Skip to main content

The Loud Silence of Garland’s DOJ

Given the recent fire hose of news, I’ve decided to be a little more short-winded this week, weighing in briefly on not one, but three subjects, none of which is Ukraine. Yes, I still believe Putin is enjoying an elaborate bluff, but I’m resisting the urge to write anything today that might make me look silly tomorrow. So let’s instead start with the rumblings of impatience about Merrick Garland’s DOJ, which are as persistent as they are misguided.

 

Patience Isn’t My Thing, Either

I get it. We’d all love to have seen our favorite villains in prison by now. And who can blame us for assuming no news is bad news?

But when it comes to the Department of Justice, we should never mistake silence for inaction. And I think we might just be missing what this silence is telling us.

Consider that there hasn’t been a single significant leak from Garland’s department. Not one. All those prosecutors, all those investigators, all those people in the field — and no leaks. The same department under Bill Barr was, by comparison, a water main break.

Remember, DOJ is still a traumatized agency. It’s still in recovery from the abuses of Barr and the mob lawyers he brought in to ride herd over the career attorneys. Many, if not most, of those attorneys were appalled at the things they saw, the things they were asked to do, and the things they were forced in good conscience to refuse to do. For four years, their professionalism was at odds with their ethics. There can be no doubt that many of them are still fuming.

If any of these people were truly upset with the path their department is taking under Garland, do you really think they’d be so quiet? If any of them were currently disgruntled — with how fast things are moving, with which cases are getting priority, with who is or isn’t being targeted — don’t you think at least one would reach out to a reporter?

There are excellent reasons for DOJ’s silence. There are hundreds of targets — actual or potential — either in their pipeline or on their radar. From the dimmest Oath Keepers, to the Roger Stones and Rudy Giulianis, to the entire Trump family and beyond, this could be the biggest caseload in history. Many of these targets will have high-priced white-collar attorneys representing them.

With that in mind, do we really want them comparing notes on their cases? Trading defense strategies? Getting their stories straight? 

Do we want them knowing who said what about whom? Who flipped on whom? Who might flip with the right incentive? There will doubtless be get-out-of-jail cards on the table for those who flip early. Do we really want DOJ tipping its hand? 

We need these cases to be as airtight as a prosecutor can make them. Which means, as much as I hate it, staying patient.

DOJ speaks exclusively through its court filings — through hearings, indictments, motions, pleadings — and every filing will tell us exactly what we’re meant to know. We’ll hear about them exactly when the defendants do, and not before.

Maybe we can’t see the progress. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t there.

 

Sandy Hook and the Win-Win-Win-Win

There’s a lot to be excited about in the Sandy Hook settlement. If it didn’t come in the context of heinously murdered school children, we might even be tempted to celebrate. But it did, so we won’t.

But this settlement against what’s left of Remington is truly a win-win-win-win — four wins for anyone who wants to see the gun industry answer for at least some of the carnage it so wantonly promotes.

The first win, and the biggest, is the brilliant new legal strategy that goes after the company’s marketing practices. Some really clever lawyers tapped the rich, century-old vein of false advertising law, and used it to draw blood. They built a killer civil case, one that sets a big juicy precedent for what will hopefully be a flood of copycat lawsuits to come.

(The settlement doesn’t even scratch the surface of the gun industry’s most atrocious marketing practices. Please take thirty seconds to watch this commercial, which is only tangentially related, but eloquently makes its point. It’s called “My First Rifle” and it’s not a parody. The Crickett rifle has long been marketed to pre-teen kids, and still is.)

The second big win is the capture of internal Remington documents, which will no doubt send shivers down the spines of other gun manufacturers. Some of the industry’s dirtiest laundry will be hung out there for all to see — and smell. For a generation of young investigative reporters and plaintiffs’ lawyers, this will be the promised land, something to build a career on. It’s a story that will only get deeper, more sordid, and more newsworthy over time.

The third win is the $73 million cash settlement. This was never the goal of the families who brought the lawsuit, but the financial pain inflicted on their adversaries is satisfying to us, if not them. Some of that award money will no doubt be invested in further suits against the industry. More power to them.

The fourth win has been somewhat under the radar. We’re not seeing much about the four insurance companies that were left holding the bag in this lawsuit, but it’s significant. Remington had long since gone bankrupt, so the cash award is on the insurers to pay out. 

This is sure to ripple through the insurance industry. Yes, they’ll continue to underwrite gun companies, but this will force them to deal with new liability risks. Any new policies they write will come with sharply higher premiums, and with a litany of onerous terms and conditions. The price of guns will almost certainly go up, as will the price of marketing missteps.

But let’s not get carried away. There will never be meaningful gun legislation as long as Republican obstruction dominates the political landscape. But using civil law to put gun companies on the hook for billions has got to be the next best thing.

 

Four Flags and a Michigan Suburb

One of my regular routes around my Detroit suburb takes me past one particular house that has a flagpole on its lawn, and a history of Trumpishness that has long been on ostentatious display.

In the past, this house has flown two flags on that pole: “Old Glory” above, “Trump/MAGA” below.

In recent months, the old Trump/MAGA flag has been replaced with a new “Let’s Go Brandon” flag. (For those who don’t know, “Let’s Go Brandon” is wingnut code for “Fuck You Biden”). This Brandon flag looks exactly like the “classic” blue Trump/MAGA flag, but drops the word “Trump.” This is the only such flag I’ve seen in the area.

But just the other day, as I drove by that house, I almost ran off the road. The Brandon flag was still flying, giving the finger to all who drove past. But instead of Old Glory, instead of the American flag to which this lawn supposedly pledges allegiance, there was now — wait for it — the maple leaf of Canada.

In other words, this home’s owner — why do I think it’s a guy? — is declaring his solidarity with a Canada that exists only in the fevered minds of Tucker Carlson, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, and all the other Republican buffoons who profess “support” for those Trump-addled Canadians who forced Michigan auto workers off their shifts, who aggravated an already-snarled Michigan supply chain, and who blew another hole in an already-shaky Michigan economy.

Not that Michigan was hurt more or less than anyone else by Canada’s truck blockade, just that Michigan is the very state this fool lives in, and it’s the very economy that supports his seditionist lifestyle.

It's bad enough that we seem to have exported some of our most idiotic ideas to Canada, a country that neither deserves nor wants them. But now, apparently, we’re importing them back again.


Comments

  1. Re the DOJ: That all sounds well and good, and as a veteran LEO, I agree. However, their due diligence HAS to be balanced with the clock they're running against. If the GQP regains control in 22 and god forbid, 24, they will kill these investigations deader than disco.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. True, but we're all assuming they can't keep track of time. Plus, DOJ doesn't change hands even if GOP wins in 22.

      Delete
  2. All very true..... but I think Canada (which I love so dearly) has its share of native-grown wing nuts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What's sad is the *expletives deleted* oligarch in America funding the reich wing nut jobs here are now taking their act on the road. It's not a coincidence we're seeing this crap sprouting up in democracies all over the world.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The GOP's Weaknesses are More Apparent than its Strengths

  Anyone who’s paying attention now understands that this election is a whole lot scarier than it ever should have been. It’s a shame — and an indictment of our constitutional system — that it comes down to an election at all. Surely, the Trump problem should have been settled by now, with no further elections required to get him out of our lives. His crimes were such that the real crime was letting him remain at large. All those checks and balances we were taught to revere should have somehow found a way to rid us of this monster. But the Supreme Court seems to have Trump’s back, though it’s not clear what that gains them. If anything, it makes one wonder what Trump is holding over them, and what might happen to their families if they don’t keep him out of prison. So it will come down to the election, and the lines couldn’t be drawn more indelibly. I prefer to think this can work out well — that these scorched-earth hacks can be overwhelmed at the ballot box

The New York Times has Gone Over to the Dark Side

  A week or so ago, Trump took a break from the courtroom and held a rally in a picturesque corner of New Jersey, a state he has no hope of winning. His speech at this rally was even more unhinged than usual, featuring his now-famous tributes to Al Capone and Hannibal Lecter — the latter being as fictional as Trump’s medical records, but seemingly real in his mind. These speeches are growing worse over time, and they seem to betray a worsening cognitive condition. Unfortunately, the New York Times doesn’t see it that way. Their reporting of the event was basically a puff piece . To them, this rally was Trump’s well-deserved break from the rigors and indignities of his criminal trial. They marvel that, “after a long and tense week,” he could now head to the Jersey Shore for some much-needed rest and adulation: Against the backdrop of classic Americana, Mr. Trump repeated his typical criticism that Mr. Biden’s economic policies were hurting the middle class.

Trump and Pecker Sittin’ in a Tree

  Before there was Fox News, before there was Rush Limbaugh, before there was the sprawling rightwing ecosystem of fake news and vicious smears we so enjoy today, there was the National Enquirer . For most of our lives, the Enquirer stared up at us from the checkout aisle of our local supermarket. Somehow, we never made the connection that its readers would one day fit the stereotype of the Trump voter — under-educated, gullible, malleable, easy targets for disinformation. The Enquirer nurtured those targets over many decades, got them to believe virtually anything, and helped lay the groundwork for the sort of know-nothing insurgency that brought Trump into all our lives. Decades ahead of its time, the Enquirer was peddling fake news long before it was fashionable. It appealed unapologetically to humanity’s baser instincts, the ones most of us try to rise above. It was always flamboyantly sleazy, and always there in plain sight, something we could dependably