Will be consulting his magic 8 ball tonite. Have no faith that wimp will show any level of fortitude on this.

Did you even read the post?

Bratt wouldn’t have argued that the memo didn’t apply to trials if he thought Garland would undercut his argument.

Do you actually think, after one of his prosecutors argued in court that the memo doesn’t apply to trials of already indicted crimes, that Garland would come out and say, “ well actually, it does, and we will drop all charges against Trump in order to avoid going to trial in the weeks leading to an election” ?

How embarrassing.

There is absolutely nothing in his previous behaviour, even if you believe all the myths and false narratives, that would suggest he would undercut one of his prosecutors, and certainly nothing to indicate he would order all charges to be dropped.

But, as your post shows, does not cover trials for already indicted matters.

Of course, Trump’s lawyers would try to introduce the memo to influence the judge’s ruling, but I think Bratt did an excellent job of shooting that argument down.

before an election.

In the federal government (and I am a retiree from it), "guidance documents" are generally more detailed versions of and/or ARE "policy documents" - i.e., SOPs. But they usually have provisions/stipulations for deviations ( "exceptions" ), which normally involves authorization from the highest levels.

I.e., they don't want rogue government officials doing stuff right before an election as it screams "political" (like we saw Comey do in 2016). But if a certain candidate stands in the middle of 5th Ave. and shoots someone, they are NOT going to say ( *whine whine* ) "We have to wait until after the election to do something".

Thanks for sharing this. Not that I expect the hair on fire crowd to care.

Neither should the courts.

For saying it out loud