Can you imagine the debates happening right now in the DOJ?

[fightforfreedom]

There are probably prosecutors arguing to indict Trump now. Others saying wait till after the elections, the 60 day rule.

In my opinion the 60 day rule is a good thing. Comey proved that. However it is still just a DOJ rule, not a law. Does the rule apply when our national security is in great danger? Does it apply when someone steals our biggest secrets and those secrets were most likely shared with other people. Garland will have to decide.

I imagine these are some of the debates, arguments taking place in the DOJ. Garland has an historic, unprecedented decision to make. The pressure must be immense. No AG has ever faced anything like this. Garlands decisions, whatever they are, will change the course of history.

[Novara]

1. "Does the rule apply when our national security is in great danger? "

It should NOT. This morherfucker is threatening to use the classified material he stole against America if he's indicted. Is that not an imminent threat to national security? So then, swoop in and arrest him and deny bail. He is a walking threat and he's out doing hate rallies. Anybody else would be locked up right now and denied bail because of national security.

I mean, think about it, What if Garland takes the safe route and lays off for the next two months and the orange motherfucker sells our secrets to Saudi Arabia? Isn't that kind of like giving him permission to do so? Here, take two months to do what you will. I won't arrest you because of optics.

We can't take the risk.

Arrest the motherfucker. I'll sleep better at night if I know he can't blab classified info. Won't you?

[fightforfreedom]

2. I agree with you, However we are not in Garlands shoes.

When you and I say lock up Trump now, no pressure, it's easy. For Garland, not so easy, lots of pressure.

[Novara]

3. Of course there is pressure, and he's cautious

He should take a page from Joe's book. Finally, mild-mannered, bipartisan-loving Joe Biden FINALLY called them out for what they are.

I keep coming back to the potential scenario where the DOJ sits back for two months and the orange motherfucker takes it as permission to sell America's secrets. You know his tendencies: anything is construed as permission.

We can't risk that.

Or maybe they've got him surveilled and his phones tapped and such, and one espionage-related word uttered will immediately prompt an arrest. We don't know. At this point, that sort of surveillance should be a given.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

5. Do you have a link to those threats you're speaking of?

Just curious.

Not that I don't believe it I'd just not read he actually did so.

I'd say arrest him either way, to be clear.

[Novara]

11. It was reported here a few days ago

Maybe in Latest Breaking News.

He threatened to reveal classified info if they arrested him. It wasn't widely reported so maybe it was not confirmed.

[Native]

10. I think they should weigh the decision based on the security of our country.

If they can wait 60 days without risking more damage, then I say go for it. But knowing Trump is desperate and willing to do anything to save his ass, I find it hard to believe they can keep a lid on him. He's likely already sold intel, and I'm sure he'll be a flight risk when the walls start closing in. If they have conclusive proof he is a Russian asset guilty of treason, especially if lives have been lost because of his treasonous acts, then something needs to be done sooner rather than later. I have to trust that they are taking measures to not allow things to get worse and are willing to step in immediately if they can't control the situation; that protecting our nation's security is more important than the 60 day rule. When you think about the reason for that rule (to avoid any perception that the DOJ is being political), it sounds almost silly when the alternative is inaction that could lead to irreparable damage to our country.

[tavernier]

4. I just think Rump's antics this weekend

along with the GOP and the magats, must really have Garland antagonized, if not plain furious.

I would be itching to rub that smarmy little bastard’s face in it as quickly as possibly, especially knowing that I have the goods.

[RKP5637]

6. Imagine if something were to happen because of what this traitor terrorist Trump has done.

An attack, deaths, whatever. The pressure must just be horrific to act now, wait for all T's crossed ... etc. DOJ, etc. know far more ... so, it's a calculated risk for them, I think.

[Solomon]

7. This really Pisses me off. Why are you even debating the so-called 60 day rule?

Trump is not running for anything in 60 days. What the fuck does the 60 day rule have to do with Trump. Pardon my French but this kind of shit drives me nuts!

[Native]

13. It doesn't have to explicitly be about Trump, the party itself is enough.

Per Eric Holder, the tradition is viewed as such: "Law enforcement officers and prosecutors may never select the timing of investigative steps or criminal charges for the purpose of affecting any election, or for the purpose of giving an advantage or disadvantage to any candidate or political party."

Which literally means they should disregard timing completely for any reason and just do the job as they would regardless of any election or political climate or schedule.

[Scrivener7]

17. And in multiple threads. It feels like propaganda.

[Hotler]

8. With anchovies or without anchovies? nt

[JT45242]

9. Trump is not a candidate, the question is moot

The DOJ "rule" which has been selectively used by members of the federalist society (i.e. domestic terrorist organization) only applies to be people actively running.

Even if he declared to run for president his election is more than 2 years away.

[JustAnotherGen]

12. Trump isn't a candidate

And Garland is a precise, measured man. I don't think he cares about the Mid Terms.

I think he is going to do whatever it takes to protect the country.

[Native]

14. My husband, "I think they should arrest him exactly 11 days before election day."

[Scrivener7]

15. THERE IS NO 60 DAY RULE. HE ISN'T A CANDIDATE!

Do you think the DOJ just goes on vacation and lets everyone run amok for the two months before every election?

This is absurd.

[JCMach1]

22. Precisely

[Fiendish Thingy]

16. Remember the days when the debate was over whether Garland would indict or not?

Now it’s simply whether he will indict before or after the elections.

The bigger question, IMO, is whether DOJ will scale back the rest of their investigation activity (grand jury subpeonas, etc) until after Election Day. While that would create room in the news cycles for the reconvened J6 committee, it would likely delay “getting their ducks in a row” in preparation to issue indictments.

So, I have no problem waiting until after the elections to issue indictments, depending how long “after” it actually is…

[Scrivener7]

18. No. The debate hasn't changed. People are just tired of having the same argument

over and over and over.

We won't know anything will happen until we see something happen.

[BumRushDaShow]

19. For some reason, this "60 day Rule" thing has taken on a life of its own

A memo was issued by Garland to DOJ employees warning them not to engage in "political (campaign) activities", and this includes those not normally covered by the Hatch Act that forbids civil service employees from participating in certain "partisan" activities anyway.

But this has been conflated into something by the legal reporters and pundits in the media, as a complete shutdown of prosecutions with no exceptions. Yet what the memo basically says is this - it directs that officials not to go about doing certain lone wolf prosecutorial activities related to elected officials and/or candidates, WITHOUT REVIEW/APPROVAL from above. It doesn't say "not do them at all".

You have 94 U.S. Attorneys scattered around the U.S. and they are responsible for managing federal law enforcement activities in their locales, including shepherding things through the courts, and they most likely have authority delegated to them from above to generally carry out their day-to-day work, where it's not micromanaged by the AG directly.

Federal regulatory agencies without law enforcement authority (which are most agencies), compile their evidence of non-compliance of federal statues by subjects within their regulated-industry/regulated authority, and once referred to DOJ, will have these get assigned to someone (or a team) within that U.S. Attorney's office with jurisdiction.

BUT there may be certain "high profile" suspects (and in that case, it doesn't even have to be political figures) who need "special handling" - particularly to make sure everyone up the chain is on the same page. Every agency has "high profile" companies/individuals who will catch the attention of the media locally, nationally, and even internationally, if charged/prosecuted, so no one wants "surprises".

I.e.,

9-85.500 Actions that May Have an Impact on an Election

Federal prosecutors and agents may never select the timing of any action, including investigative steps, criminal charge, or statements, for the purpose of affecting any election, or for the purpose of giving an advantage or disadvantage to any candidate or political party. Such a purpose is inconsistent with the Department’s mission and with the Principles of Federal Prosecution. See § 9-27.260. Any action likely to raise an issue or the perception of an issue under this provision requires consultation with the Public Integrity Section, and such action shall not be taken if the Public Integrity Section advises that further consultation is required with the Deputy Attorney General or Attorney General.

[added August 2022]

https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-85000-protection-government-integrity#9-85.500

This is what the Department looks like now, post-9/11 (when some components and functions were removed and put under DHS).


And just as an exercise of hypothesis - say there was an indictment handed down. I assume before an announcement, there might need to be "non-public/need-to-know-only" notification to federal LEO government wide - and possibly to Congressional leaders (and to the Capitol's LEO), as well as to potentially impacted federal agencies who have already received threats of violence. I.e., some kind of major support planning would need to be done, regardless of whether it happens before or after an election. It's a major effort given what happened January 6, so although needing to plan for something like that would not be a deterrent to carrying out any criminal enforcement actions, it would need to be carefully thought out, coordinated, and maintained through whatever various phases of plan execution are anticipated.

[MOMFUDSKI]

20. Garland is a Scorpio and

has already shown his sting in taking the opportunity to 'out' more info after orangeman's people tried to pull a fast one. THIS is gonna piss him off to the highest. You don't wanna mess with a scorpio - ever. I am expecting fireworks soon. Hope I am not wrong. We watch and wait.

[BumRushDaShow]

21. ...

[kacekwl]

23. TFG is not running for anything. He's not in any

election. He's a private fucking citizen. 60 day rule means nothing at all here. WTF is the question ?