Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

gab13by13

(28,877 posts)
Mon Jul 14, 2025, 11:14 AM Monday

Yeah, I Get It, Release The Epstein Files

How about releasing the Smith Report Part II, about the stolen classified documents, or did Garland throw them in the fire like Mark Meadows did?

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Yeah, I Get It, Release The Epstein Files (Original Post) gab13by13 Monday OP
How about it, indeed BoRaGard Monday #1
Mark Meadows was Attorney General? Fiendish Thingy Monday #2
Meadows threw classified documents in the fire, gab13by13 Monday #3
Once again, your lack of understanding of the facts is obvious Fiendish Thingy Monday #4
The National Archives and other government agencies knew that all of the documents gab13by13 Monday #5
And DOJ didn't drop charges against Nauta until January 29 Fiendish Thingy Monday #6
Cheerleader club must defend Merrick the Meek at al cost. republianmushroom Monday #7

Fiendish Thingy

(20,074 posts)
2. Mark Meadows was Attorney General?
Mon Jul 14, 2025, 11:38 AM
Monday

Why no hateful mention of Pam Bondi? evidence in the public record shows Bondi is definitely corrupt, which is not the case with Garland.

gab13by13

(28,877 posts)
3. Meadows threw classified documents in the fire,
Mon Jul 14, 2025, 11:47 AM
Monday

Could Garland have released the Smith files? He released every other file that was related to Joe and Hunter. Garland's release of the Hur report was disgraceful, it contained lies about Joe's mental health and Garland had no business releasing those lies.

I have no idea if Garland was corrupt or not. I know he waited 4 days to have the FBI search Joe's properties. I know he waited 11 months to search Mar-a-Lago where he knew there were top secret documents.

Fiendish Thingy

(20,074 posts)
4. Once again, your lack of understanding of the facts is obvious
Mon Jul 14, 2025, 11:57 AM
Monday

Biden invited DOJ to search his property and office.

Trump forced Garland to get a warrant, after 11 months of deception and lies about whether he had returned all the documents he had. Warrants require a judge’s signature, and getting a warrant against a former president requires all ducks to be in a row, with nary a crack in the case establishing reasonable suspicion/probable cause.

The case for getting a warrant must be as airtight as the anticipated indictment; otherwise the evidence obtained can be easily tossed by any judge, not just a corrupt one like Cannon.

Cannon excluded all of Smith’s evidence, but none of Garland’s.

But you knew that already.

gab13by13

(28,877 posts)
5. The National Archives and other government agencies knew that all of the documents
Mon Jul 14, 2025, 12:11 PM
Monday

weren't returned, or was my statement about my local library having better records actually true?

Garland couldn't release the classified documents report until after Smith dropped the Nauta D'Olivria cases. Smith gave his documents to Garland on Jan. 10, Krasnov was inaugurated on Jan. 20.

Fiendish Thingy

(20,074 posts)
6. And DOJ didn't drop charges against Nauta until January 29
Mon Jul 14, 2025, 01:54 PM
Monday
Garland couldn't release the classified documents report until after Smith dropped the Nauta D'Olivria cases.


Smith didnt drop the charges because there were still crimes worth prosecuting, Nauta didn’t have the benefit of SCOTUS declared immunity, and in any case, Smith resigned before that could occur. It was the Trump DOJ that dropped the charges.

I know you already know this, but omit it from your anti-Garland rants because it refutes your evidence-free opinion, so this is for the benefit of the casual reader who might be scrolling by:

Garland was building a case to charge Trump with unlawful retention of national defense information, because it is almost impossible to meet the charging criteria for Unlawful removal or unlawful possession when charging a former president (otherwise Biden would have faced criminal charges as well).

Because the case was focused on retention, the Archives played a key role in documenting the correspondence and attempts to retrieve documents, establishing that Trump refused to return certain documents - again, this proved willful, deliberate retention as opposed to simple possession, which is what your rants seem to focus on. After multiple attempts and refusals, Garland had enough evidence to convince a judge to sign off on the search warrant for MAL.
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Yeah, I Get It, Release T...