There is no way Garland can remove political considerations or future political impact in his decisions to prosecute Trump or not. I think G will go where the evidence points and he will prosecute the fake electors and any WH staffers involved in the effort as well as prosecuting Giuliani, Powell and Eastman for their illegal conduct. G will not want to open the door for future AG's to prosecute past Presidents for illegal actions so that it would not be used as a tool of political revenge in the hands of partisan and vindictive idiots devoid of truth and principles - think MAGA.
"G will not want to open the door for future AG's to prosecute past Presidents for illegal actions so that it would not be used as a tool of political revenge in the hands of partisan and vindictive idiots devoid of truth and principles - think MAGA."
That has been my opinion until now. BUT that ship has already sailed especially if the "Schedule F" conspiracy is real.
IF MAGAts return to power with an enabling Banana Republican Senate majority... THEN there is no way they will not use the the DoJ and AG in exactly the way that you and I and Garland fear they might. I guess giving them a precedent and DoJ guidance (which they will immediately disregard anyway) would be the prudent thing to do.
This is a national emergency and maybe prudence needs to take a back seat. This is no normal President and no normal criminal.
If we don't prosecute Trump, we've decided we're so frightened of the bullies in the American right wing that we've agreed to let THEM own the country from now on.
I don't think they are afraid of the bullies. They fear the precedent of newly elected Presidents using the DoJ to launch political prosecutions of past Presidents and opponents in order to please the cheering mob shouting "Lock her up!" Which would be the prudent response in normal times.
BUT this is no ordinary President or ordinary criminal or ordinary crimes. Extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures.
And frankly worrying about precedent in this case is silly, because the MAGA party has shown no concern whatsoever for precedent. They are going to impeach Joe Biden within months of the new congress, and that's just what is going to happen in future if (which won't happen because there will not again ever be a non-MAGA person allowed to take office) a non-MAGA party candidate wins. The filibuster will be discarded to execute the Schedule F agenda. And the MAGA DOJ will prosecute anything that moves if that is the whim of the great leader.
This is turning out to be an unexpectedly good day for Biden. Joe Manchin just did an about face in agreeing to a climate deal. The Senate already passed the anti-China tech investment bill. And now there are reports that Russia has been offered a deal to free Britney Griner and ex-marine Paul Whelan.
Attorney General Merrick Garland, I think, will soon be busy with his own investigation into politicized judicial malfeasance. From my perspective all the hand wringing about Trump and Section F is just a reflection of what has already been done by the Democrats.
Schedule F is a direct attack on the Civil Service, which has existed for over 150 years and played a vital role de-politicizing the Federal workforce. Trump was happy to use it to embed some of his corrupt political appointees in their jobs, but now he seeks to further corrupt the Fed with political loyalists and industry cronies.
The whole point of the Civil Service is that it doesn't contain political appointees. It's entirely merit based, which is why they serve from one administration to the next. There is no reason to believe the Civil Service contains "loyalists" to any particular President. If Trump has his way, there will be.
That doesn't make them "loyalists". Employees are allowed to have political opinions, and since Republicans traditionally use federal employees as political whipping posts, it is natural that they would favor Democrats.
Furthermore, since Federal employees are competitively hired and actually take their jobs seriously and care about the work they do for the country, of course the vast majority of them were opposed to someone like Trump - a man thoroughly unfit for office - becoming President.
The article goes on to state that employees are forbidden to use government time or advocate for a specific candidate. Employees are citizens and are entitled to their own opinion, and can contribute their own monies to anyone they choose, apparently to the tune of $2 million in 2016, the date of the article. But they cannot openly advocate for one candidate or another. Unlike Trump loyalists like his daughter, Jared, Kellyanne and countless others that Trump appointed who repeatedly violated the Hatch Act. Only the very top tier of government agencies are appointed by the president. Millions of other employees aren't and shouldn't be. BTW, they ALL take this oath: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God." Not one word about loyalty to the president, which is what Trump wants.
Important to not just propagate a convenient talking point but also show those who have done some thorough review of what is going on in the courts. Thanks
"institute a very quick trial death penalty sentence for drug dealers"
This is a lie. Trump has no plans for trials when he becomes El Supremo Redux. A summary firing squad after Trumped-up charges will sooth his psychopathy just fine.
The trials will be like the trials for the Hitler assassination participants - many just shot outright, others subject to show trials before being executed by lingering methods such as piano wires. Hitler enjoyed those.
I have been to five cities in 3 months (Sacramento, Portland, D.C., Columbus, and Pittsburg). When I got off the plane and jumped into my Uber. The driver did not give me the normal run down of best places to eat. We traveled for a few minute when he broke the silence with, "We have a homeless problem in Portland". He underestimates the scope of the problem. There are already tent cities in each of the above places. The biggest ones obviously in warmer climates but still prevalent throughout. In Sacramento there are people walking the strip howling at the moon with obvious signs of mental illness. In D.C. the pack any spare inch of open grass on the corners across from churches and convention centers. As global warming precipitates more housing problems. We are on a crash course not with a housing crisis. But with a home grown humanitarian crisis. It is fitting that a gluttonous socio path espouses the fix that is necessary for Capitalism to thrive. Out of Site, Out of Mind. Make no mistakes, he is talking about people. And that person one day will be you he is talking about because he does not care about life itself. He is right on one thing. We need more housing and places for homeless to sleep that is not the ground. And I am sorry to say. I don't think capitalism can solve this out of control problem. (We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States.) Notice the word Capitalism is not used one time but there is a word used that is often associated with Socialism. That is the word Welfare. This is because Socialism is about factors of production and not about the right to vote. In fact, if the common worker had more of a vote in corporate institutions outside of the need for unions. You would probably not have many of the humanitarian issues we have today. I agree that the lady in the neighborhood running the soup kitchen for her local community makes a better representative then a non-profit form out of state. This is a Republican ideal. But Democratic ideals of a central government fomenting her ability to do so needs to become prevalent. This will never happen under a party controlled by a melomaniac. I couldn't sleep the night he was elected. Its possible because I already knew that the experiment was over.
Capitalism is perfectly compatible with a generous welfare state. Virtually every time full-blown socialism has been attempted, it has failed. But American capitalism needs re-shaping. We have the resources to prevent this. A country with so much wealth and suffering from labor shortages should not have such a huge homeless problem. We are the only modern democracy that doesn't guarantee health care to its populace.
Gingrich is an authority on two subjects: himself and his very own up front and center narcissism. JHC, the self-titled genius assistant professor couldn't even get tenure at then backwater West Georgia College (now a "University"). As a result of that ignominious failure, Newt decided to enter an easier line of work - politics. Cheap, dirty, and corrupt. Yup, good old Newt found his destiny on that proverbial highway to Hell. And the sooner he checks into the hotel, the better for us all.
Disclaimer, I didn't get tenure either on my first try at Georgia State U in Atlanta. But I never boastfully declared myself a genius [I am not] with nary a blush.
I remember Newt touting the need to "defund PBS" because with the dawn of cable The Discovery Channel, The History Channel, A & E and Bravo would be bringing us science, history and the arts making PBS redundant. LOL just take a look at what is on those channels today, the search for bigfoot, The Housewives of Wherever, Naked and Afraid, Wicked Tuna, etc.
The thought of prosecuting the former President sounds, at first blush, like banana republic stuff. But then one recalls that TFG has survived 2 impeachments, and, even after launching a multi-pronged attack on the results of a free and fair election, looks quite possibly to be the nominee of the Republican Party, NOT prosecuting him seems a more dangerous option for the life of our democracy. Trump is like an evil Sword of Gryffindor, he takes in that which makes him stronger. Susan Collins was right, he has learned his lesson, and if he goes scott free for this, the lesson he will learn and pass along to other would-be demagogues is “when you’re the President, they let you do it”.
In case you're tempted to purchase a Trump gold plated dollar coin, I did a little cyphering. The value of the gold on this coin is approximately $1.76. I'M RICH!
Massive climate change is starting to look like a welcome cleansing after all this massive thuggery-muggery by Trumpublican grifters greasing their takeover palms.
Executed would never be my go-to solution. Maybe preferable would be to arrest them, throw them in jail, and confiscate their money and distribute among the families who lost someone to the Sackler's products, (all their money, since it was largely seeded with the deaths of countless Americans)
tRrump would never go after wealthy white families anyway.
Far more likely to condemn doctors, and medical cannabis users than the Sacklers.
The dog story bothers me for another reason, outside of cruelty to puppies: the amount of money the US spends researching end-stage conditions that kill people (like sepsis) vs putting that money into well established preventative measures. I beagle puppy is a poor stand-in for most humans I see with sepsis, who have a history of diabetes, drug use, cancer (with smoking and obesity being the biggest risk factors for cancer), liver failure secondary to alcoholism and fatty liver disease, or coronary artery disease secondary to smoking/diet.
I'm not remotely interested in hearing anyone who cheered for government shutdowns wax on about the cruelty of animal testing, because every time the government shut down, most of the employees at federal research agencies (NIH, CDC) would get furloughed leaving a bare minimum of people to take care of lab animals, and experiments get derailed to the point where all that suffering is for nothing.
And the judge allowed that?
There is no way Garland can remove political considerations or future political impact in his decisions to prosecute Trump or not. I think G will go where the evidence points and he will prosecute the fake electors and any WH staffers involved in the effort as well as prosecuting Giuliani, Powell and Eastman for their illegal conduct. G will not want to open the door for future AG's to prosecute past Presidents for illegal actions so that it would not be used as a tool of political revenge in the hands of partisan and vindictive idiots devoid of truth and principles - think MAGA.
"G will not want to open the door for future AG's to prosecute past Presidents for illegal actions so that it would not be used as a tool of political revenge in the hands of partisan and vindictive idiots devoid of truth and principles - think MAGA."
That has been my opinion until now. BUT that ship has already sailed especially if the "Schedule F" conspiracy is real.
IF MAGAts return to power with an enabling Banana Republican Senate majority... THEN there is no way they will not use the the DoJ and AG in exactly the way that you and I and Garland fear they might. I guess giving them a precedent and DoJ guidance (which they will immediately disregard anyway) would be the prudent thing to do.
This is a national emergency and maybe prudence needs to take a back seat. This is no normal President and no normal criminal.
If we don't prosecute Trump, we've decided we're so frightened of the bullies in the American right wing that we've agreed to let THEM own the country from now on.
I don't think they are afraid of the bullies. They fear the precedent of newly elected Presidents using the DoJ to launch political prosecutions of past Presidents and opponents in order to please the cheering mob shouting "Lock her up!" Which would be the prudent response in normal times.
BUT this is no ordinary President or ordinary criminal or ordinary crimes. Extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures.
And frankly worrying about precedent in this case is silly, because the MAGA party has shown no concern whatsoever for precedent. They are going to impeach Joe Biden within months of the new congress, and that's just what is going to happen in future if (which won't happen because there will not again ever be a non-MAGA person allowed to take office) a non-MAGA party candidate wins. The filibuster will be discarded to execute the Schedule F agenda. And the MAGA DOJ will prosecute anything that moves if that is the whim of the great leader.
This is turning out to be an unexpectedly good day for Biden. Joe Manchin just did an about face in agreeing to a climate deal. The Senate already passed the anti-China tech investment bill. And now there are reports that Russia has been offered a deal to free Britney Griner and ex-marine Paul Whelan.
Attorney General Merrick Garland, I think, will soon be busy with his own investigation into politicized judicial malfeasance. From my perspective all the hand wringing about Trump and Section F is just a reflection of what has already been done by the Democrats.
Schedule F is a direct attack on the Civil Service, which has existed for over 150 years and played a vital role de-politicizing the Federal workforce. Trump was happy to use it to embed some of his corrupt political appointees in their jobs, but now he seeks to further corrupt the Fed with political loyalists and industry cronies.
Nah. Organization bloat happens and needs to be cut with an axe.
Today the government is rife with Obama, Clinton and Biden loyalists, so time for some balance.
The whole point of the Civil Service is that it doesn't contain political appointees. It's entirely merit based, which is why they serve from one administration to the next. There is no reason to believe the Civil Service contains "loyalists" to any particular President. If Trump has his way, there will be.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/302817-government-workers-shun-trump-give-big-money-to-clinton-campaign/
That doesn't make them "loyalists". Employees are allowed to have political opinions, and since Republicans traditionally use federal employees as political whipping posts, it is natural that they would favor Democrats.
Furthermore, since Federal employees are competitively hired and actually take their jobs seriously and care about the work they do for the country, of course the vast majority of them were opposed to someone like Trump - a man thoroughly unfit for office - becoming President.
So?
The article goes on to state that employees are forbidden to use government time or advocate for a specific candidate. Employees are citizens and are entitled to their own opinion, and can contribute their own monies to anyone they choose, apparently to the tune of $2 million in 2016, the date of the article. But they cannot openly advocate for one candidate or another. Unlike Trump loyalists like his daughter, Jared, Kellyanne and countless others that Trump appointed who repeatedly violated the Hatch Act. Only the very top tier of government agencies are appointed by the president. Millions of other employees aren't and shouldn't be. BTW, they ALL take this oath: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God." Not one word about loyalty to the president, which is what Trump wants.
Charlie - I would point you to a few others who have been doing the court research that shows DOJ has been investigating https://www.emptywheel.net/2022/07/16/what-doj-was-doing-while-everyone-was-whinging-doj-wasnt-doing-anything/
Also another article https://cafe.com/notes-from-contributors/note-from-barb-where-is-merrick-garland/
Important to not just propagate a convenient talking point but also show those who have done some thorough review of what is going on in the courts. Thanks
"institute a very quick trial death penalty sentence for drug dealers"
This is a lie. Trump has no plans for trials when he becomes El Supremo Redux. A summary firing squad after Trumped-up charges will sooth his psychopathy just fine.
For about five seconds.
The trials will be like the trials for the Hitler assassination participants - many just shot outright, others subject to show trials before being executed by lingering methods such as piano wires. Hitler enjoyed those.
I have been to five cities in 3 months (Sacramento, Portland, D.C., Columbus, and Pittsburg). When I got off the plane and jumped into my Uber. The driver did not give me the normal run down of best places to eat. We traveled for a few minute when he broke the silence with, "We have a homeless problem in Portland". He underestimates the scope of the problem. There are already tent cities in each of the above places. The biggest ones obviously in warmer climates but still prevalent throughout. In Sacramento there are people walking the strip howling at the moon with obvious signs of mental illness. In D.C. the pack any spare inch of open grass on the corners across from churches and convention centers. As global warming precipitates more housing problems. We are on a crash course not with a housing crisis. But with a home grown humanitarian crisis. It is fitting that a gluttonous socio path espouses the fix that is necessary for Capitalism to thrive. Out of Site, Out of Mind. Make no mistakes, he is talking about people. And that person one day will be you he is talking about because he does not care about life itself. He is right on one thing. We need more housing and places for homeless to sleep that is not the ground. And I am sorry to say. I don't think capitalism can solve this out of control problem. (We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States.) Notice the word Capitalism is not used one time but there is a word used that is often associated with Socialism. That is the word Welfare. This is because Socialism is about factors of production and not about the right to vote. In fact, if the common worker had more of a vote in corporate institutions outside of the need for unions. You would probably not have many of the humanitarian issues we have today. I agree that the lady in the neighborhood running the soup kitchen for her local community makes a better representative then a non-profit form out of state. This is a Republican ideal. But Democratic ideals of a central government fomenting her ability to do so needs to become prevalent. This will never happen under a party controlled by a melomaniac. I couldn't sleep the night he was elected. Its possible because I already knew that the experiment was over.
Capitalism is perfectly compatible with a generous welfare state. Virtually every time full-blown socialism has been attempted, it has failed. But American capitalism needs re-shaping. We have the resources to prevent this. A country with so much wealth and suffering from labor shortages should not have such a huge homeless problem. We are the only modern democracy that doesn't guarantee health care to its populace.
"Trump cited Newt Gingrich as the authority"
Gingrich is an authority on two subjects: himself and his very own up front and center narcissism. JHC, the self-titled genius assistant professor couldn't even get tenure at then backwater West Georgia College (now a "University"). As a result of that ignominious failure, Newt decided to enter an easier line of work - politics. Cheap, dirty, and corrupt. Yup, good old Newt found his destiny on that proverbial highway to Hell. And the sooner he checks into the hotel, the better for us all.
Disclaimer, I didn't get tenure either on my first try at Georgia State U in Atlanta. But I never boastfully declared myself a genius [I am not] with nary a blush.
I remember Newt touting the need to "defund PBS" because with the dawn of cable The Discovery Channel, The History Channel, A & E and Bravo would be bringing us science, history and the arts making PBS redundant. LOL just take a look at what is on those channels today, the search for bigfoot, The Housewives of Wherever, Naked and Afraid, Wicked Tuna, etc.
Definitely PBS quality! Right?
“No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.”
- H.L. Mencken
Never overestimate the intelligence of Newt Gingrich.
- Me
Excellent, as always. Keep beating this drum: "This sounds promising, but as former DOJ prosecutor Andrew Weissmann warns, the clock is running. "
The thought of prosecuting the former President sounds, at first blush, like banana republic stuff. But then one recalls that TFG has survived 2 impeachments, and, even after launching a multi-pronged attack on the results of a free and fair election, looks quite possibly to be the nominee of the Republican Party, NOT prosecuting him seems a more dangerous option for the life of our democracy. Trump is like an evil Sword of Gryffindor, he takes in that which makes him stronger. Susan Collins was right, he has learned his lesson, and if he goes scott free for this, the lesson he will learn and pass along to other would-be demagogues is “when you’re the President, they let you do it”.
In case you're tempted to purchase a Trump gold plated dollar coin, I did a little cyphering. The value of the gold on this coin is approximately $1.76. I'M RICH!
😂
Massive climate change is starting to look like a welcome cleansing after all this massive thuggery-muggery by Trumpublican grifters greasing their takeover palms.
How many lives would have been saved if Trump had the Sacklers executed?
Executed would never be my go-to solution. Maybe preferable would be to arrest them, throw them in jail, and confiscate their money and distribute among the families who lost someone to the Sackler's products, (all their money, since it was largely seeded with the deaths of countless Americans)
tRrump would never go after wealthy white families anyway.
Far more likely to condemn doctors, and medical cannabis users than the Sacklers.
The dog story bothers me for another reason, outside of cruelty to puppies: the amount of money the US spends researching end-stage conditions that kill people (like sepsis) vs putting that money into well established preventative measures. I beagle puppy is a poor stand-in for most humans I see with sepsis, who have a history of diabetes, drug use, cancer (with smoking and obesity being the biggest risk factors for cancer), liver failure secondary to alcoholism and fatty liver disease, or coronary artery disease secondary to smoking/diet.
I'm not remotely interested in hearing anyone who cheered for government shutdowns wax on about the cruelty of animal testing, because every time the government shut down, most of the employees at federal research agencies (NIH, CDC) would get furloughed leaving a bare minimum of people to take care of lab animals, and experiments get derailed to the point where all that suffering is for nothing.
Now where can I get a beagle?
Has any Republican spoken out against trump's Schedule F plan?
They're afraid to.
They're afraid they'll be "Schedule F'd" right out of their cushy positions.
It will apply to any decent civil servant, no matter what their party. They don’t want Republicans in government, they want Trumpists.