Garland Again

You know who doesn't get enough attention? Merrick Garland. 

At least, that is the concern of some people at LGM. Second is not having enough sarcastically (upping the usage of the meme) saying "but Biden is old." NYT is HORRIBLE. But, hey, it's okay (someone blatantly said this in the comments) to link them for this reason! 

(I read LGM regularly, and it is my place to go for political news that provides a chance to comment, so I highlight it here as a well-read political website. But, the sentiment here is far from unique. It is a fair general stand-in.) 

Garland is a stupid institutionalist. In comments, the author of that blog piece says that the implication is that Biden was not aware of this aspect of Garland when he nominated him. This is moronic. Biden himself is an institutionalist (when he ran, many on the website didn't like that aspect of him). Garland is around seventy. His general leanings are known. 

Mueller She Wrote is one of the people who has gone in the weeds of these investigations. She provides a somewhat different slant of things from those who think Garland "is a Republican" or simply slow-walked this. 

She noted this in recent Twitter threads. For instance:

• DoJ opened an IG investigation into Trump’s DoJ’s involvement in the coup on January 25, 2021. 19 days after the insurrection. 
• In 9/2021, shortly after DoJ got data from Rudy’s seized phones, subpoenas were issued for coup fundraising groups including Sidney Powell’s. At this time, Biden’s DC US Atty pick was being blocked by Ron Johnson - who participated in the fraudulent elector scheme himself. 2/
• In 11/2021, Matthew Graves was finally sworn in a U.S. Attorney in DC. Senators Ron Johnson, Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, Tommy Tuberville & Rick Scott told Garland in July they would continue to block his nomination until Garland treated the BLM protestors the same as 1/6 guys. 3/
• That same month, November 2021, Thomas Windom - who is now a key member of Jack Smith’s team - was detailed to the USAO DC to continue the already ongoing probe into the top of the coup. 4/
• Within months, more subpoenas were issued for info on 1) members of Congress 2) members of the executive branch 3) ellipse rally organizers, speakers, and VIPs (which would include Ginny Thomas) and anyone who tried to obstruct, influence, impede or delay the certification. 5/
• A few months later, the 1/6 hearings would begin. These are just facts. Whatever your opinion is, it continues to be incorrect to say DoJ waited 18 months or even 2 years to begin investigating the coup. That’s all I’m saying. Thanks 🙏 END/

Note that last part. After a bunch of things happened, the 1/6 hearings would BEGIN. Got that? Read that list. All before the 1/6 hearings -- which the Trump Indictments book I wrote about implied was a major push for the Justice Department -- a bunch of things occurred. 

If there is a problem here, it is not just Merrick Garland. But, over and over and over again the same scapegoat brigade suggests otherwise. The author of this piece in comments even takes Biden partially off the hook (who would know a -- spit -- institutionalist would act this way? My fantasy option -- like a moderate red state senator -- would!).  

I very well think our institutions did not act strenuously enough. This is true even if people are correct that in the long run, a quicker prosecution will not help in the November elections. I am not sure if this is true. Still, it is something to keep in mind. The elections are of fundamental importance.

My complaint is a selective focus, one that does not even treat the specific person covered fairly.  

So, people root on the 1/6 Committee or cite favored Democrats like Adam Schiff (who helped the Republican candidate in the Senate race to have a loser opponent) as if they did more than they did. They talk a good game though.

Likewise, they selectively cite the details regarding Garland. One big thing is the timing of the appointment of the special prosecutor. It would have made sense if he was appointed upfront. Elizabeth Warren when running for president proposed a separate process to investigate Trump. 

President Biden could have done something similar. Biden was particularly concerned about an independent Justice Department. He still has agency regarding who he chooses or general policies. 

Likewise, Democrats have agency regarding the level of pressure they put on the Justice Department, the timing of a 1/6 Committee, and things like not passing legislation to enforce the insurrection clause.  

The media also has agency. It is charming when the same people who hate on the NYT  seize catnip articles like this to reaffirm that pre-existing disgust of Garland. They will nod when told that expecting one person will "save us" is naive, given the complications of the real world.

But, this time, Garland should have saved us. Sure. Yet again, this is not some total defense of Merrick Garland. It is a request to look at the whole story. It is a request to stop with all of these posts harping on the same thing as if there is not a lot more to talk about. Or we can have more choir talk.

Democrats In Disarray!