Just Human ??????
President Trump says he seriously considered Merrick Garland for the Supreme Court. “I thought, frankly, that Garland - the attorney general - was above that, I really did, and maybe he is. Maybe it’s early…”That’s very interesting. “Maybe it’s early.”
I encourage everyone to actually listen to the clip to understand the context. I read the overall message as "Damn, I cant believe Garland is a guy that could be weaponising DOJ. I never thought he was like that." - setting up the expectation that Garland is stopping Durham from indicting FBI.
Whatever the case is, I found Trump's choice of words to be curious. He is alot more precise in his words than most people realize.
Maybe Trump is secretly saying it’s someone like Gates, Soros, ect.
Could Garland be a sleeper agent, akin to what Wray is supposed to be?
I have thought this very recently, within the past few weeks or so.
I cannot quite remember what incident provoked those thoughts but this one is along the same vain.
Liz Cheney and the J6 committee not calling Pence to testify is another 'Holy shit! Is Liz under WH control?' moment...
It would not surprise me.
Comments by JustHuman:
https://t.me/realjust_human/10222
President Trump says he seriously considered Merrick Garland for the Supreme Court.
“I thought, frankly, that Garland - the attorney general - was above that, I really did, and maybe he is. Maybe it’s early…”
That’s very interesting. “Maybe it’s early.”
https://t.me/realjust_human/10223
Consider what I have been saying on my show for a year now re: Garland.
-Obama selected Garland for SCOTUS because he was LESS radical and MORE likely to get through confirmation. -Garland is hated by BOTH sides. The Left says he isn't radical enough, the Right says he is too radical. -Garland has not interfered with Durham or Weiss investigations -A whole lotta whistleblowers are coming forward from DOJ/FBI, Garland hasn't gotten in their way at all. In fact, he reminded them to do it the correct way. -Garland also told DOJ staff to NOT discuss ongoing cases with Congress or the White House. -There's virtually no difference between Trump DOJ and Biden DOJ. The Swamp Draining, War on MS13, Human Trafficking, CCP Agents, etc... it all continues.
These things give evidence to why Trump considered him. They also give evidence to the idea that things are not what they seem...
https://t.me/realjust_human/10224
There's so much fake news out there, frens.
Don't mistake the news (from either side) for the Truth.
Think for yourself. Dig for yourself. Decide for yourself.
https://t.me/realjust_human/10225
What I am saying is:
-A Deep State AG would have done far worse and interfered or ended much more
-Garland is the most misunderstood official in this Admin, by both side's
-He isn’t as inept as the Left says and he isn’t as dastardly as the Right says.
-Trump caught them all
-NCSWIC
Just the kiss of death from boss man, flattery to get him to change course by saying something like he's better than this bs he's doing now and if garland keeps course he gets destroyed politically. They've got dirt on this fool and are dangling the carrot He very well knows garland is a crooked bastard, look up his fam, personally responsible for crt ....
It depends on where Merrick Garland would have been selected. I think it is the second seat that opened during his first term. Regardless, it would have been fun to see Democrats try to keep Garland off the bench after he was nominated by President Obama but denied a hearing.
We already know that Trump listens to some of the worst advisors in DC, courtesy of the Uni-Party (republican side) establishment. So this isn't really shocking to me.
What makes you think that he listened to the advisors around him? Could he have been as successful in so many endeavors if he didn't know who to listen to? Do you think you have access to better information than Trump? If not, how can you judge anything he does? There are a lot of "armchair quarterbacks" out here.
I believe that collectively, many people here on this forum, and others, do indeed have superior insights regarding many of Trump's personnel selections. I need only point to the long list of traitors, and backstabbers who have been exposed within his circle of advisors to support that claim.
And, I was not faulting him for past personnel choices- it's not his fault that Washington DC is infested with swamp. I was merely stating that his consideration for Garland as a possible selection does not surprise me, considering some of the personnel candidates who have been presented to him in the past, by his advisors.
I don't think anyone outside the "less than 10" who know the plan, only 3 of whom are non-military, have enough information to have an informed opinion, no matter who they are individually or collectively, and no matter what they know or think they know.