Merrick Garland Needs To Do a Press Conference
I heard this discussed yesterday, with good reasons given.
Garland needs to assure the American people that Donald Trump is the subject of a DOJ investigation.
Donald Trump has been undermining our democracy from the day he decided to run for president, the 2016 election. Enough time has passed for crying out loud. It is not just decent patriotic Americans who need to hear this, traitors who are still conspiring to overturn our democracy need to hear this.
I am not asking for Garland to indict anyone; I am asking Garland to tell the American people that Donald Trump is being investigated.
If Garland decides not to prosecute Trump, so be it, I understand why, because he is an institutionalist.
No Garland doesn't get a pass for his former speech where he said he would follow the evidence wherever it leads, he needs to spell it out clearly for dummies like me, and Adam Schiff.
= new reply since forum marked as read
So... I apologize if I sound a bit frustrated but... These points have been addressed repeatedly and the poster continues to put them up over and over for a very long time now. But... I can give it a go again 
"Merrick Garland chose not to indict Trump for "individual one," the same crime that Michael Cohen went to prison for."
This is referring to Cohen's guilty plea in which tfg was referred to as individual-1 and why was tfg guy not prosecuted. The reason is that the only evidence against individual-1 in Cohen's word... And Cohen lied to the feds during the case... Not much of a witness to prove a case. There was no documentation or anything else to back up a charge... Just Cohen. That is why there was no prosecution.
"Merrick Garland chose not to indict Trump for the numerous obstruction of justice crimes that Robert Mueller laid out."
This is sort of true... Everything Mueller laid out, he also said was only good for Congress to try tfg guy on... The senate failed to convict, this is not a 'Garland' issue.
"Merrick Garland did nothing to stop a pro-Trump, bogus, Cyber Ninja company have access to ballots, voter information, and election equipment and materials, all in violation of federal law, Title 52 which states that those materials should have remained in the possession of election officials for 22 months. Doing nothing to the Cyber Ninjas allowed the Big Lie to grow and more fraudits to spread across the country."
This is a fantasy... There is simply no other way to put it. Lets go to the law... Federal Law Constraints
on Post-Election “Audits”:
Therefore, if the original election official who has custody of records covered by the Act hands over
those election records to other officials (for example, to legislators or other officeholders) or the official
turns over the records to private parties (such as companies that offer to conduct “forensic
examinations”), the Department interprets the Act to require that “administrative procedures be in
place giving election officers ultimate management authority over the retention and security of those
election records, including the right to physically access” such records. Id. In other words, the
obligation to retain and preserve election records remains intact regardless of who has physical
possession of those records. Jurisdictions must ensure that if they conduct post-election ballot
examinations, they also continue to comply with the retention and preservation requirements of Section
301.
https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1417796/download
Bolding mine... Also, that paragraph can be found on page 3. It is clear that states have the right to do an audit. That the ninja's were a scam is not in question... They were a scam pulled off by a repug state govt on it's citizens... A shit move but not a federal crime. They are free to hire a company with no experience. The simple fact is, DOJ has nothing to prosecute here.... Again.
"Merrick Garland chose to defend the office of the presidency in the E. Jeanne Carroll defamation law suit against Donald Trump. He did not have to take that case on. Is one of the official duties of the president defaming someone who is accusing him of rape?"
This is mostly true... But it leaves out a lot of details. This case is not about the rape, that sadly as passed the statute of limitations had passed (it happened in the mid 90's so passed around 2015), this is about defamation. In 2019, Carroll published a book recounting the rape... tfg was asked about it during a press conference by a reporter and he said a bunch of shitty things... He continued to be asked and continued to say the worst kind of shit. So... She sued him for defamation. The concept being defended here is that the President should be allowed to speak their mind when asked a question... I understand it but I completely disagree with it. Too many laws tend to be absolutist and they really should not be... Garland should have backed out of this.
I hope that explains things for you 
Between my CRS and insufficient time away from work to really pay attention to things, I do miss explanations and events. I'm not familiar with that aspect of the cyber-ninja thing, so I should probably have said "some of the points" in post 6.
I do remember the reasoning of Cohen being a proven past liar used to rationalize not prosecuting. But I think I remember seeing a copy of the $130k check with MF45's pointy signature on it. I thought Cohen did have records, and as long as he wasn't lying about this and could prove it, the case should have proceeded. Crimes are usually prosecuted by getting one or more co-conspirators to flip, so having a known liar as a witness isn't uncommon. I would expect that prosecutors know how to make a case using evidence and testimony of liars.
As far as Mueller, he did say it was up to congress. But that was only because he felt bound by that stupid "policy" to not indict a sitting president. When asked under oath, Mueller stated if not for that he would indeed have indicted MF45. That's why he said it was up to Congress - they had to first remove tRump so he could then proceed with prosecution. That excuse should not apply to Garland, as tRump is thankfully no longer the sitting president. Once the orange anus left office, there was nothing to prevent an indictment on the charges that were laid out and ready to go.
Thanks for your info!
Not a problem
The Check... Yes, checks exist... Unfortunately, they prove nothing. Cohen paid Stormy out of his own pocket and tfg cut him a check. That the checks exist is not in question, nor is the fact that they came from tfg. What the problem is, is there is no evidence showing what tfg was paying Cohen for... tfg's story is that Cohen just did stuff and he paid him without asking for details....
I get it... You look at this and it seems obvious... You 'just know'. 'I know' as well. The rub comes when you have to prove it in court. The checks are not evidence of anything, in all of tfg's records it's just a payment to Cohen. for services. Sadly, the entire case would come down to one liars word against another and since there is no other evidence... It would almost certainly end in acquittal.
Mueller... I'm going to cut-n-paste in a reply to a post further up, I think it answers this but let me know if it does not:
Mueller said (In response to Lieu's question, also below) during testimony:
"I believe a reasonable person looking at these facts could conclude that all three elements of the crime of obstruction of justice have been met, and I'd like to ask you the reason, again, you did not indict Donald Trump is because of the OLC (the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel) opinion stating that you cannot indict a sitting president, correct?" Lieu asked.
"That is correct," Mueller asked.
Late, he clarified:
"That's not the correct way to say it," Mueller said. "We did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime."
Link to both here - https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/did-mueller-mean-trump-could-be-indicted-when-he-leaves-n1033901
Link: https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/hundreds-of-former-federal-prosecutors-would-indict-donald-trump
But not Garland (then, before the statute of limitations expired, and yet, after witness tampering mob-boss style, at the very, very, very tinny least).
On edit: But, but, but, the orange in-our-faces criminal is not a poor black man trying to sell a cigarette on a sidewalk...
What a effed-up "system of justice" 
The article is talking about three specific things from the Mueller report... And it says:
"The letter says Trump’s actions “satisfy all of the elements for an obstruction charge” and asserts that the evidence of “corrupt intent”—a key element of any obstruction case—is overwhelming. “We emphasize that these are not matters of close professional judgment,” its authors note. “Of course, there are potential defenses or arguments that could be raised in response to an indictment of the nature we describe here. In our system, every accused person is presumed innocent and it is always the government’s burden to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. But, to look at these facts and say that a prosecutor could not probably sustain a conviction for obstruction of justice — the standard set out in Principles of Federal Prosecution — runs counter to logic and our experience.”"
___________________________________________________________________________________
So... Yeah... Barr/Mueller could have gotten an indictment and might have had a 50-50 shot at a conviction. They declined so... Lets blame Garland? Good choice 
Garland began working as USAG.
The crimes were exposed in detail in the Mueller Report Tome II. The traitorous teflon toddler was not in office and spewing lies freely at the time and still does.
Garland had access to the Grand Jury Material of the whole investigation, which Congress has still not seen any of...
The fully un-redacted Report has been burned by barr or what? 
On edit: Taxpayers paid for it.
They were who blocked congress from getting it… Also when Barr was AG but… Again, blame Garland… Stiil a good plan
Two years ago? And nobody can do anything about it?? Expand the court?
Can't do that. Revolution against the Supremely corrupt Court!
Supreme Court blocks House from seeing secret Mueller grand jury documents until hearing this fall
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/02/politics/mueller-grand-jury-material-democrats-supreme-court/index.html
AG Garland does not need to reassure us of anything, that's not his job, his job is to investigate and prosecute crimes, nothing more, nothing less.
