Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Jack Jordan's avatar

Aaron (actually, Lisa) a part of me hates to acknowledge the truth in your piece. But the bottom line is that your thoughts are remarkably accurate and highly relevant.

I’m an attorney and I worked on the first part that you wrote about—the legal fight to have the DOJ release Bill Barr’s memo. I wrote an amicus brief opposing the DOJ’s efforts. I did that because I read the declarations (under oath) and the briefing of DOJ employees under Garland. They were egregiously deceptive. They even outright lied to judges to cover up evidence that Bill Barr had lied to Congress.

I’ve also worked opposite the DOJ (under Barr and under Garland) in multiple other cases in which DOJ attorneys were guilty of the same or similar conduct. Lying about evidence and knowingly violating federal law is all too common among DOJ attorneys. It is so common that it even undermines how MANY federal judges purport to fulfill their duties to the American public as public servants in FOIA cases.

All too often, DOJ attorneys lie in FOIA cases to cover up evidence of government employee misconduct. I have seen multiple federal judges lie, knowingly violate federal laws, and violate our Constitution to help cover up evidence of DOJ attorneys’ misconduct.

I have seen such egregious misconduct by at least two federal judges who were high-level DOJ attorneys (Judge Rudolph Contreras in DC and Judge Beth Phillips in the Western District of Missouri (Kansas City)). I’ve seen a lot of judges subsequently lie and knowingly violate federal laws and our Constitution to help cover up evidence of those two judges (and other judges) lying and knowingly violating federal law--to help cover up evidence that DOJ attorneys lied and illegally concealed evidence.

Regarding the DOJ “prosecution” of Trump, I think you’re also right. We’ve all heard of “show trials” in the past. It seems the DOJ “prosecution” of Trump was just another show trial of a different sort. It was a show for us, the American public, to create the appearance of a prosecution without any real prospect of success.

The “Institutionalists” at the DOJ and on federal courts too often prevail in ensuring that so much of what we see is just a show—literally, at best, the mere appearance of propriety without the substance of justice.

Expand full comment
Jenni Plumer's avatar

This perfectly articulates Garland's blame. I don't believe he is corrupt, just protecting the Institutions as written here. When we needed swift and decisive justice. Now, the DOJ he worked so hard to protect will be turned into the very weapon used to destroy the rule of law. 💔

Expand full comment
88 more comments...

No posts