Tonight,
Rachel Maddow points out that Attorney General Merrick Garland's language in a speech that held the interest of Americans everywhere, did not make clear whether the Department of Justice is focused purely on the violence and vandalism of January 6th or the broader coup plot by Donald Trump and his acolytes.
www.msnbc.com/...
A series of guests, including Lawrence Tribe and Chuck Schumer, agreed that it is completely unclear whether the DOJ is even pursuing the question: Did Trump and his do something illegal by fostering the coup plot in any way, shape or form?
Rachel is not always on point, but when she is on, she is dead on. I tried to concentrate on the speech, but I found Garland’s delivery too subdued. If he were summarizing a case and I was in the jury box, I would have trouble concentrating. When everything is delivered in the same even tone, I do not find the points are even clear as intonation is part of the meaning of any human utterance.
In the end, I wasn’t sure that Garland had added anything to what I already had gleaned about what DOJ was doing. Maddow cut to the chase. We have no idea whether DOJ is even considering prosecuting Trump. Does the DOJ even consider Trump in possible violation of any law? Is Garland directing the DOJ to examine this question? Does the DOJ think the actions most of us here believe to be obvious as even prosecutable?
And if that is not the case, shouldn’t we know now? If a President attempts to prevent the peaceful transfer of power to his successor, is that illegal? Can those actions be prosecuted?
Garland told he was willing to look at plotters, but does that include Trump and his lieutenants? He didn’t actually say so. Look at the text again.
We are running out of time. We need a clear message about 1/6/2021 before the 2022 election process begins, and it will begin all too soon.
I will be sleeping soon, but I will check in tomorrow morning.