The WaPo Shows There Should Be More Scrutiny of Steve D’Antuono
The WaPo has a story that many Merrick Garland attackers claim confirms their fears about the DOJ investigation. Except the story has really important gaps, most importantly in its portrayal of the fake electors investigation, which is the damning part of the story about Garland or Lisa Monaco’s direct decisions (as opposed to those of FBI).
Moreover, the one thing it proves definitively is that former FBI Washington Field Office head Steve D’Antuono repeatedly shot down investigative prongs of this investigation, just like he did the stolen documents investigation. That the head of the WFO was running interference for Trump raises key questions about FBI missteps with people like Brandon Straka, someone arrested early who had direct ties to the scheme in the Willard, to say nothing about WFO’s ineptitude in advance of the attack.
Here are the main disclosures.
Steve D’Antuono shot down an effort by JP Cooney early
The story describes that — after such time as Brandon Straka was being treated as a cooperative witness — JP Cooney pitched an idea to get to Stone through the Oath Keepers, not the Proud Boys.
But a group of prosecutors led by J.P. Cooney, the head of the fraud and public corruption section at the U.S. attorney’s office, argued that the existing structure of the probe overlooked a key investigative angle. They sought to open a new front, based partly on publicly available evidence, including from social media, that linked some extremists involved in the riot to people in Trump’s orbit — including Roger Stone, Trump’s longest-serving political adviser; Ali Alexander, an organizer of the “Stop the Steal” rally that preceded the riot; and Alex Jones, the Infowars host.
[snip]
According to three people who either viewed or were briefed on Cooney’s plan, it called for a task force to embark on a wide-ranging effort, including seeking phone records for Stone as well as Alexander. Cooney wanted investigators to follow the money — to trace who had financed the false claims of a stolen election and paid for the travel of rallygoers-turned-rioters. He was urging investigators to probe the connection between Stone and members of the Oath Keepers, who were photographed together outside the Willard hotel in downtown Washington on the morning of Jan. 6.
[snip]
D’Antuono called Sherwin. The two agreed Cooney did not provide evidence that Stone had likely committed a crime — the standard they considered appropriate for looking at a political figure. Investigating Stone simply because he spent time with Oath Keepers could expose the department to accusations that it had politicized the probe, they told colleagues.
D’Antuono took the matter to Abbate, Wray’s newly named deputy director. Abbate agreed the plan was premature.
It’s genuinely hard to believe this was the plan. To be sure, FBI did investigate Stone’s ties to the Oath Keepers, starting no later than March 2021. But that wasn’t the obvious route to get to Trump.
The route to get there, importantly, was via a route that Bill Barr had affirmatively dismissed in advance of the attack: through the Proud Boys, not the Oath Keepers. Stone’s ties to the Oath Keepers was not obviously criminal; it still may not be. His ties to the Proud Boys are central.
In any case, Steve D’Antuono — who stalled the stolen documents case investigation last summer — shot down this angle of the investigation early on.
The initial decision to exclude Trump came from a guy who had presided over a politicized DOJ
Michael Sherwin — who as US Attorney played a role in killing investigations into Trump’s people in summer 2020 — did not include Trump in his summary of the investigation in March 2021.
[A]ccording to a copy of the briefing document, absent from Sherwin’s 11-page presentation to Garland on March 11, 2021, was any reference to Trump or his advisers — those who did not go to the Capitol riot but orchestrated events that led to it.
[snip]
Sherwin, senior Justice Department officials and Paul Abbate, the top deputy to FBI Director Christopher A. Wray, quashed a plan by prosecutors in the U.S. attorney’s office to directly investigate Trump associates for any links to the riot, deeming it premature, according to five individuals familiar with the decision. Instead, they insisted on a methodical approach — focusing first on rioters and going up the ladder.
The strategy was embraced by Garland, Monaco and Wray.
This may or may not have been the right decision — but WaPo only mentions Sherwin’s role in Barr’s sabotage of ongoing Trump cases in passing.
Whether certain FBI decisions came from Steve D’Antuono or Chris Wray is unclear
Chris Wray absolutely comes off as gun-shy in this story, which is perfectly consistent with the way he threw his own agents under the bus in the wake of the DOJ IG Report on Carter Page.
Wray and his team sought to avoid even an appearance of top-down influence by having local field offices run investigations and make day-to-day decisions. In fact, when it came to the Jan. 6 investigation, agents noticed that Wray did not travel the five blocks from FBI headquarters to the bureau’s Washington field office running the investigation for more than 21 months after the attack. In that time, people familiar with the investigation said, he had never received a detailed briefing on the topic directly from the assistant director in charge of the office, Steven D’Antuono.
[snip]
D’Antuono, who was interacting with lawmakers and reporters, told colleagues: “Everybody keeps asking, ‘Where the hell is the FBI?’”
The answer they heard did not instill confidence. Top FBI aides told D’Antuono and Sherwin that Wray wanted to stay on as Biden’s FBI director. They said they would not put the top boss “out there” — in the public eye — because they feared any public comments might spur Trump to unceremoniously fire him.
I’m more concerned about Wray’s later actions — but the later timidity is described to have come from Steve D’Antuono, not Wray (and on the stolen documents investigation, Wray pushed for a more aggressive investigation, whereas D’Antuono pushed the slow it).
D’Antuono shot down an effort to pursue the Willard
In November 2021, when Thomas Windom asked to pursue the plotting in the Willard in November 2021, D’Antuono refused, and tried to get Windom to pursue militia ties instead.
At a meeting in November 2021, Windom asked D’Antuono to assist in a grand jury investigation, which would include subpoenaing the Willard hotel for billing information from the time when Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani was working with Stephen K. Bannon, Boris Epshteyn and other Trump associates in their “war room.” Stone was staying there around Jan. 6 as well, in a different suite.
D’Antuono was skeptical. The investigative track sounded eerily similar to the Cooney proposal that had been shot down in February, he later confided to colleagues.
“I’m not serving subpoenas on the friggin’ Willard,” D’Antuono told Windom, according to a person familiar with their discussions. “You don’t have enough to issue subpoenas.”
This was absolutely the wrong decision, but it is yet another case where D’Antuono was thwarting the investigation. His refusal to investigate the Williard also should focus more attention on the treatment of Brandon Straka and others, because if the FBI hadn’t been so credulous months earlier, they would have had more evidence on the Willard.
800 words of this story pertain to Michael Sherwin’s firing
Sherwin’s firing for trying to force sedition charges is a distraction. Yet 800 words of this story focus on it.
While the story does show that under Chandler Phillips, there was uncertainty about direction of the investigation (Lisa Monaco’s office was micro-managing at that point, partly in an attempt to enforce consistency across hundreds of defendants, partly to ensure that more deliberate rioters were charged with felonies). But it does seem that the delay in getting Matthew Graves in place did delay a renewed focus on Trump. That’s Joe Biden’s fault.
The focus on Stewart Rhodes is a distraction
Similarly, the focus on Stewart Rhodes, as opposed to Enrique Tarrio, is a distraction.
The outstanding issue of whether to charge Rhodes and other militia leaders with seditious conspiracy quickly rose to the top of to-do lists for the two new appointees. It had been eight months since Sherwin directed his deputies to raise the idea in a memo to the office of the deputy attorney general.
A long story in which the Proud Boys investigation is treated as “other militia leaders” is a long story that doesn’t understand the most basic things about January 6.
Details about the decision not to pursue the fake electors are vague and at times inaccurate
The WaPo described that the original decision not to pursue the fake electors plot happened “about the same time,” as D’Antuono’s decision to shoot down Cooney’s Stone investigation without presenting a date.
About the same time, attorneys at Main Justice declined another proposal that would have squarely focused prosecutors on documents that Trump used to pressure Pence not to certify the election for Biden, The Post found.
Officials at the National Archives had discovered similarities in fraudulent slates of electors for Trump that his Republican allies had submitted to Congress and the Archives. The National Archives inspector general’s office asked the Justice Department’s election crimes branch to consider investigating the seemingly coordinated effort in swing states. Citing its prosecutors’ discretion, the department told the Archives it would not pursue the topic, according to two people with knowledge of the decision.
If that decision happened before Garland came in (as it appears to have), then the story is about how Garland chose to revisit and reopen the fake electors decision, not why he chose not to pursue it.
The story describes that when Lisa Monaco did publicly confirm DOJ was pursuing fake electors in January 2022, people were surprised to hear that.
Law enforcement officers, including some who would be called upon to join the investigation in ensuing months, were taken aback by Monaco’s comments because they had not been told work was beginning, and it was extremely rare for Justice Department officials to comment on ongoing investigations.
Behind the scenes, federal prosecutors in Michigan who received Nessel’s referral were waiting to hear from Monaco’s office about how Main Justice wanted to proceed. National Archives officials were dumbstruck; the Justice Department was suddenly interested in the fake electors evidence it had declined to pursue a year earlier.
One person directly familiar with the department’s new interest in the case said it felt as though the department was reacting to the House committee’s work as well as heightened media coverage and commentary. “Only after they were embarrassed did they start looking,” the person said.
In the weeks and days before Monaco’s announcement, DOJ had finalized exploiting Rudy’s phone (as I note below, the WaPo story doesn’t focus on Rudy). The DOJ pursuit of the fake electors plot included aspects and subjects the January 6 Committee never pursued. So it is virtually certain that Rudy’s phone, not just J6C, drove at least part of the renewed focus on this.
It took two months after this for the FBI — for D’Antuono and Wray — to open the investigation, and they did not open the investigation against Trump at first.
In April 2022, more than 15 months after the attack, Wray signed off on the authorization opening a criminal investigation into the fake electors plot.
Still, the FBI was tentative: Internally, some of the ex-president’s advisers and his reelection campaign were identified as the focus of the bureau’s probe, but not Trump.
Note, this is still two months before Cassidy Hutchinson’s public testimony, which had publicly been viewed as the first focus on Trump.
WaPo suggests that the first subpoenas in the fake elector plot went out on June 21, 2022 (which in any case would still be proof DOJ acted before the public hearing).
On June 21, 2022, the House select committee held a nationally televised hearing on fake electors — a topic the committee had, in contrast to the Justice Department, identified early on as a major target for investigation. Testimony revealed what the committee had learned in nine months: The Trump campaign had requested that fake elector documents be flown to D.C. in time to help pressure Pence.
[snip]
That day, FBI agents delivered subpoenas about electors for Trump to state lawmakers in Arizona. The next day, agents served subpoenas to people who signed documents claiming to be Trump electors in Georgia and Michigan.
But as I note below, the first fake electors subpoenas went out a month earlier, by May 25. This part of the narrative is misleading at best.
WaPo suggests there was an inordinate delay in interviewing fake electors.
In several cases, before the special counsel’s office got in touch, witnesses in the fake electors scheme hadn’t heard from the FBI in almost a year and thought the case was dead. Similarly, firsthand witnesses to Trump’s Jan. 2, 2021, call to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger — in which Trump asked him to “find” enough votes to win that state — were not interviewed by the Justice Department until this year, after Smith’s team contacted them.
It’s not clear whether this is true at all. It has persistently taken 6 months or more to exploit cell phones. The Boris Epshteyn interviews in April took place on that schedule, even with complications of claiming work product with Rudy.
This is, rather, consistent with much of the January 6 investigation, or any investigation. All the more so given increasing signs that the January 6 and stolen documents case is intersecting at Trump’s PAC, which is not discussed in the article.
The most damning part of this story for DOJ leaves out the Rudy phones and the May subpoena. Including those two things, though, really undermines the narrative about that prong of the investigation.
The gaps in the WaPo story
There are many things not mentioned in this story, which betray real blind spots in the sourcing. Those include:
- The failure by WFO under Steve D’Antuono to prevent January 6. D’Antuono is good at playing the press, and some quotes in here suggest that he was pushing for more aggressive investigation and Wray was resisting. Tellingly, then, this story doesn’t even mention — much less attempt to explain — why the FBI under D’Antuono failed to act on intelligence predicting January 6 (and indeed, kept Proud Boys on as informants targeting “Antifa” even as they were planning to come to DC for January 6). That’s where this story begins, yet it’s not included here.
- Brandon Straka and similarly other well-connected VIPs. Brandon Straka got credit for cooperating in February and March 2021 interviews; he was in a position (and did) provide evidence about ties to the Stop the Steel investigation and the Willard. But the FBI — led by Steve D’Antuono, who also obstructed the investigation into the stolen documents — proved remarkably credulous with Straka and similar witnesses. A different treatment of Straka may well have led to far different results. Yet Straka is not mentioned here.
- The Proud Boys’ history of teaming with Roger Stone to sow violence. According to the story, Michael Sherwin set his sights on the Oath Keepers and that initiative led to the sedition conviction of Stewart Rhodes and others. At sentencing, the sedition conviction proved important only for Rhodes and Kelly Meggs; everyone else was treated similarly as obstruction defendants, even with terrorist enhancements. But the more obvious starting point to understand Trump’s ties to January 6 — and an absolutely critical one given how bodies led by Alex Jones made the attack successful — is the Proud Boys. Given DC USAO’s treatment of the threats Stone made with Enrique Tarrio against Amy Berman Jackson in 2019, the focus on the Oath Keepers as distinct from the Proud Boys is inexcusable.
- Rudy Giuliani’s phone. In September 2021, DOJ made a decision to do a privilege review on Rudy Giuliani’s phone that would access all information on his phones, not just the Ukraine-related topics the warrants to obtain the phones targeted in April 2021. Rudy has since confirmed that this included all the January 6 related material he admits to have had in his possession when the phones were seized in Lisa Monaco’s first week. It is absolutely certain that this should have produced information on the fake elector plot, starting in November 2021, yet WaPo doesn’t mention it.
- The May 2022 Fake Electors subpoenas. The story implies DOJ first sent out subpoenas in the fake elector plot in June 2022. That’s false: the first subpoenas went out in May 2022. Importantly, there were names on those subpoenas that weren’t the focus of J6C’s public investigation (and in any case, preceded the public hearings). [Update: As Kyle Cheney noted, DOJ also obtained the email accounts of John Eastman and others, three of four lawyers.] That suggests that some of this investigation came from DOJ’s own work, not J6C’s.
- Sidney Powell. The investigation into Sidney Powell, started no later than September 2021, is not mentioned in this piece. It’s unclear what became of that investigation, but DOJ did pursue it as a prong of the investigation at a time when, the story suggests, DOJ was not pursuing any Public Integrity prong of the investigation.
- January 6 Committee’s delayed sharing. Some of this story is told from the perspective of the January 6 Committee. Yet it doesn’t mention that the committee’s decision to delay sharing of its transcripts did real and predictable damage to the Proud Boys case, and withheld tools from DOJ they could have used to flip witnesses six months earlier than they did.
Ultimately, this is a story first and foremost about Steve D’Antuono, who left the FBI in November. And I suspect it is just scratching the surface on the story about him.
This site was the first place I went after reading that article. What a complicated set of facts, and so many different interests seeking to shape the ultimate narrative! I really appreciate the close focus on details and scrutiny of claims by the contributors and commenters here – it really helps me understand and keep track of what I think is the most important criminal investigation in our history.
Whether it’s linked to Proud Boys or Oath Keepers, I’m really annoyed at the DOJ saying they have a higher threshold for starting an investigation into a “political figure” like Roger Stone. Roger Stone isn’t elected to any office. He’s not running anyone’s political campaigns. He’s a right wing media celebrity, who I’ll remind was a newly pardoned felon at the time DOJ was declining to investigate him. Absolutely crap job by the DOJ here.
And that’s almost certainly not what the issue is.
You need to start with a crime. There’s nothing about what Stone, especially, did that was publicly known until fairly recently. There are real questions about why Ali Alexander wasn’t investigated earlier, given how he engaged in fraud to get the permits. But it’s not clear you can go after ANY of these people until you’ve exploited a number of phones with Stone’s listserv. That started in late-ish 2021, and took until August 2022.
“You need to start with a crime.” That seems to be how WaPo presents D’Antuono’s resistance to the Cooney and Windom investigations. But how do you get the crime if you refuse to go after the evidence? That was what struck me about the WFO’s recalcitrance.
The article touches glancingly on the “follow the money” approach, which always seemed to have the most promise of reaching Trump. But the authors aren’t clear on what happened when with that. We still don’t know if Trump’s grifty PAC will figure in possible charges.
“ But the authors aren’t clear on what happened when with that”
GINEVRA DIBENCI
Intentionally, imho.
One of the authors of the piece was interviewed on The News Hour (I think, possibly just NPR radio).
I was hoping for clarification on that matter but he and the interviewer appeared to be going with a blanket ‘DOJ screwed up’ approach.
Where you write this:
“In the weeks and days before Monaco’s announcement, DOJ had finalized exploiting Rudy’s phone (as I note below, the WaPo story doesn’t mention Rudy).”
I take it you mean “doesn’t mention Rudy’s phone,” because you yourself do quote a passage from the WaPo story that mentions Giuliani himself. (The story has one other reference to Giuliani, in Arizona House Speaker Rusty Bowers’s January 6th Committee testimony that Giuliani communicated with him about pulling his state’s Biden electoral votes.)
Something else that has always been left out is why was Sherwin down there on the ground? Was he sent there by the trump crime syndicate/Barr to await the arrival of Antifa/BLM? Did they expect a situation that would provide an excuse to initiate Martial Law? There are plenty of questions for Michael Sherwin.
He was appointed by Barr, and that, coupled with the fact that he actually pushed against the goads for sedition charges for some of the riot mob makes me wonder if he was pulling a sort of “modified limited hangout” like the Watergate Oval Office guys did, to dangle low lying bait for investigators..
IOW, maybe Sherwin thought bringing the hammer down hard on some of the rioters might quell the Dem blood lust. That way, he’s seen as aggressive against the mob (so maybe not a good idea to sideline him), and yet he hides the Trump card in his sleeve in his briefing, as Marcy notes per the WaPo story.
What bothers me, though, is that he did have to push against the goads to get seditious conspiracy investigations going.
As to the overall story, it is titled “FBI resisted opening probe into Trump’s role in Jan. 6 for more than a year,” so the title isn’t misleading at all. And Garland does deserve reproof. All those folks answered to him and his hands off M.O. was wrong for this historic reckoning. It should have been him asking why there was no probing of all those various leads beyond the Capitol assault per se.
So Trump’s constant public harangues about weaponization, favoritism, witch hunts, etc had their desired effect. The FBI and DOJ were cowed into inaction. He put the fear of Trump into them. Sort of similar to the fear of God. Apparently.
Or, just perhaps, they tried to do things right instead of being hysterical on the internet. Like you now. Just a suggestion.
Do you think the investigation into J6 has been perfect and completely timely? There are more choices than “any criticism of Garland is beyond the pale” and “Garland is a timid fool who is letting Trump off the hook.”
I think it’s possible to believe that Garland is competent and well-meaning, trying to navigate a thankless and difficult situation, and also believe that the investigation has been delayed and possibly harmed by fear of being seen as overtly political and undue deference to Trump supporters within the DOJ and FBI.
No, of course not. But I also think uninformed carping is less than perfect.
Trump and company spent the time between initial presidential campaign confessing criminal intentions as well as confessing his crime in a ritualistic fashion.
Thank godsmack Garland and company are lawyers vs. fire and police dispatch. Their approach allows smoke to be a precursor of Chicago fire type conflagration. The story of Trumps crimes is ongoing and the narration is mostly done by him. Since when do prosecutors and police ignore public confessions?
Civilization ceases when the population sees the systems systematically rebuffed by their leaders without consequence.
As an aside, Phoenix metropolitan area is developing at a rate which would put stretch marks on a bathtub.
[Welcome back to emptywheel. Please use the same username each time you comment so that community members get to know you. “Terduken” is your second user name since you changed from “Duke” to “TurDuken.” Perhaps keeping a notepad .txt file on the desktop with your username will help augment your memory? Thanks. /~Rayne]
I “think” metropolitan PHX area is starting to cut back, but not sure. Hilariously, we are about to have to replace a bathtub (and, more significantly, underground piping) from the late 50’s. Fun times!
On a slab? Good luck. I tried once to jack hammer a hole for piping in ground outside a building in Tucson. Couldn’t make a dent.
That is exactly what is afoot.
Good foundation for a joke.
Gonna be a lot. Truly wish it were a joke
As long as you don’t have to do the jackhammering.
Last month they were in my apt looking for the main water line, because there was a leak. I guess they found a better way, because they haven’t been back. (Maybe it’s safe to take the duct tape off the carpet.)
Perhaps the Bureau and DoJ, like the USS, employ people predisposed to follow authoritarians who favor personalist rule. It’s not only about Trump, but he is gifted at spotting weaknesses he can exploit.
So if I understand this story, it sounds as if DOJ has/had pro-Trump division heads that were in position to at the best delay, and at the worst thwart, investigations into Trump and his leaders in the insurrection?
I get that investigations and trials take time, and I haven’t bashed Garland (because my opinion on this topic means nothing and in any event what do I know?), but it sure seems as if the very corrupt Chris Christie’s buddy Wray carries water for his party and that AG Garland let (past tense) Trump moles delay legitimate investigations, and that those delays likely caused some long-term harm at getting to the truth or convictions.
I’m happy to see evidence that I’m wrong on this, BTW.
The WaPo article suggests that Chris Wray was trying to avoid getting fired by Trump so that he could stay at the FBI. According to reporting at the time, during the period from January 6th to January 20th, Wray like other officials tried to avoid getting fired by Trump to prevent him from doing something worse than January 6th.
I am not so quick to label Wray as to sympathetic to the Republicans.When the institution has been subjected to criticism for its handling of the Russia investigation, the head of the FBI might be expected to proceed gingerly with regard to politically fraught investigations. And when the AG is convinced that the mythical Antifa is more of a threat than the right wing militias, Wray might be a little gun shy about chasing the militias. Wrays’ actions are understandable but not laudable.
Trump’s Plan to Gut the Civil Service
https://www.lawfareblog.com/trumps-plan-gut-civil-service 12/8/20
Here is the 9/2022 GAO report about the FORMER EO:
https://www.gao.gov/assets/730/723120.pdf
See this comment for a transcript of the end of TRUMP’s 6/13/23 remarks at Bedminster, in which he tells us his plans:
https://www.emptywheel.net/2023/06/19/the-wapo-shows-there-should-be-more-scrutiny-of-steve-dantuono/#comment-998012
What RitaRita said.
I am quick to label Chris Wray as sympathetic to Republicans. For instance in his 60 Minutes interview with Pelley he was asked about the rise in murder during 2020 and he trotted out the same old fear talking points. Violent youths and gangs.
It is pretty evident that Domestic Violence was far more of a factor, but seemingly the guy with access to the data trots out the same lies.
Interesting study on societal pressure and our responses.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7152912/
And another study on societal pressures and our responses.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWdLt3Afjrg
FBI directors have to be politicians too. When they appear in public (on 60 Minutes, say), they represent an institutionalist view.
Remember that the position is a political appointment, even though its holder isn’t supposed to act like one.
I can land this plane. ahem. hem.
Better yet I will keep it from ever even getting off the ground.
One might expect this sort of floundering if Maggie Habberman worked at the FBI.
But they get some slack for staying conscious it’s a one shot one kill situation. Without a crime you are shooting a blank.
This will be examined thoroughly at the next non weaponization hearing, I’m sure.
For a very long time, many elder commenters on this site shouted down anyone who questioned whether law enforcement’s investigation into J6 was proceeding too slowly. Often the animus towards those who would question whether DOJ and FBI were on track resorted to ad hominem attacks on critics on this site and public figures like Adam Schiff. Some here wondered whether a pro-DOJ bias in the EW community was resulting in a blind spot to the feds failure to properly institute its investigation. Adherence to the standard of bottom-up investigative techniques seemed inappropriate given the uniqueness and gravity of the situation related to J6.
Knowing that the DOJ was filled with Trump appointees and sympathizers, the top officials should have been mindful that some obstruction within the ranks would be likely. Perhaps the lack of focus on the Proud Boys had more to do with right-wingers in the FBI avoiding investigations of those who were supplying info on the BLM and Antifa movements.
While Marcy correctly points out that there are some flaws in the Washington Post’s presentation, I think the story’s premise is solid that the DOJ and FBI were largely at fault for the laggard investigation. Indeed, the investigative failures allowed the destruction of a great deal of evidence, such as the Secret Service’s cell phones.
The slow crawl of the investigation has had many negative impacts. The odds of having a court trial on J6 crimes by its top perpetrators before the next election is fleeting. The opportunity to indict and flip some top level people long before any indictment of Trump seems to be lost.
I know my comments will not be welcome by knee-jerk apologists for the Feds, but I think Marcy has done a typically excellent job of pointing out that the early focus on figures like Rhodes, Stone, Straka and others were flawed and counter-productive.
If Garland and Wray endeavored to avoid an appearance of top-down influence, as stated in the article, then they succeeded. Now they deserve the criticism being leveled at them. The ultimate success of the investigation and perhaps even the continued existence of our democracy may be greatly negatively impacted by their neglect.
Hi jackass. My name is bmaz. If you want to refer to me, use my name. And fuck right off with “elder commenters” and “knee jerk apologists”.
Get out of here. What have YOU done for the “existence of democracy” big “Cosmo”?
Commentating is a contact sport, but there are fouls. Elder commenters? LOL. Knee-jerk apologists? This isn’t Faux Noise and there aren’t many of those about.
You also seem to underestimate the complexity of the jobs Garland and Wray have to do, and assume they know every programmatic misstep their staffs make. That the FBI or DoJ did something wrong doesn’t necessarily mean Garland or Wray did it or signed off on it.
I wouldn’t conflate Wray, who helped his pal CC (who went to grade school with my wife) escape accountability for real crimes and was appointed by Trump, with Garland, who is the epitome of integrity. Not the same class of public servant.
[Welcome back to emptywheel. Please choose and use a unique username with a minimum of 8 letters. We are moving to a new minimum standard to support community security. Thanks. /~Rayne]
Not conflating them.
And not to apologize for anyone, if you have worked in a large, bureaucratic organization, especially a large governmental bureaucratic organization, would realize how long it takes for any initiative to travel from the head (of the mythical dinosaur) to the extremities. A lot of what looks like unreasonable delay is probably institutional inertia, not any right (or left) wing deep state action.
I’ve said elseweb that people seem to think that Garland has nothing to do but investigate 1/6 and the WH criming before 1/20/21. I guess they don’t have any idea what else DOJ deals with daily. And the previous administration did as much as they could to turn it into a department for revenge (of a legalish kind).
There might be a few other things going on…..
I guess they’ve never seen what managers have to deal with. My work group was small enough that I got to know that mine dealt with budgeting more than day-to-day.
But the media tells us we should be concerned only about Trump’s future conduct!?
“For a very long time, many elder commenters on this site shouted down anyone who questioned whether law enforcement’s investigation into J6 was proceeding too slowly.”
With all due respect, fuck off. There’s a wide difference between the DOJ doing absolutely nothing which many drive-by/infrequent/trollish commenters have insisted has happened, and expecting an understanding and acceptance of due process including all that’s entailed in the DOJ’s largest-ever investigation. That we’re still learning where holes in the investigations have been and which of those holes may be persistent failures including internal obstruction says something about the size and scale of the investigation.
You should be asking corporate-owned media why they didn’t pay more heed to the problems Marcy noted along the way instead of expecting “elder commenters” — by which you’re implying moderators who are bloody sick of the constant, ignorant baying for extrajudicial and immediate conviction and punishment, among other forms of concern trollery — to roll over and allow whining to flood comments here unfettered, fill threads with uninformed complaints in excess of 350 words at a pop.
Where’s your oh-so-informed comment back in March when Marcy wrote about D’Antuono in this post anyhow: https://www.emptywheel.net/2023/03/06/trophy-documents-the-entire-point-was-to-make-fbi-obedient/ ?
Fret not, Cosmo; anyone who posts on here regularly has an extra rectum or two courtesy of the “elder commenters”. My taint hardly has room for more. Accepting the risk, however, I agree with some of the sentiments expressed. I’m not all that bright, but I read the WAPO piece as as saying the JD/FBI was not exactly hustling. Back at least a year–or more–or so ago I wondered what was going on with the very obvious crimes that had been committed in front of our very eyes in the Nov. ’20 to Jan.’21 time frame: the riot, obviously, but also the “Stop the Steal” fraud. How is “Build the Wall” a crime, but “Stop the Steal” okey-dokey? I was shut up by my betters who proclaimed–accurately–that I knew nothing and that the appropriate measures–about which I knew nothing–were being taken by the JD/FBI. And now this. People lose respect for and adherence to the rule of law when it appears to be something that big shots can ignore while the rest of us need to quail in fear. To be fair to Trump, he ran on his ability to ignore the law, so why am I bitching?
You’re getting sucked into this wholesale after all this time? There are specific problems with FBI-DOJ’s handling, but there also specific reasons why traction was challenging.
Like cracking cellphones and passwords, or have you forgotten this? Or cracking encrypted messages between perps?
Or the status posts Marcy published one weekend, in which it was clear progress had been made in federal investigations — reports she published not that long before Trump was indicted?
https://www.emptywheel.net/2023/04/30/where-the-trump-investigations-stand-stolen-documents/
https://www.emptywheel.net/2023/04/30/where-the-trump-investigations-stand-the-january-6-conspiracies/
I can’t with you whiners. It’s like you haven’t read a goddamned thing at this site since January 6, 2021. If you can’t be bothered to stay abreast and make logical, focused critiques and offer new material, just stay the fuck out of comments here. We expect better than this whiny fucking bullshit.
But “Stop the Steal”?
You: It’s happening; you just can’t see it. Quit whining.
Me: At some point, if nothing ever happens, what does that mean?
Dude. You need to get back in your fucking time travel machine for this “if nothing ever happens” to be true.
We’re 1014 perps charged/convicted/sentenced deep and still counting in the largest DOJ investigation ever but do go on whining.
Just know you’re going to do it into the void.
I point out they’re still arresting people for 1/6.
It’s not even a good troll… get some new material.
Re the FBI not being aware/not reacting to Jan 6 threats in advance, there’s this story from Newsweek’s early 2022 series on Jan 6 that contradicts that assertion:
https://www.newsweek.com/exclusive-secret-commandos-shoot-kill-authority-were-capitol-1661330
Now, I don’t know how accurate that story is per se… but it does indicate that the FBI was aware they needed to have LEO/LEFD available above normal levels for Jan 6, and deployed such for quick reaction. Interestingly, the article mentions that there were military sharpshooters possibly seconded to the FBI for these units. According to the article, these extra FBI led units were ‘reacted’ to the area where bombs were found and so were not initially available when the rioters breached the Capitol.
PS Yeah, the byline for that article is over-the-top sensationalism.
PS Yeah, the byline for that article is over-the-top sensationalism.
My fuzzy recollection of that concept was that the “secret commandos” were there to take out all those mythical antifa grooming zombies. These critters are so stealthy that no one has ever seen one. Just like some “gods”!
“But the more obvious starting point to understand Trump’s ties to January 6 — and an absolutely critical one given how bodies led by Alex Jones made the attack successful — is the Proud Boys. Given DC USAO’s treatment of the threats Stone made with Enrique Tarrio against Amy Berman Jackson in 2019, the focus on the Oath Keepers as distinct from the Proud Boys is inexcusable.”
I agree with your assessment that ignoring the threats that Stone and Tarrio made against Judge Berman Jackson is inexcusable. But I do think that the connections between them and others will form the basis of separate indictments of Stone, et. al concurrent with the J6 Trump indictment.
It’s puzzling why the proprietors of this site permit a horse’s ass like bmaz to spew the bile he directs at people merely trying to have a civil discussion. We all disagree with the viewpoints of others. Yet we express those differing opinions sans the juvenile, insulting BS bmaz inflicts upon emptywheel’s avid readers and commenters.
[If you don’t like the moderation here you are free to leave. You have not been asked to pay anything to comment here, there’s no need to wait for a refund which isn’t coming. /~Rayne]
News flash: bmaz is a site mod.
Also unfortunate. Sort of like naming Charlie Kirk your corporate diversity officer.
LOL. Not even bothering to open the popcorn.
Meh, don’t worry about the interloper with 12 comments and ALL CAPS name.
It’s just that demon life that’s got you in its sway.
That daemon is woman, the true progenitor of life: mitochondria only come to us from our moms. The engines of life! Oh geez, I’m off topic again. Sorry!
I hadda come back to this to thank you for the earworm … circular time.
We need you bmaz to help straighten out some front pagers at LG&M. It’s very Veruca Salt over there.
I see we’re shifting over to 8 characters in nyms but we’re also supposed to be consistent-any suggestions?
[Doug – If you are used to commenting as “Doug R” I suggest salting that with another word or number which is significant to you, easily memorized, but not too revealing. /~Rayne]
Well, I guess I’m 100 then.
[Thanks for updating your username to meet the 8 letter minimum. :-) /~Rayne]
Yeah, more like a butter burrito kind of comment. (Heat your flour tortilla. Add a teaspoon or so of butter, plus other flavors as desired. Roll. Eat.)
https://www.emptywheel.net/2020/11/03/what-comes-after-america/#comment-864400
Every serious, informative site should have a bmaz to warn off time wasters, egotists, and trolls. I recently recommended Emptywheel to a brother of mine who had some great questions about TFG’s indictment, Judge Cannon, and other legal issues. He tends to verbosity so I cautioned that there was a moderator who did not suffer fools gladly so if he commented to be brief and to forego attempts to be cutesy or witty.
Thanks bmaz et al., for ensuring the high quality continues!
thank you BMAZ! I like it when people get along and don’t always have my antenna up when people are blowing smoke. This site is unique in pushing back on that. Just like many of emptywheel’s posts are about the media’s framing of stories that SEEM liberal, but actually spin things off in drastically inaccurate ways–because the sources are not DOJ, but Trumpers. We still get Garland did nothing and Marcy does her best to highlight what he did, and even in posts on the same very posts people still critique Garland. And then ALL CAPS DUNCAN dude wants to complain things aren’t nice–well, hell, no they aren’t nice. But they are sure a hell of a lot more accurate on this site and that is thanks to the moderation.
Today is Juneteenth and, Florida can’t each it’s kids about something like that because us white folks might be a tad uncomfortable. Talking about slavery and gay rights and carrying a dead fetus to term is pretty damn uncomfortable, and yeah BMAZ is sometimes a teensy wheensy bit uncomfortable compared to that, but not really. whinging could really go somewhere else.
thanks, Rayne, Ed. Marcy, Bmaz, Harpie, Brandi, etc….
We need to be more uncomfortable before we live in a dictatorship.
I acquired a new cousin last month. Married my youngest first cousin, who’s an OB-GYN. It’s a two-fer: same sex *and* inter-racial. And they’re in Arkansas…
And along came Jack Smith.
He is the official fuel of the current investigations.
Whoever recommended him for the job deserves a MVP for reducing the foul stench emanating from the Right.
Across public comment sections, foreign and partisan trolls pose as “people merely trying to have a civil discussion,” while actually attempting to sway public opinion by nudging baseless talking points. I find it refreshing that the mods here point out rhetorical nonsense. YMMV
So much this.
Yes! Exactly. Malki is brilliant. Have been a fan from the early years. One of the great honors of my life was being a character in one strip (599). Framed and on my wall.
Had to follow that trail. https://wondermark.com/599/
http://wondermark.com/c/2010-02-26-599fineprint.gif
Agree 100%. A long time ago I got off Quora because it was over-run with antisemites and Nazis “just asking questions” and looking for “reasonable discussion on the issues.” Hooray for the mods on this site, who brook no nonsense. And yes, that often will make me stop and think before I post about whether I have much of moment to contribute. And hooray for bmaz and Rayne who do all the heavy lifting in keeping this site civil. If you don’t like the heat……
I read the WaPo piece first, and was struck once again by the underlying overtone (sorry for the contradictio in adjecto) that Garland started out as hesitant to inert with the prosecution of 1/6. As if Garland’s decision to appoint Jack Smith as special counsel came over night, and Smith was able to send out subpoenas “after just four days” if they hadn’t already been prepared.
So I’m very thankful for Marcy’s meticulous analysis of the WaPo report, and summarizing the gaps in that article in the end.
Yes, Biden could be more aggressive in his nominations, but the excessive delay in Graves’ confirmation to the DC post was largely due to a hold placed by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI).
[Welcome back to emptywheel. Please choose and use a unique username with a minimum of 8 letters. We are moving to a new minimum standard to support community security. Thanks. /~Rayne]
And a perverse honoring of the hold and blue-slip system Dick Durbin and Chuck Schumer allow. Were the situation reversed, it’s unlikely the GOP would reciprocate.
There is zero chance were the roles reversed, and the GOP has shown that.
The end of TRUMP’s post arraignment remarks at Bedminster on 6/13/23
https://www.c-span.org/video/?528671-1/president-trump-remarks-court-appearance
This connects to a comment about TRUMP’s 10/21/20 Executive Order to Gut the Civil Service, here
https://www.emptywheel.net/2023/06/19/the-wapo-shows-there-should-be-more-scrutiny-of-steve-dantuono/#comment-998005
Thanks for that, harpie. :-)
:-) It was quite a rant.
That bit about “the seal has been broken”…oof! It was a direct quote from a TRUMP social media posting on 6/12/23, screenshot here:
https://twitter.com/JeffSharlet/status/1668313350105714688
1:44 PM · Jun 12, 2023
SMITH / DOJ are coming for the King…
I, for one, do NOT want them to miss.
that’s actually a question I would love journalists to ask him, instead of whether it was news clippings he was talking about when he was caught on tape bragging about classified documents: what does that broken seal business mean? I suspect he has no idea, he was just told that it is a keyword that will please the crowd.
I hate to say it, but Trump’s remarks were excellent, in a horrible, manipulative, dictatorial way. Guess he’s had a lot of practice over the last 6 years.
I remember when George H.W. Bush was campaigning, he once said something like, “And racism! It’s bad! Let’s eliminate it!”
I can see Trump soon saying, “And Democrats! They’re bad! Let’s eliminate them!”
These are the remarks of a man who kept a copy of Hitler’s collected speeches, My New Order, by his bed.
https://archive.vanityfair.com/article/share/e515a2cd-a51b-4f83-8d61-6ebb9a104e0a
Money quote from that article (though there are many):
” ‘The key to Donald, like with any bully, is to tell him to go fuck himself,’ the lawyer told me.”
Oh, man.., I can never read something he’s said without hearing his voice in my head. But this:
“You just don’t. Unless it’s really bad. But you just don’t.”
You’ve said that you could shoot someone on 5th Ave. You’ve taken & willfully withheld NDI. You’ve likely shared that information with others who shouldn’t see it, causing unknown harm to this country and probably our allies. Please tell me what, in your mind, is “really bad?”
[Welcome back to emptywheel. Please choose and use a unique username with a minimum of 8 letters. We are moving to a new minimum standard to support community security. With only (53) comments at this site to date as “noromo,” you will not be grandfathered to keep your existing username. Thanks. /~Rayne]
Trump may not have studied Arendt or WWII, but he is a student (and character) of WWE!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkghtyxZ6rc
[Welcome back to emptywheel. Please use the same username each time you comment so that community members get to know you. “EricMariposa” is your second user name; you commented last as “EricofMariposa.” Pick a name and stick with it. Thanks. /~Rayne]
“Communists”? They’ve never had power in the US. Even the socialists haven’t managed that kind of power, and they’re closer to reality
“Persecution”? The only people doing persecutions are the RW nuts who want a one-party Christianist country, and they’re backing him.
Many Americans had socialist leanings during the Great Depression. For good reason, the system was failing them appallingly. By the 1950s, Hoover had infiltrated more agents into the Communist ranks than there were Communists.
Some of my father’s sibligns were registered as socialists in the 40s. So yeah. At least two of them were liberal right up until they died.
Holy balls, the persecution fetish intensifies.
The stochastic terroristic comments coming from Trump’s puckered asshole and xtians like Kent Christmas (lol @ the name) is sure to get innocent people injured, if not killed.
O/T Stories now coming out how DOJ and Merrick Garland refused to look at Trump’s criminal activity related to J6 and the fake elector scheme for more than 1 year.
Yea, we who complained work not being done in this area had NOTHING to worry about! LOL.
Fuck. Fire Merrick Garland.
WTaF? Have you even paid attention to anything for the last 2.5 years?
Obviously not. It’s also affected their use of English.
” the Justice Department chose to primarily pursue cases against rioters and repeatedly overruled prosecutors who argued that the department should also investigate the role of figures in Trump’s orbit.”
Both can be true.
Lower level prosecutors wanted to pursue those in orbit of trump….ie..Marcy’s articles about confiscation of phones of Rudy, etc.
But lower level individuals were overruled by Wray, Monico and Garland.
Just because Rudy’s phone was confiscated for example is not proof Trump is being investigated. And saying it’s an indication that Trump is being investigated is conjecture, not fact. Albeit, it’s a better informed conjecture, but conjecture nonetheless.
And yes, i’ve been reading.
Your last comment is not immediately obvious.
Have you read any of the posts on this site?
Fascinating. I’ve looked repeatedly for info wrt what DOJ was doing (if anything) investigating what happened at the Willard. Didn’t find much that wasn’t pure speculation. From your article, sounds like “not much”… at least until Jan 6 hearings.
That doesn’t seem to me, to fit at all. About 2 weeks between Jan 6 and inauguration. Not long. Can’t imagine Wray making long term decisions based on a very short window. To me, the notion someone wanted to disparage Wray twisted a couple facts to get that in there.
I think Carol Leonnig is a good reporter with a lot of useful contacts. But the WaPo article is somewhat raggedy. The article reads like a compilation of the stories of a number of interviewees with grudges or personal agendas. It might have been useful to have a timeline because the article makes it appear that nothing was being done until after the J6 Committee. It also might be useful to identify the obstacles to the investigation put forth by key witnesses. I’d rather have a careful Merrick Garland than someone who was impetuous.
I agree. And your comment about including timelines is excellent.
That is something I hope EmptyWheel has taught a lot of the new/upcoming reporters and analysts. MW has been excellent at tying these threads together using timestamps, and of course other connections.
You know, no matter what the field is, it seems there’s always gonna be someone who will come along with the advantage of hindsight, having spent ten seconds of thought on the matter, an axe to grind, and a very binary, very black-and-white opinion.
No decision is actually hard, no situation is complicated. It’s all so simple, and if you don’t see that, you’re either a moron (this is the most likely when it comes to technical fields), or an agent of the enemy (comes up more in politics and sometimes business.)
I would counter with the fact that Trump’s well known public actions-from stating the election would be rigged in the summer of 2020 to the “stand back and stand by” to militias, to the non-stop public statements that the election was rigged to the “its gonna be wild” tweet to the simple fact of “who benefits” all lead to an obvious conclusion, on January 6th, that Trump was at the center of an conspiracy to overturn the election and stop the certification. That alone should have resulted in the obvious decision to investigate his involvement.
Exercise of First Amendment right to express fucking bullshit isn’t a crime, as much as you would like to prosecute speech and thought crimes, hell, even pre-crimes.
There actually has to be evidence beyond Trump blowing his verbal load. Some of the evidence related to a conspiracy was in encrypted devices and encrypted communications, which has been discussed numerous times here.
I’m going to chalk one more under the column, DOESN’T ACTUALLY FUCKING READ EMPTYWHEEL JUST COMES HERE TO DUMP THEIR EMOTIONAL BAGGAGE.
” … he was in a position (and did) provide evidence about ties to the Stop the Steel investigation and the Willard. …”
Kudos to Carol Leonnig – finally we have some explanation of what Adam Schiff has been saying for more than a year now.
I always thought the whole ‘roll up the small fry and work your way up’ approach was idiotic and never likely to work with the political and financial muscle of the Republicans.
This was a hastily constructed plot with actors all across the country, which means there is, or was, an electronic trail if Garland had ever bothered to look. It may be too late already (certainly was with the Secret Service data).
And Kudos to the National Archives. Seems to be the one functioning part of U.S. law enforcement.
Hi there. So you and your agenda are coming to us from the Philippines “Jeevs”. Thanks for playing through.
The National Archives are staffed by historians and archivists. It is not part of US law enforcement.
They flagged up the Trump fake electors documents to the FBI.
They flagged up the missing classified documents too.
They deserve credit for simply doing their job and not worrying about how it might look to Republicans.
Fine, but it doesn’t make them law enforcement.
What part of “National Archives and Records Administration” makes you think they’re law enforcement?
What do you mean by “work”? If it’s to investigate and build prosecutions that are successful in court, what does that have to do with anything Republicans are saying? It’s not DoJ’s job to win a political messaging battle.
I’m referring to the Wapo article which says that at various times the FBI and DoJ debated whether to directly investigate Trump and his direct associates or instead rely on a bottom up approach. They opted for the latter.
But the failure of the Mueller and Libby investigations shows this is unlikely to work. The money and pardon power mean that people don’t flip like normal criminals.
You are “referring” to horse manure. Are you state sponsored in the Philippines, or a privateer, “Jeevs”?
You’ve picked the wrong site to simplistically critique the Libby investigation.
Mueller didn’t fail so much as he passed the baton to a corrupt AG, who refused to follow up on his work and, in several cases, spiked it. That’s on Barr and Trump, not Mueller.
Similarly, but more so than with Mueller (and probably less so than Barr did with Walsh’s investigation into Iran-Contra), the Libby investigation fell short owing to obstruction by senior govt. officials. That’s not on the DoJ or the mob boss model of starting with the underlings and moving up the chain.
Pretty sure some person associated with this site wrote a book about the Libby thing. But, hell, what do I know?
Predictably, TV lawyers follow their producers’ bandwagon and yelp about the topic of the day. Most of them are following the WaPo’s lead without any nuance or consistency. Screw them and their TV paychecks. They are making their viewers stupid.
How much do they get paid for that? This site is free, and we are far better at it!
I think two separate initiatives are conflated by the interested public. Rolling up the Jan 6 putchists was one, and these are people who will be wearing soap on a rope for the next certification. It was a considerable effort to get the unlawyered low hanging fruit. Getting to the principals, however, is an exponentially more difficult task – with little margin for error. If going slow (at the risk of appearing to do nothing) is what it takes to get it right, that is a lower risk – we’ll need our fellow voters to keep the white house occupied by the current tenants. I think they (we) are up to the job.
There’s some interesting information in that WaPo article. Sadly, the overall theme could be summed up as the Department of Justice is a large bureaucratic organization. And that’s not news. This story is representative of a specific genre of “news”. These stories get written about every big government effort.
There seems to be far more than adequate evidence to believe that Trump is guilty of the retention of NDI, which to this date he has not returned to the government. In fact, he is stubbornly asserting (beyond all sorts of allegations against prosecutors and their families) that he does not intend on returning those documents to the government. In addition, there seems to be sufficient evidence that on multiple occasions Trump (as a private citizen) revealed classified information and showed classified documents to people who were not permitted to view this information.
Donald Trump is a private citizen. Donald Trump is no longer POTUS.
Why is Trump not being held without bail, like literally anyone else would be in this situation?
I welcome the abuse this post will receive.
Trump is being treated the same as all similarly situated indicted but not convicted defendants, who happen to be ex-Presidents with a Secret Service detail.
Who also may be deeply entwined in counterintelligence investigations, and may be deeply linked to diplomatic challenges related to content within classified documents he’s stolen (he may be greymailing with his near or actual admissions this week).
Not to mention the risks he poses as he did when the warrant was served in Mar-a-Lago, encouraging violence against law enforcement. It may be safer for him to remain where he is, under close scrutiny, especially since the U.S. Bureau of Prisons doesn’t have a published policy about handling ex-presidents with Secret Service details.
But we’ll continue to see whiners having tantrums in threads demanding he’s locked up RTFN.
That’s the third time just this morning I’ve seen a variance of that “incarcerating trump would put an undue burden on the Secret Service” line.
As someone who has been on a few security details I can assure you that it’s not an undue burden. Guarding someone in a jail cell pales in comparison to guarding someone that constantly travels, gives speeches in front of large crowds, and advertises their schedule ahead of time. Being on trump’s detail while he is locked up would be a cakewalk, so I’m not sure where all that worry is coming from. If a couple of SS agents have to spend their shifts sitting in the cell across from him well TFB, that’s the job they signed up for.
I would also argue that, should he be convicted, he HAS TO BE locked up.
They can take away the docs he stole, but they can’t take away what’s in his head.
Trump can and will run his mouth from behind bars and that will put a lot of our intelligence community at risk. He needs to be jailed with his outside communications strictly monitored as everyone knows he would mouth off just to get revenge.
Point to where I said “incarcerating trump would put an undue burden on the Secret Service,” emphasis mine.
I noted he has a Secret Service detail. How is that regulated? What changes need to be made to comply with regulations if a POTUS is incarcerated? Is this something the GOP-led House will try to fuck with in order to obstruct this particular ex-POTUS’ detention?
And are you prepared for this new standard of incarcerating an ex-POTUS for a non-violent crime should DeSantis or other fascist GOP candidate take office?
Jesus Christ, use your brain and think bigger and more systemically than your Veruca Salt-like demands.
p.s. Running one’s mouth is protected under the First Amendment.
As you will have pointed out, the USS detail accommodating Trump’s imprisonment is not the problem. It is choosing a federal prison that has a wing that can isolate him from the general population.
It wouldn’t be solitary, as Trump would frequently run across his own USS detail. Physical and digital visitation rules would have to be worked out, as he has so many supporters who would gladly deliver him a loaf of bread with the proverbial file baked in.
Some Americanized version of the latter-years Spandau prison, when Rudolf Hess was the only inmate?
A couple in the cell opposite, one in the video room and a couple in one of the perimeter pickups.
Admittedly, the collective actions taken by FBI officials appear frustrating and painstakingly slow.
Trump, Stone and other clowns have recklessly manipulated the legal and political apparatus in this massive scheme. They have been doing borderline illegal activities for decades, and they are masterful in hiding their tracks. If you take the last two sentences for granted, then sure – DOJ should put them behind bars right away.
But the pestering problem is PROOF – where is the incriminating evidence? You can’t draw evidence out of thin air. There has to be a pretty high bar to go full-throttle against them. Otherwise, what prevents the same DOJ to go batshit crazy on another person? Innocent until proven guilty – that is the bedrock of a civil society.
I am confident that the DOJ will ultimately prevail in the pursuit of Justice. Trump & company are smart and creative, and they have managed to tread the fuzzy border for quite a while. But the megalomaniac went too far, took too many reckless missteps and tried to grab too much this time. Lots of smaller fish are getting fried, and the heat is cranking up.
The orange man’s toast – but this toaster oven will take time to get the proper brown color. Be patient and enjoy the show.
A damning, damning article. No matter how much one might try to nuance it. Wow.
*yawn* Predictable response is predictable.
The WaPo one?? It is absolute shit. Said without “nuance”.
One thing I’ve observed about this particular post: it has drawn a much higher than usual number of overseas drive-by/first time commenters, particularly those willing to trash talk.
They’re clearly not familiar with the site, either, since the username format and other comment protocols used here are avoided.
What is it about this particular post’s topic which attracts them?
It seems to be an organized operation. You can observe the same thing in the comments on the Post article
Really? Huh. That’s even more interesting. What could possibly be the trigger. LOL
Verdad.
Almost verbatim.
I spent way too much time and energy responding to them with some of the points Marcy has now cogently laid out in this piece.
An aside: Thank you, again, Marcy.
Perhaps it has to do with the anxiety that Trump will continue to avoid accountability with all its attendant negative results like further damage to our national security the increased likelihood of his re-election and the continued erosion of the trust in our judicial system.
And since this topic is generally viewed as verboten on this website people are taking advantage of the discussion of the WP article to express their views.
Apologies for the incorrect username and fwiw I am not part of any concerted effort to do what ever but expressing my strongly held belief.
PS. Perhaps it just seems like people are coming out of the woodwork because the topic is normally not permitted to be discussed and people feel a little freedom to express themselves. That applies to me
Garland didn’t fake a squeeze bunt and then blast away.
He took his time and played by the rules.
My problem has always been the time element and whether a more aggressive approach was warranted.
The Post article does get into the details, with plenty of details, and more details.
What bothered me was Wray.
In any case, there are 505 days to the election.
It will be a close call, but Smith is now the league president and will be dishing out the indictments with alacrity.
Let’s hope there are no more rain delays.
“My client, the honorable dump, should go right to f**king jail. . .
You’re out of order. You’re out of order. The whole trial is out of order.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sA0glbG6c-8
I am from the Al Pacino branch of judicial watch.
I appreciate your rain delay trope.
Wray bothers me, but like Pacino, I am sure the whole place is out of order.
Nobody is playing by the rules anymore, anywhere.
I am a natural born optimist with a strong dose of let’s cut to the chase anger, but if I take a moment to be rational, pessimism seems to be the only logical choice.
The country is out of time, and Mother Nature has had all she can take. I am sorry if this connection is not obvious, but I don’t want this comment to drone on.
Rocket Docket! How do you like them apples! Talking about action:
Adam Klasfeld on Twitter: “Just in— Jury trial in the Trump documents case set for Aug. 14, 2023, per the rocket docket. https://t.co/HzkSA5Uc02” / Twitter, 6/20/23
You know, I have WAPO and NYT subscriptions. And frankly, you add more to their value and usefulness than any of their journalists.
I am so envious sometimes when I think I’ve seen through reporting and been a critical consumer of journalism just to come here and find that you have dissected a piece like a surgeon and left my poor analysis in the dust.
Truly Dr. Wheeler, you have an almost preternatural gift for this business.
Thank you for stating my own feelings very well.
I’ll read an article in those two outlets and nod my head thinking that this is some good information. Then the much more astute and acute folks show me the cracks in the story.
“Ultimately, this is a story first and foremost about Steve D’Antuono, who left the FBI in November. And I suspect it is just scratching the surface on the story about him.”
One thing under that surface that I can’t stop thinking about is that Steve D’Antuono may have connections to Stephen Friend. He is the guy from Daytona FBI who refused to perform his job in a SWAT team and was subsequently assisted financially through Kash Patel. He was also a witness for Jim Jordan’s pseudo committee.
D’Antuono was special agent in charge of the Detroit field office from 2019 to 2020. I have read that Stephen Friend claimed he was on a team that was on assignment in Michigan and executed a warrant related to the plot against Gretchen Whitmer. If that is true, it is conceivable that they know each other. It does seem like they have similar modes of behavior and common interests.
Thanks much, SL! Harpie, where are you??? Did we know Steven Friend was a senior fellow at Center for Renewing America?
See https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/jim-jordan-weaponization-committee-trump-deep-state-1234690041/
ADDER: And of course Jonathan “Trumpian Turd Polisher” Turley had to make sure the relationship between CRA and CPI was sanitized. He wrote:
Seehttps://jonathanturley.org/2023/03/05/the-mary-poppins-of-litigation-nina-jankowicz-solicit-funds-to-sue-fox-news/
Hannity hosted Friend and Michael Flynn in his podcast:
Can’t produce a direct link to that portion of podcast because the site sucks so bad. Home: https://www.podcasts-online.org/the-sean-hannity-show-1112194905
So now we have Meadows, Patel, Rufo, Friend, and possibly Flynn all in the same circle. When I get a chance I need to poke around and see if Flynn’s group is a CRA donor.
Also worth a laugh: Patel wrote in CRA about excessive classification back in February this year. Mentioned Flynn once along the way.
https://web.archive.org/web/20230328110247/https://americarenewing.com/issues/combatting-overclassification-and-weaponized-intelligence/
Also: CUCCINELLI, Jeff CLARK, Mark PAOLETTA
I wish NNDB had a relevant name-network entry for these guys. Need a pinboard for CRA. LOL
Rayne, that Hannity interview is with BILL Flynn…I think a right wing radio guy.
Ah, missed that — wonder if related to Mike Flynn. Or to Katharine Flynn who’s a member of CNP.
ADDER: Bill Flynn the polka radio dude? LOL https://wnbf.com/show/bill-flynn/ I have to dig more when I’m done with my chores.
Yeah, PolkaDude is what I came up with, too…and/or used to work for Rush Limbaugh radio[?].
It would be hilarious if it didn’t all feel so serious. :-/
Unfortunately it means at some point I listened to that butthead’s polka stuff if syndicated to other stations. Sunday mornings around here it’s difficult to find decent radio station programming irritable old dudes will listen to — one is the polka show.
LOL! Oy!
Yes, I did realize FRIEND was at CRA, but I guess I forgot to mention it when we were talking about RUFO. FRIEND’s photo is on their “about” page, which I didn’t link to and will find again.
Conversation re: RUFO:
https://www.emptywheel.net/2023/06/15/down-a-mouse-hole-with-bill-clintons-cat-socks/#comment-997484
There are links at that conversation to the Influence Watch pages on CRA and its advocacy group, which are both staffed with people that were at OMB with Vought.
Center for Renewing America [about]: https://americarenewing.com/about/
CRA advocacy arm:
Citizens for Renewing America [about]:
https://citizensrenewingamerica.com/about/
[Added] Direct link to this comment:
https://www.emptywheel.net/2023/03/01/did-steven-dantuono-make-it-easier-for-trump-to-steal-47-classified-documents/#comment-983299
LOL you’re braver than I am, had been avoiding going to CRA’s site directly. I should make sure their main pages have been added to the Wayback Machine. Thanks!
I just noticed that RUFO is not on the CRA “about” page…
I thought he used to be, didn’t he?
MMFA certainly thought he was linked if not a member.
https://www.mediamatters.org/critical-race-theory/anti-civil-rights-activist-chris-rufo-has-extensive-ties-christian-nationalist
I can’t put my finger on why the dance around CRA. MotherJones doesn’t mention CRA in this piece on Rufo:
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2023/06/chris-rufo-launched-crt-panic-he-isnt-done/
I wonder if it’s because Rufo has been a consultant for DeSantis as this MJ piece says which causes the Schroedinger-like CRA/not-CRA relationship.
We may have to back up and assume “CR” is a typo for Cristos Makridis, too.
Speaking of our discussion of RUFO, you mentioned he is affiliated with the Manhattan Institute. From today’s ProPublica story about ALITO / Paul SINGER:
https://www.propublica.org/article/samuel-alito-luxury-fishing-trip-paul-singer-scotus-supreme-court
Also, Harlan CROW’s wife, Kathy, is on the Board:
https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Manhattan_Institute_for_Policy_Research
Jesus. It doesn’t end, it’s an ouroboros.
The possible meta layer is CNP. I’ll send you a list of folks related to that enterprise. Surprisingly, Crow and quite a few others aren’t on this list though folks like Jim DeMint are.
Definitely agree about CNP!
[Including G. THOMAS and C. MITCHELL]
ALITO to ProPublica: [LOL!]