Merrick Garland Decides To Say "Way 'Mint, There Judge Cannon..."

And he is of course right. He will win.

I am a lil' concerned about this being gamed by Tangerine for added delay.

But I am sure DoJ. . . is ready to prosecute -- when the indictment is unsealed, even on the consented to documents, as I earlier said. DoJ may always file a superseding indictment with the contested ones, here -- when this is sorted out.

I know Mr. Garland knows well what he is doing. Here is that well-argued filing, tonight -- in full. He will get this crook -- and on the "merits" before Judge Cannon (if Trump is in fact innocent -- highly unlikely, now, given the photos):

. . .As the Supreme Court has made clear, “the cost, anxiety, and inconvenience of having to defend against” potential criminal prosecution cannot“ by themselves be considered ‘irreparable’ in the special legal sense of that term.” Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 46 (1971); cf. Cobbledick, 309 U.S. at 325 (“Bearing the discomfiture and cost of a prosecution for crime even by an innocent person is one of the painful obligations of citizenship.”).

That is why courts have exercised great caution before interfering through civil actions with criminal investigations or pending cases. See also Deaver v. Seymour, 822 F.2d 66, 69-71 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (applying Younger’s principles with regard to potential federal charges); Ramsden v. United States, 2 F.3d 322, 326 (9th Cir. 1993) (“The mere threat of prosecution is not sufficient to constitute irreparable harm.”). And those fundamental principles strongly support the limited stay the government seeks here. . . .

So there you have it. Tangerine is soon buying me root beer floats, all over the Twitterverse, too. Grin.

नमस्ते