Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think there's been a lot of speculation about the relationship between the Jan 6 Committee and the DOJ, partly because the DOJ has been holding their cards pretty close to their vest. That has recently changed.
You know this how? more wishful thinking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdog
1) Garland is favorable of the committee because the public needs to know what happened.
Again, more wishful thinking. The DOJ shouldn't be favorable to any 1 sided political hearing acting like a court. His job is to keep due process and the rights of everybody involved and to prosecute cases that the DOJ can prove beyond a reasonable doubt and take the politics out of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdog
2) He was also clear that the DOJ is conducting their own investigation into Jan 6 and that the two investigations are separate.
They have been doing that after 1/6th. That's their job. What he didn't say was that Trump is under criminal investigation. That's more wishful thinking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdog
3) He expects there will be things that the DOJ finds out first, and there will be things that the Committee will find first. Both are fine.
That's a political answer and doesn't say much or mean much. Something politically to throw at the base. After all, his position is political appointed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdog
3)4) If the DOJ discovers any illegal activity by anyone, they will bring them to Justice. And they will do so without fear from anyone or any group.
That's their oath and everybody at the DOJ. So you lost me with that statement. He never said Trump is under criminal investigation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdog
2)5) Referrals from the Committee to the DOJ are fine but unnecessary since the DOJ will have everything from both investigations and will be making up their own minds whether to bring charges.
Well duh!!! The DOJ is supposed to do their own investigations and have their own protocols away from the legislative branch. A DOJ investigation doesn't necessarily means indictments or guilt. It might work for citizens to not prosecute. He didn't say anything new here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdog
2)6) They are moving urgently and quickly with a huge number of investigators to bring anyone and everyone to justice that's responsible for interfering with the peaceful transfer of power.
If you say so. I guess you have exclusive inside connections to the DOJ or is it more wishful thinking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdog
2)Here's a link to the video. All the points I mentioned above are discussed between timestamps 2:00 - 4:00. That's only 2 minutes, so there's really no excuse not to watch it.
Where in the video he says he agrees with the committee and there is enough "evidence" to criminally charge Trump or that Trump is under criminal investigation? More wishful thinking.
Again, more wishful thinking. The DOJ shouldn't be favorable to any 1 sided political hearing acting like a court. His job is to keep due process and the rights of everybody involved and to prosecute cases that the DOJ can prove beyond a reasonable doubt and take the politics out of it.
They have been doing that after 1/6th. That's their job. What he didn't say was that Trump is under criminal investigation. That's more wishful thinking.
That's a political answer and doesn't say much or mean much. Something politically to throw at the base. After all, his position is political appointed.
That's their oath and everybody at the DOJ. So you lost me with that statement. He never said Trump is under criminal investigation.
Well duh!!! The DOJ is supposed to do their own investigations and have their own protocols away from the legislative branch. A DOJ investigation doesn't necessarily means indictments or guilt. It might work for citizens to not prosecute. He didn't say anything new here.
If you say so. I guess you have exclusive inside connections to the DOJ or is it more wishful thinking.
Where in the video he says he agrees with the committee and there is enough "evidence" to criminally charge Trump or that Trump is under criminal investigation? More wishful thinking.
Not sure exactly what you are saying. You had a LOT of questions about the role of the DOJ and the Committee. Garland answered them. I think you just don't like the answers.
In fact, it was more shameful and disgusting because these were American citizens turning on their country and attacking the foundations of our republic!
The goal, of course, was to get Mike Pence out of the building and scare the Congress into acquiescing to Trump's scheme. That could take a bit of muscle and threat.
As we have seen, Trump already knew there would be armed men leading the crowd. This is why he wanted the metal detectors withdrawn.
The fake electors had already met in their various states in the previous weeks, and had already sent their 'certificates' in. An interstate conspiracy to defraud the people of those states their votes.
The only thing left to do (in Trump's mind) was to get the Vice President to reject the real electors and accept the fake electors. Pence understood what Trump expected of him, and he refused.
Grassley was primed and ready to comply, the loathsome snake he is. To get Grassley in place it would be necessary to get Pence out of the building. That was why this mob of fools were led into their treasonous violent attack. This was no ordinary spontaneous riot, it was deliberately planned to bring down our government.
Not sure exactly what you are saying. You had a LOT of questions about the role of the DOJ and the Committee. Garland answered them. I think you just don't like the answers.
I think my answers are pretty direct to understand to your statements. He didn't say much. I'm not challenging him. I'm challenging your wishful thinking and how you spin things.
You are correct that the Jan 6th "insurrection" is a myth.
Okay. "Terrorist attack" or "coup attempt" either one will fit nicely in its place. All three are true and fit, even if they are not synonyms.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
it was
