So Garland spent 4 years prosecuting the low hanging fruit for Jan 6th

[bigtree]

84. never said Garland is anything

...have pointed out repeatedly the absurdity of bashing the man who uncovered and obtained for use in his prosecutions almost all of the evidence used to charge Trump with TWO historic indictments, and hired on his OWN volition, the man who successfully presented all of that to grand juries and obtained those indictments.

Not only did he gather the goods to indict, he's been fighting against both the Trump team, and this backbiting from people seemingly more concerned with attacking him than they are in highlighting ANY of that evidence he collected and had approved through appeals for use in the prosecutions.

Oh, you'll get someone waving around one piece or the other, but there's not enough intellectual curiosity among most of his internet critics to follow those strings and reason together something that would actually be available to convict Trump.

Instead, after initially claiming Garland would never allow an indictment, the argument against him shifted to this 'Garland late' canard which conveniently allows these posts where there's just the insult, the projection, and virtually no reasoning other than 'Garland late', or 'you *heart* Garland' like some kind of HS cafeteria taunting from grade school bullies.

All of that derision, not for purpose of figuring out what went wrong, but just this complaint that DOJ couldn't win the election for us with a prosecution that was estimated to take years AFTER conviction to resolve. But we're still being sold this nonsense that a conviction on these charges was not only possible before the election, but going to save the day.

I mean, that's the test critics set for Garland, something everyone desperately knew wasn't happening, especially after the Supreme Court came out with the 'save trump' ruling that president that are named Trump are essentially immune from prosecutions while they hold the majority and can make more shit up to defend him at the end of any prosecution and appeal.

But, hey, Garland late.

The nonsense still persists, even thought we just witnessed a convicted felon/adjudicated rapist, twice impeached insurrectionist get elected again.

Not Garland's fault, OURS, and the Constitution's, I think, which allows felons to be our president. We got an investigation which produced two multi-felony indictments (not as simple and immediately available as so many pretend), all against an already convicted felon, and Americans still voted for him.

What the fuck did people expect Garland to do if all Americans were going to do was put him back in a position to lord his criminality over us? Garland didn't do that, and you don't need to make ANY judgment about him to come to that conclusion.

You won't find another AG who will dare charge a first term president again with an expectation of success. That's not Garland's fault, it's the system of government that allows a convicted felon, someone convicted of interfering in our elections to run for the presidency.

Nothing Garland could do will change the fact that a convicted felon can not only run for president, but can get elected and assume office, even from jail.

That's not Garland's fault either, even if you call him silly names like you're mad at him. Not his fault Trump got elected, not his fault that Trump can end his own prosecutions as president with impunity and pardon the co-conspirators.

That's a U.S. problem with our democracy that Garland doesn't control, either. Best of luck, because, repeatedly demeaning me or Garland in these successive posts isn't going to fix the reality that American voters didn't do OUR job in keeping him out of power.