Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Let's be clear. Tribe and Weissman are full of shit about the Trump investigations [View all]Silent3
(15,647 posts)70. I'm talking about my opinion of Garland and the DoJ
What I say has everything to do with what I believe most likely to be true (Garland being excessively concerned about looking political, to the point of failing in the opposite direction, coupled with a DoJ containing some people afraid to go after Trump, and some unwilling to do so) and not one bit about any of your imagined side-effects of me talking about it.
I have no intent of changing what I say or don't say based on worrying about what Hur might or might not want me to say.
Now, if you want to play the game of screening your speech based on imagined agendas, have at it. I'm not joining you.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
122 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Let's be clear. Tribe and Weissman are full of shit about the Trump investigations [View all]
bigtree
Mar 2024
OP
If we cannot exist within a shared reality, how can we hope to defeat fascism?
Fiendish Thingy
Mar 2024
#96
There's not politicizing the DoJ, and then there's being so afraid of the appearance of being political...
Silent3
Mar 2024
#7
You keep on using the term "exoneration," yet Hur specifically testified he did not exonerate Biden.
sop
Mar 2024
#88
Posting on the earlier article I said the cheer leaders would be staying up
republianmushroom
Mar 2024
#13
You are exactly right. Garland has been a poor AG. The OP poster keeps posting the same crap...
brush
Mar 2024
#39
I have no idea. Wouldn't surprise me because of the over-the-top defensiveness.
Goodheart
Mar 2024
#44
If you think his job was to win the election, you're making the same mistake Trump made about his DOJ
bigtree
Mar 2024
#46
Win the election? No. His job was to prosecute the orange toad and his cabal who lead...
brush
Mar 2024
#49
As bad as the NYT article is, it still destroys nearly all of the myths about Garland
Fiendish Thingy
Mar 2024
#38
3 year plus is not impatience. Blind to reality is unfortunate though. He's been a poor AG.
brush
Mar 2024
#54
Perfect example of a straw man: "Garland did nothing to investigate Trump until Smith was appointed"
Silent3
Mar 2024
#71
it was really galling to hear the committee members like Schiff to complain about delays
bigtree
Mar 2024
#93
Anonymous internet poster says renowned Constitutional scholar Lawrence Tribe is full of shit. All righty then.
jalan48
Mar 2024
#69
If the lives of billions of people depended on getting to the moon in a hurry...
Silent3
Mar 2024
#78
I 100% agree. And in the case of Apollo 13, rushing rocket science is exactly what they had to do
lostnfound
Mar 2024
#122
Actually, if you look at the number of recs divided by the number of views, the quotient is remarkably low.
Earth-shine
Mar 2024
#103
I assume that "number of views" represents people on "both sides" of this argument.
Earth-shine
Mar 2024
#106
Frankly, that's a load of Moosepoop. People can do the math for themselves.
Earth-shine
Mar 2024
#110