General Discussion

JohnSJ

(92,509 posts)

42. Absolutely. A least not a comey fiasco

Reply to Cha (Reply #41)

Thu Feb 8, 2024, 08:00 PM

Feb 2024

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

124 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I have been an ardent defender of AG Garland, but after today's political charged report against [View all] JohnSJ Feb 2024 OP

Be sure to let his boss know. brooklynite Feb 2024 #1

In other words, if I am disappointed, I should just shut up and not complain. Totally not surprised by JohnSJ Feb 2024 #4

Welcome to the dark side. Prepare thyself for lame, canned, illogical responses to any of your concerns, Scrivener7 Feb 2024 #12

I have! Wuddles440 Feb 2024 #18

Biggest Threat to Democracy Cthulu on call Feb 2024 #108

Yes, your shtick is well known Orrex Feb 2024 #116

Post removed Post removed Feb 2024 #117

Was I assigned George Santos in the last election? brooklynite Feb 2024 #121

Sounds really serious. Torchlight Feb 2024 #120

Truth be told, Garland and his actions never sat well with me. sprinkleeninow Feb 2024 #2

I didn't like him when Obama nominated him as SCJ, just had a feeling about him. Merlot Feb 2024 #3

.... sprinkleeninow Feb 2024 #7

I have no clue how the guy became beloved TheKentuckian Feb 2024 #31

Many here don't grasp this, newdayneeded Feb 2024 #87

yeppers, I hadn't ever heard Garland speak until his confirmation hearings.. that was when I intuited msfiddlestix Feb 2024 #91

Exactly this Farmer-Rick Feb 2024 #101

I have been defending him for quite some time, but with his appointments of republican special JohnSJ Feb 2024 #6

Or he could have appointed a Democrat or someone neutral. LeftInTX Feb 2024 #49

Why should he consider political affiliation? TexasDem69 Feb 2024 #52

That's a somewhat... druidity33 Feb 2024 #75

I don't pay all that much attention. He seemed alright to me. LeftInTX Feb 2024 #73

this is nonsense bigtree Feb 2024 #5

There was no need forva special prosecutor edhopper Feb 2024 #8

Exactly, and why did it take so long to appoint a special counsel against trump? JohnSJ Feb 2024 #10

Smith was named Special Counsel six days after trump declared he was a candidate for president. onenote Feb 2024 #63

Yes, thanks though JohnSJ Feb 2024 #65

But most of the stuff known newdayneeded Feb 2024 #124

The special counsels to investigate the BIdens,were appointed by Garland, and they are partisan republicans. and as far JohnSJ Feb 2024 #9

If I remember correctly... ShazzieB Feb 2024 #29

A thoughtful reply JohnSJ Feb 2024 #32

Thank you. ShazzieB Feb 2024 #119

That Sick Fuck made his intentions to run for office again was made to ALL before he left the white-house msfiddlestix Feb 2024 #94

This particular appointment was bad judgement. LeftInTX Feb 2024 #72

Zero input from Garland? Only if he chose to give zero input. It was his job to review... Silent3 Feb 2024 #85

Everything the GOP has to CYA for Ayatollah Complainy is nonsense at this point, defending Mr. 91 and LOSER! Brainfodder Feb 2024 #107

He prosecuted the OKC Tim McVeigh trial which I followed closely, being in Denver at the time... hlthe2b Feb 2024 #11

People always cite that case. But despite the horror of the result, McVeigh was one kid, Scrivener7 Feb 2024 #13

McVey was not wealthy, connected, or a Republican politician TheKentuckian Feb 2024 #115

Well done FHRRK Feb 2024 #14

Thanks. I have never had a problem admitting an error in judgment or being incorrect JohnSJ Feb 2024 #33

No one else is obligated to change their mind just because you or anyone else thinks they should. ShazzieB Feb 2024 #34

Duly noted FHRRK Feb 2024 #62

Sorry for the misunderstanding. ShazzieB Feb 2024 #69

"Be sure to let his boss know" has been posted many multiple times in every single thread that expresses concern Scrivener7 Feb 2024 #81

I had no idea that's been posted repeatedly. ShazzieB Feb 2024 #118

It is not the week before the election. Thus I don't think it will hurt Biden. Demsrule86 Feb 2024 #15

I agree, next up will be presidential immunity or lack thereof BeyondGeography Feb 2024 #17

Yup, I do not not believe that Trump wins the immunity case. Demsrule86 Feb 2024 #19

That's What I've been saying, Dems.. Cha Feb 2024 #23

Some of us hear you and agree! 😁 ShazzieB Feb 2024 #36

Mahalo, Shazzie! Cha Feb 2024 #39

true, but he might not be done talking yet. ecstatic Feb 2024 #24

CNN tapper was laying it on against Biden today, but that is par for the course for him. JohnSJ Feb 2024 #35

But it is many, many weeks beyond 1/6/2021. jaxexpat Feb 2024 #44

I don't think this will go away they have a SC saying Biden is old and doc03 Feb 2024 #53

Yes it does. Trump's Attorney General would never allow such a partisan report to come out. Shit, his AG didn't dem4decades Feb 2024 #80

NBC coverage was disastrous. LeftInTX Feb 2024 #71

That's true regarding the Faux News viewers, Wuddles440 Feb 2024 #83

But, what worries me is Farmer-Rick Feb 2024 #104

Oh well. Oopsie Daisy Feb 2024 #16

It's not a fun club to be in, but welcome aboard, I guess. ecstatic Feb 2024 #20

Garland was a bad choice. Biden felt sorry for him. No good deed goes unpunished dalton99a Feb 2024 #21

Of course many DUers assured us that Garland's milquetoast kowtowing to the GQP Sky Jewels Feb 2024 #47

So Biden didn't know what he was doing when he appointed him? Why hasn't he replaced him? onenote Feb 2024 #64

Joe made a mistake. People do. Do YOU think less of him because of that? I never expected he was infallible. Scrivener7 Feb 2024 #78

Should he have corrected his "mistake"? onenote Feb 2024 #82

That's nice. Scrivener7 Feb 2024 #84

Cleaerly, he doesn't. at least not enough of a mistake to take action on. msfiddlestix Feb 2024 #99

This one is a truly case in point on "no good deed goes unpunished" msfiddlestix Feb 2024 #96

The language and conclusions in Robert Hur's Special Counsel report amount to prosecutorial misconduct. sop Feb 2024 #22

TY.. I'm hoping something can Cha Feb 2024 #25

I don't think so Cha except to push back on Hur's accusations. JohnSJ Feb 2024 #37

Thanks John.. At least it's in February and Cha Feb 2024 #41

Absolutely. A least not a comey fiasco JohnSJ Feb 2024 #42

Team Biden.. Cha Feb 2024 #48

This type of garbage works well for the GOP. hadEnuf Feb 2024 #113

Agree- push back is necessary TxGuitar Feb 2024 #105

President Biden crowing about the report. TomSlick Feb 2024 #26

His old and forgetful comments are anything but helpful in my view JohnSJ Feb 2024 #38

It's the only smart response for him to have. Scrivener7 Feb 2024 #55

We could have done without the commentary. That was political, unprofessional total BS. LeftInTX Feb 2024 #74

Agreed. TomSlick Feb 2024 #110

I am not holding my breathe that he is going to go anywhere.. DemocratInPa Feb 2024 #27

That is up to Biden. That is up to the postal board of governors JohnSJ Feb 2024 #40

+1 TeamProg Feb 2024 #28

i felt ag garland should have left along time ago. but i was ignored. AllaN01Bear Feb 2024 #30

Join the club. lees1975 Feb 2024 #43

I'll take this Joe Biden, today, over ANY day in years past calimary Feb 2024 #45

A lot of us knew Garland was terrible long ago, Sky Jewels Feb 2024 #46

+1 People are starting to realize Garland is not a Democrat. Emile Feb 2024 #79

I Agree, Sir The Magistrate Feb 2024 #50

I just read the report on Politico. It couldn't be worse if Trump himself doc03 Feb 2024 #51

Is there anything you think is wrong about the report? TexasDem69 Feb 2024 #54

Only One Sentence Required, Sir The Magistrate Feb 2024 #56

After the SC finds no cause to prosecute Biden, he basically makes a doc03 Feb 2024 #57

Interview for yankee87 Feb 2024 #122

It also isn't the job of the special counsel to make appraisals of Biden's JohnSJ Feb 2024 #59

"Swift Boating", a very appropriate description of the SC's editorial pointlessly set within his "finding of fact". jaxexpat Feb 2024 #112

cosigned jcgoldie Feb 2024 #58

We have just been swift boated by this special counsel, and anyone who JohnSJ Feb 2024 #61

Oh, damn, are we looking a little political. republianmushroom Feb 2024 #60

You take a lot of heat for this, but, yep. Scrivener7 Feb 2024 #77

I agree with you Takket Feb 2024 #66

"Unprofessional report." Exactly. nt sprinkleeninow Feb 2024 #67

You state this eloquently. I'm all out of hearts....Wish I had one.... LeftInTX Feb 2024 #70

I don't want to beat a dead horse, and we are in agreement about how Garland should go forward. Scrivener7 Feb 2024 #76

Garland is a coward budkin Feb 2024 #68

People give him too much credit for Oklahoma City dalton99a Feb 2024 #86

Garland okay'd that summary. He is responsible for it. spanone Feb 2024 #88

You are darn right he is. JohnSJ Feb 2024 #90

I've not supported him. Duppers Feb 2024 #89

Garland had no business allowing this report to be published 'as is,' because PatrickforB Feb 2024 #92

Well said! n/t msfiddlestix Feb 2024 #97

It was a frustrating experience to express feelings and thoughts of doubt right out the gate... msfiddlestix Feb 2024 #93

If my goal in life were to be a Supreme Court Justice... 3825-87867 Feb 2024 #95

What are you talking about? President Obama nominated Garland for SC justice JohnSJ Feb 2024 #98

I know Obama nominated him. 3825-87867 Feb 2024 #100

DUers finally coming to conclusion that TFG will not be tried before election. Sneederbunk Feb 2024 #102

You can't criticize Garland cactusfractal Feb 2024 #103

It's almost funny to watch the doubling down on "Everything Garland touches is three-dimensional-chess gold," Scrivener7 Feb 2024 #111

And the light does come after the darkness..... republianmushroom Feb 2024 #106

Dem DOJ's damifino10 Feb 2024 #109

"Garland is the gift that keeps on giving." - Mitch McConnell TomDaisy Feb 2024 #114

'Confidential' in name only: Merrick Garland's delicate decision to release the Hur report LetMyPeopleVote Feb 2024 #123