If Biden had fired him and the subsequent AG's actions resulted in pro-Biden or anti-Trump outcomes, then Biden, the AG, and the outcomes would have been attacked 24/7 by the reichwing propaganda machine and every Republican in government.

Even if Garland had retired for legitimate reasons, the effect would be the same.

It was a mistake to pick Garland, a mistake that Biden openly acknowledged. But by then it was too late to replace him.

I didn't know that Biden said it was a mistake. I'm not doubting you, but when did he say this?

I believe he expressed disappointment in the way that Garland handled things, particularly the investigation of Hunter.

He's too nice to say that it was a mistake, but I'm sure he thinks it.

We sure dodged a bullet with that one.

Biden fires Garland for the lack of forward motion re: Trump's obvious insurrection et al.

What next?

screw the repub propaganda

That is true, but Biden would have been attacked 24/7 by the reichwing propaganda machine and every Republican in government no matter what he did.

and ceding it to Hillary Clinton.

Perhaps he would have won, but it would have been a tough primary.

that she would be supported for President after his term ended.

But, I do agree that his running in 2024 was a disastrous decision as well. Garland would be the third.

But only one sitting VP was directly elected President in 150 years, and that was George HW Bush. Nixon, Gore, and Harris all failed to do it. Besides Biden in 2016, Cheney also chose not to run in 2008.

My choices for 2016 were, in order:

Obama 3rd term (Constitutionally barred from that)

Biden (didn't run)

Recently retired 4 Star Admiral William H. McRaven, commander of the United States Special Operations Command, superb public speaker, commanding presence, and he was the military leader who got bin Laden (did not run)

Martin O'Malley (dropped out)

After that I just voted for Clinton in the general.

I'm a massive fan of "what if's" though, and this is an excellent one. The toughest part imo would be defeating Clinton in the primaries. Not sure if he could have done it.

Democratic Party locked up on day one - Obama was a supernova who was able to lock up the entire half of the party who didn't want Clinton - doubt Biden could have done that (at minimum, he would have needed Sanders not to run to have a direct one on one competition with Clinton and he probably also needed the unofficial but obvious support of Obama.)

I'm not certain Biden would have been the second one in 2016

was that Merrick Garland deserved the post because of being screwed over by McConnell for Supreme Court.

Funny how the winds change.

Maybe next time no one will be thinking of the USAG position as a consolation prize or reward, but thinking of someone's actual capability for the job. Although to be fair, I don't know that we weren't thinking about it - maybe we just didn't predict how poorly he would perform vs. our wishes. That "vs. our wishes" piece is quite important. I don't have a JD or enough experience and knowledge to really fairly assess what he's done with what he was up against. But I get the sentiment at DU is that he was too squishy for our liking and I lean that way a bit also. Not sure what we (or Biden) could have seen to predict that.

...and collected and defended in myriad, successive courts almost all of the evidence used in the TWO historic, multi-felony indictments of the leader of MAGA.

You say that as if we're too stupid to recognize the contradictions in that reasoning.

Why even fight to remove the privileges of half a dozen top WH aides and lawyers to obtain the testimony KEY in those indictments, if Garland was 'maga'?

And on and on....

There were about a dozen other ways Donnie could have been prevented from running, and the people who should have acted fucked up either through indifference, cowardice or because they were in on the fix from the beginning to get Donnie back into power...

Trumpism has officially broken us as a functioning, stable nation...

We’re going to miss him like hell.

🤮💀

That Garland was simply the wrong man who thought we were living in a Pre Trump era.

He applied old school ideas of worrying about appearing non partisan and fair as if those things are rewarded anymore. He assumed being slow and methodical would build a case no one could dispute.

It was all fine 30 years ago but utterly stupid in the Trump Era. A younger, wiser AG would have known that the only path was swift and overwhelming. To capture the moment while the public still blamed him and cared about Jan 6th.

But he waited so long that people stopped caring about it and stopped blaming Trump for it. If the government isn't rushing over this, if they aren't actually charging him with inciting an insurrection then he must not have.

I don't want to be ageist, you need experience in government. But you also need vigor. The administration was filled with two many older and old school people and not enough younger, more vigorous folks in the right places.

It made the entire admin slow to react, slow to respond, and slow to recognize.

This Gatez report is disgusting, and AGAIN Garland has done nothing.