Attorney General Merrick Garland says there should be ‘speedy trial’ of Trump as 2024 election looms
Attorney General Merrick Garland says there should be ‘speedy trial’ of Trump as 2024 election looms
Attorney General Merrick Garland said in an interview with CNN that he believes there should be a “speedy trial” in the election subversion case against Donald Trump, while also pushing back on allegations that his department is targeting the former president for political reason...
Yes. There should have been. FOUR FUCKING YEARS AGO!
114he could shoot someone on the street, and the trial would still take long enough for him to get reelected and pardon himself....
31Omg yes, this. Garland did Jack Shit for 2 years until Jack Smith got called in to start actually doing something, due to mounting public pressure. Merrick is a picture perfect representation of weak sauce Dems - pathetic. And now he says “hurry up”. Ducking infuriating dude.
17Right, we're getting to the point where the Biden admin is playing right into his hands. If this goes through at those point, they are already primed to cry foul.
4He was going to cry foul no matter what. He will always cry foul. He's a whiner and a loser and he's going to complain no matter the situation if it doesn't go his way.
8Biden probably thinks Trump is easier to beat than Haley.
1
It's not like they had 4 fucking years to get a trial done. They dropped the fucking ball and now they're panicking because it's already too late to push it through. He should have been convicted and incarcerated before the Iowa caucus this year.
107The only thing I'd disagree with here is that I don't think they're really panicking, I think Trump being the Republican nominee is exactly what our current administration wanted because he's the easiest one to beat in a general election. This is why as soon as the case got handed over to a special counsel with some degree of independence from the White House things actually started happening with it.
26I think it would have been better if he didn't get the nomination. There's a 1000% chance he would run 3rd party or independent if he didn't get the nomination and that would split the Republican vote making it easier for the Democrats to win when 2/3 of voters don't show up to the polls this year.
13
Sorry man, that's not how this stuff works.
- You can have a quick case.
- You can have a strong case.
Choose one.
Now consider you're:
-
Evidence-gathering and waiting for smaller fish to flip and issue depositions.
-
All the while evidence gathering has happened since Garland got in office.
... While you're up against a former President in an unprecedented prosecution where loads of outside money will be funding the defense.
So your arguments better be TIGHT. I'd rather they take their time and do it right.
22
We can't go back and correct the mistakes already made. However, we can correct the problems going forward. Starting with not treating Trump with as much deference as he has received.
Donald Trump is a prime example of what happens when nobody stands up to a bully.
68Wish he was up against more Federal judges like Judge Lewis Kaplan in the NY civil trials, that guy takes no shit.
20
"Should". If only he knew someone in a position of power at DOJ.
25Well thanks for dropping anchor there, Admiral fucking Obvious.
14Isn't Merrick Garland the one to make that call? Times a tickin.
11No, not really. It's entirely in the hands of the court and to a lesser extent Special Council Jack Smith and the chess moves he makes against said Judges (which some may be fair; others not so much aka SCOTUS)
1
In the phoneix Wright universe, trials can take up to 3 days and no longer. I use to think that was a dumb rule. Now I wish that something like that was real.
5This is the best summary I could come up with:
Attorney General Merrick Garland said in an interview with CNN that he believes there should be a “speedy trial” in the election subversion case against Donald Trump, while also pushing back on allegations that his department is targeting the former president for political reasons.
Garland said he agrees with special counsel Jack Smith’s assertion that the “public interest requires a speedy trial” in the 2020 election currently set for trial in March in Washington, DC.
Garland also defended the department against allegations of election interference when asked whether he thought the federal cases against Trump should have been brought sooner – in order to avoid the prosecution of a leading candidate unfolding months before a presidential election.
When asked about the perception that the Justice Department is prosecuting Trump for political reasons, Garland said: “Of course it concerns me.”
The federal criminal case over Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election results has been put on pause while a dispute over Trump’s claim of presidential immunity winds through the appeals process.
“With respect to the public, I hope they will see, not only from what we’ve done but the outcomes of the cases and the way in which special counsel have proceeded that we have kept politics out of this,” Garland said.
The original article contains 351 words, the summary contains 204 words. Saved 42%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
2Imagine if this fedsoc jackwagon was a supreme court justice right now, instead of personally being responsible for the end of civilization
-1So he admits openly that this isn't about justice, but about politics. As long as you have people in key areas of the government politically persecuting someone as high a former and likely future president, people will yearn for a populist president like Trump.
-27Garland's not leading any of the prosecutions, nor did he originate any of the indictments. Heck, many of them aren't even federal indictments.
And if people don't want their favorite candidate indicted, they should start by picking one who's not a crook.
21