Garland will not indict Trump, and here's why...

[infullview]

If they indict him, he will not be a viable candidate in 2024. If they leave him as is, then he splits the republican party and DeSantis doesn't have a chance of winning. If the republicans take Trump out of the mix, then DeSantis becomes a strong contender and possibly unites the party and wins in 2024.

Just a theory, but plausible. Personally, I think they should lock Trump up and throw away the key and then the Dem's should crow about being the law and order party. Unfortunately, the red part of this country isn't all that bright and would probably be corralled by Fox news into voting against their best interests as usual.

[hlthe2b]

1. There is absolutely NOTHING in Garland's history and record to show such partisan motives

NOTHING.

[3Hotdogs]

16. Either way, we win. Who doesn't want to see Trump in orange? But

a loose Gropenfuhrer, ruining the Republican Party: SWEET !

[malaise]

2. This post won't wear well

Take that to the bank

[JohnSJ]

3. If there is evidence, which there is, and witnesses, which there are, for multiple crimes, if the AG

refuses to indict, then he is not doing his job, and would need to be removed

There is nothing to indicate that is the case as of yet

[bucolic_frolic]

4. Any facts?

[MuseRider]

5. Nope.

That is not how this is supposed to work and no matter what you or anyone things of Garland there is no reason to think he would do this.

[newdayneeded]

6. I agree he won't indict trump,

but it would never be for partisan reasons. It's simply because of the risk of civil outbreak with MAGA running around with AR15s. I hope I'm wrong, but I think it'll never happen.

[Demsrule86]

10. No, not true...Garland isn't scared of the rightwing scum...he will base his decision on the

evidence.

[Emile]

22. Evidence like top secret documents?

[48656c6c6f20]

7. Garland moves slow, but

I've seen nothing in his work or character that says he would base his decision off of pure politics. Feels like a bomb tossing post.

[Beastly Boy]

8. I see no reason why Garland is going to start playing politics all of a sudden.

He will go wherever the facts lead him, as he has done so far. He is no Bill Barr.

[Demsrule86]

9. Garland is not political and will decide to convict based on evidence.

[Tetrachloride]

11. The primary situation is military. Those nuclear documents

are the lead. Regardless of any other issue, the military / intelligence community is coming for Trump.

[msfiddlestix]

13. Interesting theory

I grew up in the military, but it seems to have radically changed since the 50's and 60's it seems.
.

[gab13by13]

12. I am as tough on Garland as anyone,

but one thing for sure, Garland is no Bill Barr, there isn't a partisan bone in his body.

[Goodheart]

14. Er, no.

Garland might not indict trump, but that won't be for the reasons you state. Garland seems quite apolitical to me.

[marble falls]

15. You're over thinking this stuff. It's not 3D chess, it's a criminal prosecution. Indicting him ...

... is the easy part.

[gab13by13]

17. Something else,

I don't even know if Garland is a Democrat or a Republican, if I had to guess, I would guess he is a Republican.

[3Hotdogs]

19. If I recall, he was nominated to the Supreme Court by Obama because he was a centrist Republican.

Obama figured he could get Garland past the Repukes in the senate.

[Earth-shine]

24. Garland was recommended to Obama by Orrin Hatch.

In early 2016, after Justice Antonin Scalia's passing, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) suggested then-President Barack Obama nominate Judge Merrick Garland for the Supreme Court. The Democratic president took the advice and sent Garland -- to borrow McConnell's phrasing, a "qualified, experienced, and mainstream nominee" -- to the Senate for consideration.

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/gop-acts-if-its-completely-forgotten-merrick-garlands-nomination-msna1147411

[fightforfreedom]

18. No. Garland does not work that way.

[infullview]

20. And I hope to god the majority of you that Garland will act is true

as I said this is just a theory - I hope I wrong, but we are living in unsteady times right now. A split republican party would certainly be a good thing heading into the next election cycle.

[Genki Hikari]

21. None of this has anything to do with why Garland can't indict anyone

He can't indict anyone--not a mafioso or a serial killer or even that local gangbanger caught selling drugs by the DEA.

Only grand juries can indict for federal crimes.

Maybe if people understood that, they'd stop expecting the impossible of someone like Garland.

[Zambero]

23. If Trump is somehow not indicted, this will not be the reason

Say what you wish about Garland, but he has a history of being far more judicious than partisan.

[LuckyCharms]

25. Consider this:

If Garland does not indict, he will have to explain his reasoning for not doing so.

With so much evidence right in front of the world's nose, what is he possibly going to say to support his lack of indictment?

How will he explain that tfg is above the law without telling the entire world not to believe their lying eyes?

My opinion: He will follow the law. Period. Politics will not be a consideration.

[Fiendish Thingy]

26. You're right Garland won't indict him...

But a grand jury will.

Garland’s team seek indictments from the GJ, and once the evidence is available, the GJ will grant the request.

Your political theory on withholding indictments is not supported by the facts.

[Tommy Carcetti]

27. Whatever he does, Garland's not going to play politics.

He's not Bill Barr or any other of Trump's toadies.

[treestar]

28. Not sure he would not be a viable candidate

MAGATs will not care and will say it is persecution.

[jcgoldie]

29. I do not believe politics motivates Garland

If it did he would have indicted him prior to the midterms.