I started out hoping for T***p to meet his demise in some painful, undignified, humiliating way.Then I figured out that in order for that to happen, he would have to be capable of shame, which clearly is not the case.
Am I missing something here?I don't know the gentleman, but if he was a Federal prosecutor, how would he have been able to certify an election result (in either direction)?Was he ALSO an elector, and it just doesn't say that?
You know, I get the frustration and the anxiety. I share it.
But we try to teach children that feelings are not facts, and as adults we should try to bear that in mind too. In this case, we may be frustrated and anxious, but it does not follow that Garland is therefore asleep at the switch.
I believe Garland is doing his job, based on indirect evidence. It's not particularly emotionally rewarding. The not knowing is maddening, which is such a fundamental aspect of human nature that the Greeks even had a legend about it (Orpheus trying to get Eurydice back from the underworld).
There might also be something to be said about keeping low expectations too. When Mueller was appointed, it was all "it's Mueller time" this and "Mueller is coming for him!" that, and then the report finally dropped like a wet turd. It was disingenuously spun in advance by Bill Barr, punted the whole thing to Congress, and then... nothing happened. Two years of hype and the people who thought Trump was guilty of working with the Russians still think he is, and the people convinced it was all a hoax used it as proof of his innocence.
Maybe it is better to expect little and perhaps be pleasantly surprised than waiting for Garland and the DOJ to drop the hammer and be disappointed if it doesn't happen (or doesn't happen as soon as people would like). I guess one could counter about the "soft bigotry of low expectations," but happiness = expectations minus reality. I want Trump held accountable for his many crimes as much as the next person, but Garland and the DOJ are gonna do what they're gonna do and we won't know till we know.
... all those 15 boxes of top secret classified material Trump had stolen from the White House and smuggled down to Mar-a-Lago inside a Russian nesting doll he stuck up his butt.
I checked with the Guinness Records people, and this may be a new world record for keistering.
The Mueller situation was also an example of the DoJ hobbling the investigation and deliberately running interference for Trump; there was zero chance of an indictment, period.
As it is, even if Garland does his job correctly - and I imagine he will - anything that goes to trial is still going to be subject to the will of the jury. All it will take is one MAGA to derail a guilty verdict. None of which really matters right now. The issues at hand are 1) are we going to vote in 2022 and 2024, and 2) what possible good does it do to demoralize people?
I'd really like to know more about Merrick Garland, information deeper and more detailed than what one can get in Wikipedia. He came out of Harvard. He worked for Arnold and Porter. He looks like an establishment guy. Maybe he is all for justice but not the justice we'r looking for and need. Maybe he cleans his plate, washes it off, and puts it in the dishwasher when we need someone who will yeet the plate against the wall.
I also would like to know more about every attorney working on anything related to 1/6, tfg, and so on. Who are they? Where did they come from? These are things that a healthy MSM that has not been overtaken by the corporate borg should be looking into. That aside, how about other non-MSM media taking it on?
And if anyone knows that this kind of information exists, by all means please share.
At least on Wonkette, I don't see any Garland haters. I see people who are understandably frustrated and with good reasons. The longer this takes, the closer to the midterms we get. We just don't know if he's doing legal needlepoint because indicting an ex-president for acts committed while he was in office is a big norm to break. Or if he is dragging his feet because at bottom he doesn't believe an ex-president should be indicted and he's waiting until it's not his problem anymore (repubs win Congress and the Committee is dissolved). How can we know?
It's funny you should mention that. I just watched a "Wagon Train" where Wally Cox (a tweedy little professorly type) was traveling west, and the wagon train was running into trouble with some Native Americans. Well Wally Cox took it upon himself to try to deal with the Native Americans, and through the powers of Keeping A Cool Head and Demonstrating His Knowledge And Expertise, managed to accomplish what all the hotheaded know-it-alls could not.
I started out hoping for T***p to meet his demise in some painful, undignified, humiliating way.Then I figured out that in order for that to happen, he would have to be capable of shame, which clearly is not the case.
Am I missing something here?I don't know the gentleman, but if he was a Federal prosecutor, how would he have been able to certify an election result (in either direction)?Was he ALSO an elector, and it just doesn't say that?
The kind of Lucky Charms that is all marshmeggles.
Surely THIS SPECIFIC FELONY will be a bridge too far, and...`Fuck it; I can't even do this sarcastically any more.
https://uploads.disquscdn.c...
You know, I get the frustration and the anxiety. I share it.
But we try to teach children that feelings are not facts, and as adults we should try to bear that in mind too. In this case, we may be frustrated and anxious, but it does not follow that Garland is therefore asleep at the switch.
I believe Garland is doing his job, based on indirect evidence. It's not particularly emotionally rewarding. The not knowing is maddening, which is such a fundamental aspect of human nature that the Greeks even had a legend about it (Orpheus trying to get Eurydice back from the underworld).
I prefer it when he marshals his Blue soldiers from Saturn to lure idiots into believing dumb shit like this. It's a symphony of stupidity.
Or his haters attacks. It's easy to sit at a keyboard and pretend to know exactly what is going on.
Publicly, jackshit is going on, and none of us have to "pretend" to know that.
There might also be something to be said about keeping low expectations too. When Mueller was appointed, it was all "it's Mueller time" this and "Mueller is coming for him!" that, and then the report finally dropped like a wet turd. It was disingenuously spun in advance by Bill Barr, punted the whole thing to Congress, and then... nothing happened. Two years of hype and the people who thought Trump was guilty of working with the Russians still think he is, and the people convinced it was all a hoax used it as proof of his innocence.
Maybe it is better to expect little and perhaps be pleasantly surprised than waiting for Garland and the DOJ to drop the hammer and be disappointed if it doesn't happen (or doesn't happen as soon as people would like). I guess one could counter about the "soft bigotry of low expectations," but happiness = expectations minus reality. I want Trump held accountable for his many crimes as much as the next person, but Garland and the DOJ are gonna do what they're gonna do and we won't know till we know.
... all those 15 boxes of top secret classified material Trump had stolen from the White House and smuggled down to Mar-a-Lago inside a Russian nesting doll he stuck up his butt.
I checked with the Guinness Records people, and this may be a new world record for keistering.
The Mueller situation was also an example of the DoJ hobbling the investigation and deliberately running interference for Trump; there was zero chance of an indictment, period.
As it is, even if Garland does his job correctly - and I imagine he will - anything that goes to trial is still going to be subject to the will of the jury. All it will take is one MAGA to derail a guilty verdict. None of which really matters right now. The issues at hand are 1) are we going to vote in 2022 and 2024, and 2) what possible good does it do to demoralize people?
I'd really like to know more about Merrick Garland, information deeper and more detailed than what one can get in Wikipedia. He came out of Harvard. He worked for Arnold and Porter. He looks like an establishment guy. Maybe he is all for justice but not the justice we'r looking for and need. Maybe he cleans his plate, washes it off, and puts it in the dishwasher when we need someone who will yeet the plate against the wall.
I also would like to know more about every attorney working on anything related to 1/6, tfg, and so on. Who are they? Where did they come from? These are things that a healthy MSM that has not been overtaken by the corporate borg should be looking into. That aside, how about other non-MSM media taking it on?
And if anyone knows that this kind of information exists, by all means please share.
At least on Wonkette, I don't see any Garland haters. I see people who are understandably frustrated and with good reasons. The longer this takes, the closer to the midterms we get. We just don't know if he's doing legal needlepoint because indicting an ex-president for acts committed while he was in office is a big norm to break. Or if he is dragging his feet because at bottom he doesn't believe an ex-president should be indicted and he's waiting until it's not his problem anymore (repubs win Congress and the Committee is dissolved). How can we know?
It's funny you should mention that. I just watched a "Wagon Train" where Wally Cox (a tweedy little professorly type) was traveling west, and the wagon train was running into trouble with some Native Americans. Well Wally Cox took it upon himself to try to deal with the Native Americans, and through the powers of Keeping A Cool Head and Demonstrating His Knowledge And Expertise, managed to accomplish what all the hotheaded know-it-alls could not.
Considering Florida's elevation, wouldn't they have to flush up?