There was quite the dust up here and around the internets after the Rachel Maddow show the other day. In the show, it was mentioned that someone at DOJ leaked a memo Garland sent to DOJ staff in May of 2022.
Secret Garland memo to DOJ originated with Bill Barr
MSNBC's Rachel Maddow obtained a Feb. 2020 memo authored by then-Attorney General Bill Barr saying that anyone at the Justice Department who is investigating a political candidate has to run it by the Attorney General. That memo, she explained, was renewed by Attorney General Merrick Garland in May 2022.
"The Department of Justice has a strong interest in the prosecution of election-related crimes, such as those involving federal and state campaign finance laws, federal patronage laws, and corruption of the election process. As Department employees, however, we must be particularly sensitive to safeguarding the Department's reputation for fairness, neutrality, and non-partisanship," the memo says.
Former Justice Department official Andrew Weissmann said that under a normal and reputable attorney general something like this would make sense.
"On the other hand, the Bill Barr Justice Department was anything but a Justice Department. The rule of law was so flouted that the idea of re-upping something that he put in place is one that I'm not sure if I were at the department I would look at with anything other than saying, 'I am not bringing a case against anyone at the White House until such time as I personally approve it' no matter how much evidence seems to be accumulated in the Jan. 6th committee hearings. So, you know, I think it's a plus/minus. You know, it probably could have been phrased a lot better and clearer to people at the Justice Department."
Rachel Maddow: Merrick Garland Gave Donald Trump a Reason to Announce 2024 Presidential Run Early (Video)
Attorney General Merrick Garland is extending a policy that mandates he sign off personally on any Department of Justice investigations of presidential candidates and their affiliates, citing "election year sensitivities." The previously unprecedented policy was first instated in February 2020 by former AG William Barr and was largely seen at the time as a means of protecting Donald Trump.
"Well, former president Donald Trump has had the delightful experience of the Jan. 6 investigation, essentially rolling out a real-time, primetime criminal referral of him to the justice department," Maddow said, answering her own question. "And also since this memo went out, Trump has responded to all these revelations about him and Jan. 6 by reportedly moving to speed up his own declaration that he's going to be a candidate for president again."
Spotting a potential correlation between the two developments, Maddow indicated that the sooner Trump announces his 2024 presidential bid, the sooner he will have another barrier to criminal prosecution for his alleged actions surrounding the Jan. 6 insurrection.
"Yes, it would be unorthodox for him to announce two years in advance that he's a candidate for president. Why would he do that? Well, now we know now that we've obtained this Justice Department memo from a few weeks ago. Now we know for sure that it does kick something into action, if he in fact announces himself as a declared candidate for president," Maddow said. "That means any investigation that relates to him or anyone working for him has to be personally cleared in writing through the very highest echelons of the justice department."
Afterwhich, Daily Kos’ Mark Sumner wrote this diary which had some very heated debate about what the memo means for Trump, how people feel about Garland and DOJ and Biden and Obama, and how likely we are to see justice for the insurrectionists and their leaders.
www.dailykos.com/…
The immediate takeaway from the memo as presented on MSNBC and spreading rapidly across social media was that it was a signal from the Department of Justice that there would be no indictments of Donald Trump or members of his staff prior to the fall midterm elections. Considering that the memo is titled “election year sensitivities,” that the memo repeats Barr’s language about the timing of public statements avoiding even the appearance of an issue, and avoiding the appearance of impropriety in “investigative steps, criminal charges, or any other action in any matter,” it’s certainly possible to read it this way.
There is nothing in the memo to even suggest that there will not be indictments related to Jan. 6. There’s nothing in the memo to suggest that there won’t be an indictment against Trump.
It may be possible to argue that since some of those involved in the Jan. 6 conspiracy are candidates for office in 2022, then if an investigation were opened into them it would take asking Garland or the deputy attorney general. But that’s the most that might be milked out of it. And even that’s a stretch.
DOJ gets some complaints that they don’t say enough about what they are doing, how they are investigating or why they are handling the investigation the way they are. This silence allows people critical of the pace, to project their own reasoning why to fill in those gaps. I disagree with this take and think that DOJ is proper to say very little, but when they are willing to speak, we should be ready to listen.
This was seen in some of the complaints I saw mentioned in the diary. If this came out in May, what does it mean and does this protect Trump/run out the clock? So what was DOJ leadership saying around the time this memo was sent out and what has DOJ said since? Anything?
WHAT LISA MONACO SAID ABOUT CHARGING A HYPOTHETICAL FORMER PRESIDENT
Lisa Monaco spoke at University of Chicago in May, where Professor Genevieve Lakier asked her a hypothetical about charging the President and Monaco answered at some length.
Lakier: I guess I’ll [take a?] follow-up, because maybe I don’t see any students at the microphones, but if students have questions please go up to the microphones. Just as a quick follow-up. I mean, thinking sympathetically one might imagine that if you’re a prosecutor and you’ve got lots of cases to charge and there’s lots of bad behavior to go after, you might think that the profound political fall-out that might follow going after a particular individual would distract generally from the work of the Department of Justice and in the long run, undermine the people’s justice. So I guess I’m wondering, are those kinds of concerns — not with the, oh we don’t want to charge this person because of their rank. But we don’t want to charge this person because it’s going to make our lives of doing the people’s justice so much harder. Do those kinds of considerations come in?
Monaco: Look, I’ll quote the Attorney General here. “We don’t avoid specific cases because they’re controversial or they’re sensitive. We do avoid making decisions based on purely political or partisan considerations.”
Monaco: So a few points. One, on the question of how broad to go, how high to go, we’ve been exceptionally clear about this and let me restate it and be clear here. We will follow the facts and the law wherever they go, to hold perpetrators of January 6 accountable at any level. At any level. And we will do so whether or not individuals were present on that day or not. So we’ve been exceptionally clear and I want to make that clear here for this audience.
….
Last point, on how we make these decisions, starting first with the crimes that are in front of us, and then working out from there, and the reasons for that. I think what you see in the charging decisions that we’ve made, the most serious charges and thus far the most serious sentences have been meted out against those individuals who engaged in assault. The 200+ individuals who I said we’ve arrested and charged with assaulting officers or members of the news media. Those who engaged in conspiracy acts to obstruct the peaceful transfer of power. Those are the most serious charges and thus far are garnering the most serious charges and ultimately sentences, most likely. Then, where that conduct is not present, either assault or a conspiracy to obstruct the peaceful transfer of power, you see us using lesser charges for those who entered the Capitol without authorization. Trespassing and the like. It is important to mete out those charges as well, however you’re seeing individuals both coming forward and taking responsibility, getting lesser sentences both because they are lesser charges and if they’ve come forward, accepted responsibility, and in some instances, cooperated with the government, you will see lesser sentences and lesser charges there.
So what are they saying now?
Yesterday:
DOJ Says Probe of Trump’s Jan. 6 Role Will Continue If He Declares 2024 Run
The Justice Department’s investigation into efforts by Donald Trump and his allies to overturn the 2020 election results won’t be deterred if the former president declares his intention to run again, Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco said.
“We’re going to continue to do our job, to follow the facts wherever they go, no matter where they lead, no matter to what level,” Monaco said Tuesday at a cybersecurity conference in New York. “We’re going to continue to investigate what was fundamentally an attack on our democracy.”
Monaco reiterated a pledge that she and Attorney General Merrick Garland have made that the Justice Department will follow the facts of the investigation wherever they lead. To date, the department has prosecuted more than 850 individuals for offenses related to the attack on the Capitol and has issued subpoenas for information about Trump allies and lawyers.
“The mandate the team has remains, which is to follow the facts wherever they go, regardless of what level, regardless of whether the subject of those investigations were present on Jan. 6,” Monaco said.
Today:
AG Garland reiterates 'no person' -- not even Trump -- is above the law over Jan. 6
Attorney General Merrick Garland on Wednesday reiterated that "no person" is above the law amid calls from some congressional Democrats to charge former President Donald Trump over last year's Capitol riot.
A visibly animated Garland twice stated that "no person" is above the law during a press conference when pressed specifically about Trump, whom Democrats say incited the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection over his unfounded claims of widespread voter fraud in 2020.
"There is a lot of speculation about what the Justice Department is doing, what's it not doing, what our theories are and what our theories aren't, and there will continue to be that speculation," the attorney general said. "That's because a central tenant of the way in which the Justice Department investigates and a central tenant of the rule of law is that we do not do our investigations in the public."
"We have to hold accountable every person who is criminally responsible for trying to overturn a legitimate election, and we must do it in a way filled with integrity and professionalism," Garland added.
And if words aren’t enough, here are actions DOJ took AFTER that memo was circulated:
FBI arrests Michigan GOP gubernatorial candidate on Jan. 6 charges
A Republican candidate for governor in Michigan was arrested by the FBI on Thursday and charged with misdemeanors for his role in the U.S. Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021, the agency said.
Federal agents raided Ryan Kelley's home in Allendale, Michigan, on Thursday morning. NBC News received a tip about the raid, which was confirmed by a law enforcement official.
An FBI spokesperson later confirmed that a search warrant was executed at the home where Kelley, 40, was arrested. He faces four charges related to his alleged actions at the Capitol, including disorderly conduct and willfully injuring or attacking U.S. property, according to the criminal complaint.
A statement from an FBI special agent, released Thursday by Justice Department officials, includes and describes video and other images that indicate Kelley was involved in breaching the Capitol and directing others to participate.
DOJ sends message with 'domestic terrorism' enhancement for Jan. 6 sentencing