115

White House frustration with Garland grows (www.politico.com)

submitted 7 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

35 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The president believes the special counsel investigating his handling of classified documents went beyond his remit. And part of the blame is being placed on the AG.

Joe Biden has told aides and outside advisers that Attorney General Merrick Garland did not do enough to rein in a special counsel report stating that the president had diminished mental faculties, according to two people close to the president, as White House frustration with the head of the Justice Department grows.

The report from special counsel Robert Hur ultimately cleared Biden of any charges stemming from his handling of classified documents that were found at Biden’s think tank and his home. But Hur’s explanation for not bringing charges — that Biden would have persuaded the jury that he was a forgetful old man — upended the presidential campaign and infuriated the White House.

Biden and his closest advisers believe Hur went well beyond his purview and was gratuitous and misleading in his descriptions, according to those two people, who were granted anonymity to speak freely. And they put part of the blame on Garland, who they say should have demanded edits to Hur’s report, including around the descriptions of Biden’s faltering memory.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Dkarma@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago

Obama was basically a Republican from 1980, my guy. Even Obamacare is romneycare and a right wing policy example.

Obama is not progressive he is not left. He is a corporate liberal.
Those are not the same thing.

[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

This isn't 1980 anymore, though, my friend.

Shit, I'd take a 1980s Republican right about now, which speaks to the fragility of our nation at the moment.

None of this changes my point and the claim, "Merrick Garland has been working to get Trump back in the entire time" is entirely unsubstantiated bold-faced speculation. A complete non-sequitur.

Look at it another way: Democrats may be 1980s Republicans, but modern-day Republicans are 2024 Republicans, which basically means the banner of neo-nazi, ultra-right right extremists and a platform that is entirely Anti-Democrat as much as it is Anti-Democracy.

Democrats basically marginalized the GOP away by absorbing their most rational political platform, topped off with a little more social liberty and justice. It has actually been working quite effectively at making the Republicans irrelevant. So with that (1) Yes, at this stage of the game with the party endorsed by neo-nazis, I'll take the 1980s Republican, and (2) Sending the Republicans the way of the Whigs could very well open up a vacuum for the Democrats to assume the center-right position and a new truly leftist party to fill the void. (Though is is all probably predicated on massive campaign finance / election reform which again, will only ever come through the Democrats and never Republicans).

[-] K1nsey6@lemmy.world -1 points 7 months ago

He wasnt basically a republican, he directly said in a 2012 interview his policies would be mainstream republican during Reagan, And he, like all other Presidents, continued Reaganomics

this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2024

115 points (96.7% liked)

politics

18870 readers

5526 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News