Trump used the DOJ to investigate members of Congress, their families and even a minor child.

[Lakhota]

I remain "hopeful" that AG Garland is doing much more behind the scenes than we know about or has been reported by mainstream media. So far it looks pitiful...

What exactly is Garland supposed to ‘do’ about it?

No current administration is going to investigate its predecessor pursuant to criminal charges – that would establish a dangerous, and unwanted, precedent.

Moreover, one of the most fundamental of our democratic institutions is that the president in power doesn’t use the authority of the state to subject his political opponents to criminal prosecution – that’s the act of despots and dictators in banana republics; which is why Trump’s call to ‘lock up’ Clinton was so utterly reprehensible and wrong, one of many examples of Trump’s contempt for our democratic institutions.

I have general respect for your opinions and posts - but I totally disagree with you on this! Totally! There are many things AG Garland can do within the Constitution.

Why Is Merrick Garland Defending Donald Trump?

In the name of returning the DOJ to “normal,” the attorney general has protected an abnormal president from accountability.

newrepublic.com

AG Garland Defends DOJâs Support For Trump In Defamation Case Despite âStrongly Disagreeingâ With Ex-President

Democratic lawmakers have slammed the Justice Department’s decision to seek to defend Trump in the civil case as “profoundly misguided.”

www.forbes.com

AG Garland defends the DOJ's decision to endorse controversial Trump-era moves, saying there isn't 'one rule for friends and another for foes'

The rule of law stipulates that "there not be one rule for Democrats and another for Republicans," Garland said while addressing the controversy.

www.businessinsider.com

Why the Hell Is Bidenâs Justice Department Defending Donald Trump?

It’s becoming a (bizarre) pattern.

www.vanityfair.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/06/07/best-way-garland-protect-justice-department-is-stop-defending-his-predecessor/

That an AG may do something doesn’t mean it should be done.

I remain "hopeful" that AG Garland is doing much more behind the scenes than we know about or has been reported by mainstream media. So far it looks pitiful...

What exactly is Garland supposed to ‘do’ about it?

No current administration is going to investigate its predecessor pursuant to criminal charges – that would establish a dangerous, and unwanted, precedent.

Moreover, one of the most fundamental of our democratic institutions is that the president in power doesn’t use the authority of the state to subject his political opponents to criminal prosecution – that’s the act of despots and dictators in banana republics; which is why Trump’s call to ‘lock up’ Clinton was so utterly reprehensible and wrong, one of many examples of Trump’s contempt for our democratic institutions.

I have general respect for your opinions and posts - but I totally disagree with you on this! Totally! There are many things AG Garland can do within the Constitution.

Why Is Merrick Garland Defending Donald Trump?

In the name of returning the DOJ to “normal,” the attorney general has protected an abnormal president from accountability.

newrepublic.com

AG Garland Defends DOJâs Support For Trump In Defamation Case Despite âStrongly Disagreeingâ With Ex-President

Democratic lawmakers have slammed the Justice Department’s decision to seek to defend Trump in the civil case as “profoundly misguided.”

www.forbes.com

AG Garland defends the DOJ's decision to endorse controversial Trump-era moves, saying there isn't 'one rule for friends and another for foes'

The rule of law stipulates that "there not be one rule for Democrats and another for Republicans," Garland said while addressing the controversy.

www.businessinsider.com

Why the Hell Is Bidenâs Justice Department Defending Donald Trump?

It’s becoming a (bizarre) pattern.

www.vanityfair.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/06/07/best-way-garland-protect-justice-department-is-stop-defending-his-predecessor/

That an AG may do something doesn’t mean it should be done.

Why not? These are extraordinary times. The future of democracy may depend on it.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

NY. Times. Nope.

The thug Trump ‘presidency.’

Trump's mistake was he wasn't a thug. If he had done right he would have been the dictator all the communists said he was.

Trump was a thug and criminal; his ‘administration’ was corrupt, incompetent, and lawless.

The big question is - will he get away with it without any legal accountability? If Trump and his mafia don't face legal consequences - then future administrations will have carte blanche to also do whatever they want. It would set an ugly precedent.

Trump and his criminal administration didn’t get away with anything – he was voted out of office, and appropriately so.

Justice is administered in ways other than the legal process; and Trump being voted out of office was indeed justice served.

The people have the ultimate power and authority to pass judgement on a sitting president at the ballot box.

The best way to ensure there not be another criminal, corrupt future administration is to not vote for Republicans for president.

I totally disagree! Especially with Republican authoritarianism and autocracy spreading across the country. Voting alone will not stop future Trumps. Republicans are feverishly working to rig future elections.

And I respect that.

But we mustn’t allow our warranted and appropriate contempt for Trump, his criminal administration, and his contempt for the rule of law to blind us to our behaving like Trump and his reprehensible supporters – to being just as petty and vindictive.

 

[Lakhota]

A federal criminal investigation is a comparatively blunt instrument, but it is the last, best route to uncovering the truth about one of the most violent attempts to overthrow a Presidential-election result in American history. During his confirmation hearing, Garland said, of the siege, “This was the most heinous attack on the democratic processes that I’ve ever seen, and one that I never expected to see in my lifetime,” and vowed to pursue leads “wherever they take us.” The risks for the new Attorney General, though, are significant. Justice Department prosecutors could struggle to find enough evidence to prove a conspiracy beyond reasonable doubt. Stone, other Trump associates, and Trump himself have adeptly operated in legal gray areas for decades. Garland could be forced to announce that the investigation has concluded without charges being filed against them. In that event, he would likely be barred, by law, from revealing any evidence collected, because most criminal investigations are conducted in secret, via grand-jury subpoenas. Garland could also announce charges, go to trial, and fail to win convictions, a debacle that would reinforce claims from Trump that he is the victim—and the unbowed survivor—of another deep-state plot against him.

Yet facts, hopefully, remain weapons. That is why Garland should use his powers as Attorney General to exhaustively, and impartially, reconstruct the events of January 6th and the months that preceded it—to go, as prosecutors are supposed to, where the facts lead him, and then determine who deserves to be criminally charged. “You can’t make that decision without an investigation,” Gillers told me. “You follow the facts, you learn the facts, and then you make a decision.” Our increasing inability to agree on basic facts, of course, is the great challenge, and tragedy, of our time.

Garland Is the Last, Best Chance to Uncover Trump’s Role on January 6th

The ongoing federal criminal inquiry is the most promising route to the truth.

www.newyorker.com

I want AG Garland to do his job with courage and conviction!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I remain "hopeful" that AG Garland is doing much more behind the scenes than we know about or has been reported by mainstream media. So far it looks pitiful...

What exactly is Garland supposed to ‘do’ about it?

No current administration is going to investigate its predecessor pursuant to criminal charges – that would establish a dangerous, and unwanted, precedent.

Moreover, one of the most fundamental of our democratic institutions is that the president in power doesn’t use the authority of the state to subject his political opponents to criminal prosecution – that’s the act of despots and dictators in banana republics; which is why Trump’s call to ‘lock up’ Clinton was so utterly reprehensible and wrong, one of many examples of Trump’s contempt for our democratic institutions.

I have general respect for your opinions and posts - but I totally disagree with you on this! Totally! There are many things AG Garland can do within the Constitution.

Why Is Merrick Garland Defending Donald Trump?

In the name of returning the DOJ to “normal,” the attorney general has protected an abnormal president from accountability.

newrepublic.com

AG Garland Defends DOJâs Support For Trump In Defamation Case Despite âStrongly Disagreeingâ With Ex-President

Democratic lawmakers have slammed the Justice Department’s decision to seek to defend Trump in the civil case as “profoundly misguided.”

www.forbes.com

AG Garland defends the DOJ's decision to endorse controversial Trump-era moves, saying there isn't 'one rule for friends and another for foes'

The rule of law stipulates that "there not be one rule for Democrats and another for Republicans," Garland said while addressing the controversy.

www.businessinsider.com

Why the Hell Is Bidenâs Justice Department Defending Donald Trump?

It’s becoming a (bizarre) pattern.

www.vanityfair.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/06/07/best-way-garland-protect-justice-department-is-stop-defending-his-predecessor/

That an AG may do something doesn’t mean it should be done.

I remain "hopeful" that AG Garland is doing much more behind the scenes than we know about or has been reported by mainstream media. So far it looks pitiful...

What exactly is Garland supposed to ‘do’ about it?

No current administration is going to investigate its predecessor pursuant to criminal charges – that would establish a dangerous, and unwanted, precedent.

Moreover, one of the most fundamental of our democratic institutions is that the president in power doesn’t use the authority of the state to subject his political opponents to criminal prosecution – that’s the act of despots and dictators in banana republics; which is why Trump’s call to ‘lock up’ Clinton was so utterly reprehensible and wrong, one of many examples of Trump’s contempt for our democratic institutions.

I have general respect for your opinions and posts - but I totally disagree with you on this! Totally! There are many things AG Garland can do within the Constitution.

Why Is Merrick Garland Defending Donald Trump?

In the name of returning the DOJ to “normal,” the attorney general has protected an abnormal president from accountability.

newrepublic.com

AG Garland Defends DOJâs Support For Trump In Defamation Case Despite âStrongly Disagreeingâ With Ex-President

Democratic lawmakers have slammed the Justice Department’s decision to seek to defend Trump in the civil case as “profoundly misguided.”

www.forbes.com

AG Garland defends the DOJ's decision to endorse controversial Trump-era moves, saying there isn't 'one rule for friends and another for foes'

The rule of law stipulates that "there not be one rule for Democrats and another for Republicans," Garland said while addressing the controversy.

www.businessinsider.com

Why the Hell Is Bidenâs Justice Department Defending Donald Trump?

It’s becoming a (bizarre) pattern.

www.vanityfair.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/06/07/best-way-garland-protect-justice-department-is-stop-defending-his-predecessor/

That an AG may do something doesn’t mean it should be done.

Why not? These are extraordinary times. The future of democracy may depend on it.

Why not is because these are extraordinary times; after four years of Trump’s criminality, abuse of power, and contempt for the rule of law we need an administration to demonstrate that although some might believe it justified, not pursuing Trump with Federal criminal charges is to bring America back to ordinary times, demonstrating that the Biden administration respects and understands our democratic institutions and traditions – paramount among them the tradition that current presidents do not subject their defeated political opponents to criminal prosecution.

 

[Lakhota]

NY. Times. Nope.

The thug Trump ‘presidency.’

Trump's mistake was he wasn't a thug. If he had done right he would have been the dictator all the communists said he was.

Trump was a thug and criminal; his ‘administration’ was corrupt, incompetent, and lawless.

The big question is - will he get away with it without any legal accountability? If Trump and his mafia don't face legal consequences - then future administrations will have carte blanche to also do whatever they want. It would set an ugly precedent.

Trump and his criminal administration didn’t get away with anything – he was voted out of office, and appropriately so.

Justice is administered in ways other than the legal process; and Trump being voted out of office was indeed justice served.

The people have the ultimate power and authority to pass judgement on a sitting president at the ballot box.

The best way to ensure there not be another criminal, corrupt future administration is to not vote for Republicans for president.

I totally disagree! Especially with Republican authoritarianism and autocracy spreading across the country. Voting alone will not stop future Trumps. Republicans are feverishly working to rig future elections.

And I respect that.

But we mustn’t allow our warranted and appropriate contempt for Trump, his criminal administration, and his contempt for the rule of law to blind us to our behaving like Trump and his reprehensible supporters – to being just as petty and vindictive.

I think it's high time that Democrats were "vindictive".

 

[Lakhota]

I remain "hopeful" that AG Garland is doing much more behind the scenes than we know about or has been reported by mainstream media. So far it looks pitiful...

What exactly is Garland supposed to ‘do’ about it?

No current administration is going to investigate its predecessor pursuant to criminal charges – that would establish a dangerous, and unwanted, precedent.

Moreover, one of the most fundamental of our democratic institutions is that the president in power doesn’t use the authority of the state to subject his political opponents to criminal prosecution – that’s the act of despots and dictators in banana republics; which is why Trump’s call to ‘lock up’ Clinton was so utterly reprehensible and wrong, one of many examples of Trump’s contempt for our democratic institutions.

I have general respect for your opinions and posts - but I totally disagree with you on this! Totally! There are many things AG Garland can do within the Constitution.

Why Is Merrick Garland Defending Donald Trump?

In the name of returning the DOJ to “normal,” the attorney general has protected an abnormal president from accountability.

newrepublic.com

AG Garland Defends DOJâs Support For Trump In Defamation Case Despite âStrongly Disagreeingâ With Ex-President

Democratic lawmakers have slammed the Justice Department’s decision to seek to defend Trump in the civil case as “profoundly misguided.”

www.forbes.com

AG Garland defends the DOJ's decision to endorse controversial Trump-era moves, saying there isn't 'one rule for friends and another for foes'

The rule of law stipulates that "there not be one rule for Democrats and another for Republicans," Garland said while addressing the controversy.

www.businessinsider.com

Why the Hell Is Bidenâs Justice Department Defending Donald Trump?

It’s becoming a (bizarre) pattern.

www.vanityfair.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/06/07/best-way-garland-protect-justice-department-is-stop-defending-his-predecessor/

That an AG may do something doesn’t mean it should be done.

I remain "hopeful" that AG Garland is doing much more behind the scenes than we know about or has been reported by mainstream media. So far it looks pitiful...

What exactly is Garland supposed to ‘do’ about it?

No current administration is going to investigate its predecessor pursuant to criminal charges – that would establish a dangerous, and unwanted, precedent.

Moreover, one of the most fundamental of our democratic institutions is that the president in power doesn’t use the authority of the state to subject his political opponents to criminal prosecution – that’s the act of despots and dictators in banana republics; which is why Trump’s call to ‘lock up’ Clinton was so utterly reprehensible and wrong, one of many examples of Trump’s contempt for our democratic institutions.

I have general respect for your opinions and posts - but I totally disagree with you on this! Totally! There are many things AG Garland can do within the Constitution.

Why Is Merrick Garland Defending Donald Trump?

In the name of returning the DOJ to “normal,” the attorney general has protected an abnormal president from accountability.

newrepublic.com

AG Garland Defends DOJâs Support For Trump In Defamation Case Despite âStrongly Disagreeingâ With Ex-President

Democratic lawmakers have slammed the Justice Department’s decision to seek to defend Trump in the civil case as “profoundly misguided.”

www.forbes.com

AG Garland defends the DOJ's decision to endorse controversial Trump-era moves, saying there isn't 'one rule for friends and another for foes'

The rule of law stipulates that "there not be one rule for Democrats and another for Republicans," Garland said while addressing the controversy.

www.businessinsider.com

Why the Hell Is Bidenâs Justice Department Defending Donald Trump?

It’s becoming a (bizarre) pattern.

www.vanityfair.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/06/07/best-way-garland-protect-justice-department-is-stop-defending-his-predecessor/

That an AG may do something doesn’t mean it should be done.

Why not? These are extraordinary times. The future of democracy may depend on it.

Why not is because these are extraordinary times; after four years of Trump’s criminality, abuse of power, and contempt for the rule of law we need an administration to demonstrate that although some might believe it justified, not pursuing Trump with Federal criminal charges is to bring America back to ordinary times, demonstrating that the Biden administration respects and understands our democratic institutions and traditions – paramount among them the tradition that current presidents do not subject their defeated political opponents to criminal prosecution.

I'll leave turning the other cheek to flower children.

 

[Lakhota]

I want Trump and his mafia to be thoroughly investigated by every state and federal entity with the authority to do so - and prosecuted if the evidence dictates.

Supreme Court Correctly Rules that Trump is Not Above the Law​

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I think it's high time that Democrats were "vindictive".

Disagree.

Behaving like Trump and reprehensible Republican scum isn’t the answer.

 

[mudwhistle]

WASHINGTON — As the Justice Department investigated who was behind leaks of classified information early in the Trump administration, it took a highly unusual step: Prosecutors subpoenaed Apple for data from the accounts of at least two Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee, aides and family members. One was a minor.

All told, the records of at least a dozen people tied to the committee were seized in 2017 and early 2018, including those of Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, then the panel’s top Democrat and now its chairman, according to committee officials and two other people briefed on the inquiry…..

The zeal in the Trump administration’s efforts to hunt leakers led to the extraordinary step of subpoenaing communications metadata from members of Congress — a nearly unheard-of move outside of corruption investigations. While Justice Department leak investigations are routine, current and former congressional officials familiar with the inquiry said they could not recall an instance in which the records of lawmakers had been seized as part of one.

Moreover, just as it did in investigating news organizations, the Justice Department secured a gag order on Apple that expired this year, according to a person familiar with the inquiry, so lawmakers did not know they were being investigated until Apple informed them last month.

Hunting Leaks, Trump Officials Focused on Democrats in Congress (Published 2021)

The Justice Department seized records from Apple for metadata of House Intelligence Committee members, their aides and family members.

www.nytimes.com

**************

There was nothing too low that the Trump Administration would steep to intimidate the opposition.

This was pure and simply an abuse of power.

Riiight, any proof President Trump directed that? The DoJ were doing it’s own investigations. Too bad if some Congresscritters were investigated, there isn’t much doubt Congress leaks information.

Clearly these numbnuts don't need proof.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I want Trump and his mafia to be thoroughly investigated by every state and federal entity with the authority to do so - and prosecuted if the evidence dictates.

Supreme Court Correctly Rules that Trump is Not Above the Law​

Trump being subject to criminal prosecution by the states is perfectly appropriate and warranted.

 

[mudwhistle]

I want Trump and his mafia to be thoroughly investigated by every state and federal entity with the authority to do so - and prosecuted if the evidence dictates.

Supreme Court Correctly Rules that Trump is Not Above the Law​

LOL.....the utter stupidity of that post is breathtaking.

 

[Lakhota]

There are many ways to hold Trump legally accountable.

Here Are the Various Ways Donald Trump Could Be Prosecuted​

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Supreme Court Correctly Rules that Trump is Not Above the Law

No one says he was.

Criminal acts by elected officials can be address through the political process as well as the legal – last November the American people found Trump guilty of his crimes and sentenced him to being voted out of office.

 

[Rambunctious]

Fake news but don't you think leakers should be investigated?....

 

[Lakhota]

I want Trump and his mafia to be thoroughly investigated by every state and federal entity with the authority to do so - and prosecuted if the evidence dictates.

Supreme Court Correctly Rules that Trump is Not Above the Law​

Trump being subject to criminal prosecution by the states is perfectly appropriate and warranted.

What about the Mueller Report, obstruction of justice, etc. Did Mueller do all that for nothing? Barr's whitewash doesn't prevent it from being pursued and prosecuted.

 

[Rambunctious]

There are many ways to hold Trump legally accountable.

Here Are the Various Ways Donald Trump Could Be Prosecuted​

 

[Lakhota]

Election fraud is a federal offense.

 

[mudwhistle]

I want Trump and his mafia to be thoroughly investigated by every state and federal entity with the authority to do so - and prosecuted if the evidence dictates.

Supreme Court Correctly Rules that Trump is Not Above the Law​

Trump being subject to criminal prosecution by the states is perfectly appropriate and warranted.

It's against the constitution to harass a former president and go on yet another witch hunt simply because of political differences.
First you have to have a crime.....not assume a crime has been committed and then go about manufacturing evidence to prove it. If anything....Obama and the DOJ violated Trump's rights when they used the Steele Dossier as a predicate to an illegal wire-tap under the 4th Amendment. The two impeachments Congress subjected him to would have been a violation of his 5th and 6th Amendment rights....because they didn't allow him due process or allow witnesses to counter their charges. Obama and his DOJ have been guilty of violating the 8th Amendment rights of Trump associates and of Obama critics and people who were on Capital hill on Jan 6th. Democrats also denied Trump privacy while president by planting spies in his administration and violated the 9th Amendment as well as attorney client privilege in his private affairs and executive privilege on several occasions.

If anything...Trump has grounds for a massive lawsuit against Obama, Biden, the FBI and the DOJ. He also has another defamation suit against several members of the media and corporate media including CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News. Also...when they find out that Biden did indeed have the most extensive election fraud organization in US History.....he'll have been able to prove damages against them....and sue several states.

And you freaks think Trump did something wrong. That so ironic.

 

[mudwhistle]

NY. Times. Nope.

The thug Trump ‘presidency.’

Trump's mistake was he wasn't a thug. If he had done right he would have been the dictator all the communists said he was.

Trump was a thug and criminal; his ‘administration’ was corrupt, incompetent, and lawless.

The big question is - will he get away with it without any legal accountability? If Trump and his mafia don't face legal consequences - then future administrations will have carte blanche to also do whatever they want. It would set an ugly precedent.

Trump and his criminal administration didn’t get away with anything – he was voted out of office, and appropriately so.

Justice is administered in ways other than the legal process; and Trump being voted out of office was indeed justice served.

The people have the ultimate power and authority to pass judgement on a sitting president at the ballot box.

The best way to ensure there not be another criminal, corrupt future administration is to not vote for Republicans for president.

I totally disagree! Especially with Republican authoritarianism and autocracy spreading across the country. Voting alone will not stop future Trumps. Republicans are feverishly working to rig future elections.

And I respect that.

But we mustn’t allow our warranted and appropriate contempt for Trump, his criminal administration, and his contempt for the rule of law to blind us to our behaving like Trump and his reprehensible supporters – to being just as petty and vindictive.

I think it's high time that Democrats were "vindictive".

Uh.....Jesus Christ. *shakes head*

If you look up vindictive in the Dictionary.....it will say 'See Democrats'

Democrats*

*vindictive
ADJECTIVE

Possessing or showing a strong or unreasoning desire for revenge.

 

[San Souci]

WASHINGTON — As the Justice Department investigated who was behind leaks of classified information early in the Trump administration, it took a highly unusual step: Prosecutors subpoenaed Apple for data from the accounts of at least two Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee, aides and family members. One was a minor.

All told, the records of at least a dozen people tied to the committee were seized in 2017 and early 2018, including those of Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, then the panel’s top Democrat and now its chairman, according to committee officials and two other people briefed on the inquiry…..

The zeal in the Trump administration’s efforts to hunt leakers led to the extraordinary step of subpoenaing communications metadata from members of Congress — a nearly unheard-of move outside of corruption investigations. While Justice Department leak investigations are routine, current and former congressional officials familiar with the inquiry said they could not recall an instance in which the records of lawmakers had been seized as part of one.

Moreover, just as it did in investigating news organizations, the Justice Department secured a gag order on Apple that expired this year, according to a person familiar with the inquiry, so lawmakers did not know they were being investigated until Apple informed them last month.

Hunting Leaks, Trump Officials Focused on Democrats in Congress (Published 2021)

The Justice Department seized records from Apple for metadata of House Intelligence Committee members, their aides and family members.

www.nytimes.com

**************

There was nothing too low that the Trump Administration would steep to intimidate the opposition.

This was pure and simply an abuse of power.

NY Times? Consider the source. Probably one of those anonymous tips they are so fond of misusing. NYT is a Scandal Rag. Suitible for lining cat boxes.