Justice Dept. Faces Tough Calls in Weighing Response to Trump Ruling
Bullshit.
WASHINGTON — The Justice Department faces a complex and consequential decision this week...
No, they're not facing anything complex. The New York Times LOVES complex. They want to MATE with complex. If it's not complex it's not fit to print. They muddy the waters to make them look deep. Lawyers can see all the way to the bottom of this one through crystal clear waters.
...
Over the past several days, senior officials at the department have been huddling to game out options.
Okay, let's all put our complex heads together here in the huddle, grab our johnsons and shoot our bodily essence all over each other.
...
the judge’s [i.e. Loose Cannons's] blunt, far-reaching defense of Mr. Trump’s rights as a former president poses a dilemma for Attorney General Merrick B. Garland and his top officials...
No, there is no dilemma.
...
“It is a very hard--No, it's not very hard. It’s never been very hard. It’s always been flaccid.--series of decisions,” said Mary McCord, who held several top positions at the Justice Department from 2014 to 2017 in the Obama administration.
...
The case presents the department with several tough calls--No, there are no tough calls.--requiring a careful balance--No, they don't have to be careful.--between the desires to speedily resolve the investigation and to limit an expansion of executive power espoused by Mr. Trump’s team.
Let me see if I get the gist of this complexity riddle: The Garlands have their panties in a wad over, on the one hand, a speedy trial on what they got, and on the other, an imperial conception of presidential power. That's the complexity? That's a "tough call" for them? That's their "dilemma"? No, no, it really is not. What that is is fucking stoopid. But wait, I'm not done. I'm going to go from playing checkers with yinz Nuu Yawkahs to playing 3-D chess. Oh, Quasis, you're going to love this, this complexity addition is going to be enough to shoot you into orgasmic orbit and spew your quasi seed on the heavens: not fully and combatively appealing every jot and jit in Loose Cannon's order will be to surrender to an unparalleled expansion of judicial power over the executive, DOJ.
...
The question is whether they will mount a narrow approach--No, no narrow. Fat.--geared at extracting relatively small concessions from the judge, to speed up--No, it's dangerous to speed.--the independent review, or if they plan a more comprehensive,--Yes, comprehensive.-- riskier--No, it's not riskier--appeal to reverse what they see as a dangerous enhancement of presidential power.--+concession to dangerous enhancement of judicial power at expense of executive power.
...
It's riskier because appealing the ruling up to the 11th Circuit Court in Atlanta, which is stocked with no fewer than six Trump appointees.
Let's see, do we give in without a fight to one Idiot Trump Judge now, or take the "risk" before 11 judges, six of whom are Trump Judges? That's a hard call? Protect your losses? This is appeasement of fascism in the law.
There is no easy path for Mr. Garland’s team.--No, the path is easy, it's a bright, Shining Path: aggressively fight the existential threat to equality before the law of 45th's Imperial Presidency and Loose Cannon's radical judicial overreach into the executive branch, or go up the Muddy Road straight into the asshole of DEFEAT.