General Discussion

FakeNoose

(41,071 posts)

13. Yes, Barr and Garland both need to testify

Wed Feb 25, 2026, 03:34 PM

6 hrs ago

Not together of course. Not even on the same day. But they both need ot face the American people and answer our questions honestly and completely.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

6 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

BeerBarrelPolka La Urraca c-rational SheltieLover buzzycrumbhunger republianmushroom

53 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Top Oversight Democrat says Merrick Garland should testify on Epstein [View all] Mr. Sparkle 8 hrs ago OP

Oh BeyondGeography 7 hrs ago #1

DURec leftstreet 7 hrs ago #2

Great idea! And while they're at it, please subpoena whomever at SDNY requested NM to stop ranch investigation in 2019 SheltieLover 7 hrs ago #3

Years of silence Tetrachloride 7 hrs ago #4

Merrick Garland also has standing Mblaze 7 hrs ago #5

Lol. msfiddlestix 7 hrs ago #6

Agree. Spineless weasels like Garland never stand up for anything. BannonsLiver 6 hrs ago #19

he's trying to appear even-handed here bigtree 5 hrs ago #27

Bill Barr needs to be deposed. poli-junkie 7 hrs ago #7

Yes, Barr and Garland both need to testify FakeNoose 6 hrs ago #13

This!!!!! 👆👆👆👆👆👆👆 SheltieLover 3 hrs ago #52

Gooooood! Prairie Gates 7 hrs ago #8

🤞🤞🤞🤞🤞🤞🤞🤞 Whyisthisstillclose 6 hrs ago #9

Merrick Garland would take the 5th... Escape 6 hrs ago #10

Merrick Garland has never and would never take the 5th. SunSeeker 6 hrs ago #12

Thank you. Well said Raven123 5 hrs ago #26

Epstein-related files could not be legally released during Garland's term because Maxwell's case was still under appeal bigtree 6 hrs ago #11

Here comes the Garland Society. BannonsLiver 6 hrs ago #14

There is certainly grounds for criticizing Garland for his slow prosecution of Trump, but not for this. SunSeeker 5 hrs ago #22

I've heard all those excuses and rationalizations before. BannonsLiver 5 hrs ago #24

Those are not "rationalizations" about the handling of the Epstein files, they're facts. SunSeeker 5 hrs ago #39

When Bondi threw Garland's name at Ted Lieu he didn't disagree with her premise that Garland was delinquent on Epstein BeyondGeography 5 hrs ago #41

Ted Lieu was not implying Garland should have disclosed the Epstein files. SunSeeker 4 hrs ago #44

Exactly. Thank you bigtree. He didn't want to comment because it could endanger the conviction, which was on appeal. SunSeeker 6 hrs ago #16

this expectation of some is a degeneration of norms bigtree 5 hrs ago #23

Sounds sorta like can't fight the fire until the house KPN 6 hrs ago #21

I may have a different interpretation of 'still interviewing witnesses' than you bigtree 5 hrs ago #25

There's some management tools called priorities, assignment of resources, KPN 5 hrs ago #28

none of which have been shown by anyone to have been neglected or mismanaged bigtree 5 hrs ago #31

You have your opinion. I have mine. This was a big deal as KPN 5 hrs ago #38

I literally said none was shown bigtree 4 hrs ago #42

You can't show something that is missing -- like higher priority, greater emphasis, etc. I don't isolate everything to KPN 3 hrs ago #45

we're only talking about points and processes of law. What does 'proof' have to do with all that, you say? bigtree 3 hrs ago #48

UH OH, Escape 6 hrs ago #15

I like to call it the Garland Society. BannonsLiver 6 hrs ago #18

Yes, and isn't it amazing... Escape 3 hrs ago #46

Interesting question. BannonsLiver 3 hrs ago #49

One million files and nothing was done The Blue Flower 6 hrs ago #17

Incompetence or worse? KPN 5 hrs ago #29

Blaming Biden's DOJ is everywhere on right wing social media. progressoid 6 hrs ago #20

Lol. In some ways, I can't disagree. KPN 5 hrs ago #30

We need to have a GOOD answer to this or it will cost us in the election. Currently our answer is that Scrivener7 5 hrs ago #35

THIS. Absolutely. Shed the thin skin and blinders. KPN 3 hrs ago #47

Instead of wasting time on Garland... appmanga 5 hrs ago #32

This. Good idea. Scrivener7 5 hrs ago #34

THIS SunSeeker 5 hrs ago #40

Garland won't tell us anything. Bring on Jack Smith to talk about his investigations. Scrivener7 5 hrs ago #33

The deep of corruption in the current and former DOJ is very enlightening. Pretty obvious walkingman 5 hrs ago #36

Brilliant idea xuplate 5 hrs ago #37

Well there's at least one thing MAGAts and Dems appear to agree on MorbidButterflyTat 4 hrs ago #43

It's essentially spring in my area already. BannonsLiver 3 hrs ago #50

So should Barr!!! SheltieLover 3 hrs ago #51

AGREE ! republianmushroom 1 hr ago #53