring. 🙄

[Goodheart]

59. Indeed.

Didn't Lucy used to call Charlie Brown "Chuck"? Doesn't it mean wishy-washy?

I don't think we, the public, should expect or want that justice follow the typical timelines here because this treason was unprecedented and far more serious than the typical crimes.

[crickets]

64. That was Peppermint Patty. 😉

My patience is wearing thin too, but I want Garland and the Jan 6 Committee to get it right. There will be no do-overs, so if it takes longer than I'd like to get the job done, I will still be ecstatic if it just gets done. The list of crimes is long and the list of the guilty is longer. "unprecedented and far more serious than the typical crimes" - indeed. There's much more going on here than during Watergate, and many more people involved. It's understandable that this is taking serious time. I can wait. I don't like it, but I can wait.

But they'd better get it right.

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

61. I'm not concerned about the speed so much as the scope and intensity.

There was and is an ongoing coup to destroy the foundation of out democracy. The number of insurgents DOJ has arrested doesn't matter so much as slap on the wrist consequences they're each paying. "Hey, I went to a really cool party! Want to see my selfies? We were having a great time until the cops came and broke it up. Now I have to stay in my house for a couple of months. Bummer. I can't wait until The Man calls us together for the next rave!"

Every member of the mob took part in a concerted effort to stop an official function of government -- the formal recording of the electoral votes. How anyone can watch the videos of the attack, know of the deaths caused by the insurrection and huddle in fear as the mob chanted, "Kill Mike Pence," claim the event didn't happen at all is beyond me. Yet that's what I heard Hannity say today.

There are two groups that need to be held accountable -- the insurrectionists and the traitors who planned the attack and set it into motion. I will be really pissed if Garland focuses all his efforts on the former.

[mcar]

62. He is correct. Nt

[maxsolomon]

63. L. Tribe reminded us on last night's Last Word that THE CLOCK IS TICKING.

The Midterms are now 11 months off. There HAS to be action prior to then.

Will there be? Who fucking knows?

Garland's speech was the 1st we've heard from the DOJ (or the FBI) since around 1/10/21 (remember those 2 bald guys? where'd they go?), and the 1st I've heard that mentioned anything besides the Capitol Riot pawns.

This was Conspiracy to commit Sedition, and I'm still not sure the DOJ sees that as prosecutable. Maybe if they had talked about it once or twice last year, there'd be a little more faith.