Garland names special counsel for Trump Mar-a-Lago, 2020 election inquiries

[BillStime]

 

 

Just remember: Barr and Rosenstein are not in office to sabotage this Special Counsel like they did with the Mueller investigation.

 

 

[ChiGoose]

This is the right call. The target of the investigation has declared their run for president and the guy who appointed Garland is saying he’s going to run too. 

[BillStime]

🎯

 

 

[BillStime]

🎯

 

 

[BillStime]

 

[ChiGoose]

1 minute ago, BillStime said:

 

I love the idea that you can just decide not to participate in a criminal investigation into your activities.

[BillStime]

6 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

I love the idea that you can just decide not to participate in a criminal investigation into your activities.

 

Well, his party has enabled him and never held him accountable.

 

With that said - nothing is going to happen to Trump.

 

[Tiberius]

3 minutes ago, BillStime said:

 

Well, his party has enabled him and never held him accountable.

 

With that said - nothing is going to happen to Trump.

 

What? No way, they will arrest him and prosecute him. I bet he goes to jail 

[ChiGoose]

16 minutes ago, BillStime said:

 

Well, his party has enabled him and never held him accountable.

 

With that said - nothing is going to happen to Trump.

 

I think it’s more likely than not that he’s indicted on the NARA-Lago case. It’s pretty clear cut. Not sure on the timing though. 

[Doc]

Wake me when they finally got him.

[KDIGGZ]

I thought he colluded with Russia, did a quid pro quo with Ukraine, and was shady with his taxes? Surely he's already in jail for those crimes. This will just add on additional time served, right?

[ChiGoose]

1 hour ago, KDIGGZ said:

I thought he colluded with Russia, did a quid pro quo with Ukraine, and was shady with his taxes? Surely he's already in jail for those crimes. This will just add on additional time served, right?

DoJ won’t indict a sitting president, so he could do all the crimes he wanted and they wouldn’t indict him. The solution, as pointed out by Mueller, would be impeachment. 
 

That’s a political process, not a legal one, so no matter the facts, there was no chance of success. 

[B-Man]

The Same Old, Same Old Deja Vu

By Victor Davis Hanson

 

Attorney General Merrick Garland has just announced the appointment of special counsel Jack Smith.

But Smith's team will not look into the Biden family quid pro quo syndicate nor its incriminating confessionals on Hunter Biden's laptop.

Instead, it will further investigate Donald Trump's possession of presidential records that were hauled off from Mar-a-Lago, as well as his purported role in the January 6 "insurrection."

 

We know the script that will follow because we suffered through it for 22 months and spent $40 million for it under Robert Mueller's special counsel team.

 

First, the Smith investigation will bear no resemblance to special counsel John Durham's probes. The media ignored Durham. His team did not leak to the press. And neither a Washington, D.C. nor northern Virginia jury was ever likely to convict any perceived enemy of Trump.

 

Second, upon the announcement of Smith's legal staffers, the media will grow giddy that their resumes portend another "dream team," "all-stars," or "a hunter-killer team."

 

Puff pieces will blanket the media. They will attest, just like "good Ol' Bob Mueller," that the former Obama Justice Department public integrity unit lawyer Smith is "an old hand," "tough but fair," "nonpartisan," and a "prosecutor's prosecutor."

 

Weeks into the investigation, the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, or MSNBC will darkly inform their audiences that "unnamed sources close to the investigation tell us that "a bombshell" is about to go off.

 

Perhaps the "stunning development" will be similar to the fake "walls are closing in" scoop about the conspiratorial pinging in Trump tower from the Alfa Bank in Russia, or the "game-changer" Christopher Steele-fed, pee-pee, Moscow hotel room fable.

 

Yet one thing that will be different this time around is that the Biden administration is in power. Garland remains an unapologetic, embittered partisan. He is fresh off siccing a now-weaponized FBI on school kids' parents and various MAGA enemies of the state.

 

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/11/22/the_same_old_same_old_deja_vu_148504.html

[Tiberius]

 

10 hours ago, B-Man said:

The Same Old, Same Old Deja Vu

By Victor Davis Hanson

 

Attorney General Merrick Garland has just announced the appointment of special counsel Jack Smith.

But Smith's team will not look into the Biden family quid pro quo syndicate nor its incriminating confessionals on Hunter Biden's laptop.

Instead, it will further investigate Donald Trump's possession of presidential records that were hauled off from Mar-a-Lago, as well as his purported role in the January 6 "insurrection."

 

We know the script that will follow because we suffered through it for 22 months and spent $40 million for it under Robert Mueller's special counsel team.

 

First, the Smith investigation will bear no resemblance to special counsel John Durham's probes. The media ignored Durham. His team did not leak to the press. And neither a Washington, D.C. nor northern Virginia jury was ever likely to convict any perceived enemy of Trump.

 

Second, upon the announcement of Smith's legal staffers, the media will grow giddy that their resumes portend another "dream team," "all-stars," or "a hunter-killer team."

 

Puff pieces will blanket the media. They will attest, just like "good Ol' Bob Mueller," that the former Obama Justice Department public integrity unit lawyer Smith is "an old hand," "tough but fair," "nonpartisan," and a "prosecutor's prosecutor."

 

Weeks into the investigation, the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, or MSNBC will darkly inform their audiences that "unnamed sources close to the investigation tell us that "a bombshell" is about to go off.

 

Perhaps the "stunning development" will be similar to the fake "walls are closing in" scoop about the conspiratorial pinging in Trump tower from the Alfa Bank in Russia, or the "game-changer" Christopher Steele-fed, pee-pee, Moscow hotel room fable.

 

Yet one thing that will be different this time around is that the Biden administration is in power. Garland remains an unapologetic, embittered partisan. He is fresh off siccing a now-weaponized FBI on school kids' parents and various MAGA enemies of the state.

 

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/11/22/the_same_old_same_old_deja_vu_148504.html

This time the jury won't be Republican senators 

[All_Pro_Bills]

15 hours ago, ChiGoose said:

DoJ won’t indict a sitting president, so he could do all the crimes he wanted and they wouldn’t indict him. The solution, as pointed out by Mueller, would be impeachment. 
 

That’s a political process, not a legal one, so no matter the facts, there was no chance of success. 

Almost everything this administration does is focused on politics.  This decision is no different and perhaps Garland should have done this from the beginning and recused himself like Sessions did in 2017.  A special counsel and the rules that one operates under will result in less Congressional oversight into any investigation.  So checkmate on the House majority riding herd over the DOJ via any extensive hearings.  If the Democrats held the house I'll wager Garland would not have made this move.  Politically its smart and when it comes to playing the game the DNC continues to run circles around the GOP.   

[BillStime]

12 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Almost everything this administration does is focused on politics.

Oh please -  do we need to go through each example how Trump weaponized the DOJ, FBI and IRS against political foes, journalist and Americans?

 

Do we need to discuss how Trump purposely sought to divide us and spark hate across America?

 

17 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

This decision is no different and perhaps Garland should have done this from the beginning and recused himself like Sessions did in 2017. 

 

Why did Sessions recuse himself?

 

Did Garland work on the Biden campaign like Sessions worked on the Trump campaign and worked directly with subjects of the investigation Michael Flynn and Paul Manafort and others?

 

23 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

A special counsel and the rules that one operates under will result in less Congressional oversight into any investigation.  So checkmate on the House majority riding herd over the DOJ via any extensive hearings.  If the Democrats held the house I'll wager Garland would not have made this move.  Politically its smart and when it comes to playing the game the DNC continues to run circles around the GOP.   

Cry harder. When you elect clowns expect a circus - and that is exactly what your party is…

 

[SoCal Deek]

What’s the purpose of this Special Counsel? Is there really that much of a dispute about the facts of this case? 

[Westside]

29 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Almost everything this administration does is focused on politics.  This decision is no different and perhaps Garland should have done this from the beginning and recused himself like Sessions did in 2017.  A special counsel and the rules that one operates under will result in less Congressional oversight into any investigation.  So checkmate on the House majority riding herd over the DOJ via any extensive hearings.  If the Democrats held the house I'll wager Garland would not have made this move.  Politically its smart and when it comes to playing the game the DNC continues to run circles around the GOP.   

Yeah, but it’s not a game. It’s our freedom’s that are at stake. The dnc are cold blooded assassins when it comes to digging up garbage and making up lies to further their cause. The republicans are a bunch of pansies when it comes to standing up to the democratic cult. 
Both parties suck, the left are just more evil than the hopeless idiots on the right. 

[T master]

On 11/22/2022 at 12:04 PM, BillStime said:

 

Well, his party has enabled him and never held him accountable.

 

With that said - nothing is going to happen to Trump.

 

 

Kind of just like Obama & Hillary then right ?? 

[SoCal Deek]

On 11/23/2022 at 5:47 AM, SoCal Deek said:

What’s the purpose of this Special Counsel? Is there really that much of a dispute about the facts of this case? 

I rarely do this but let me ask again here. What’s the role of a Special Counsel here? How complicated is this case? Seems to me it’s just a simple question of a legal interpretation. 

[Tiberius]

On 11/23/2022 at 8:47 AM, SoCal Deek said:

What’s the purpose of this Special Counsel? Is there really that much of a dispute about the facts of this case? 

To prosecute a criminal 

[SoCal Deek]

1 minute ago, Tiberius said:

To prosecute a criminal 

And the Attorney General couldn’t do that?

[Tiberius]

1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said:

And the Attorney General couldn’t do that?

Sure, so? 

[SoCal Deek]

Just now, Tiberius said:

Sure, so? 

Are we going to go in circles here? 

[Tiberius]

2 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Are we going to go in circles here? 

Where is it you want to go? 

[Albwan]

You've chosen to ignore content by Tiberius.

 

Have you heard the rumor of the incoming investigation of the real criminal in chief ?

Ya know the one who actually committed crimes not fantasy ones concocted

by a group of mentally ill power hungry cultists

Edited November 25, 2022 by Albwan

[T master]

On 11/18/2022 at 3:20 PM, ChiGoose said:

This is the right call. The target of the investigation has declared their run for president and the guy who appointed Garland is saying he’s going to run too. 

 

Why couldn't they have done this a few weeks back when others were calling for a special council or that judge to look at the documents & determine what & weather they were indeed that important ? Inquiring minds want to know .

[Tiberius]

1 minute ago, T master said:

 

Why couldn't they have done this a few weeks back when others were calling for a special council or that judge to look at the documents & determine what & weather they were indeed that important ? Inquiring minds want to know .

Then you guys would be screaming it was to interfere with the red (ha ha) wave in the midterms 

[Doc]

3 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

I rarely do this but let me ask again here. What’s the role of a Special Counsel here? How complicated is this case? Seems to me it’s just a simple question of a legal interpretation. 

 

It tells me the material in question may not be what the Left is claiming it is.  But we'll see.

[T master]

On 11/22/2022 at 3:11 PM, ChiGoose said:

DoJ won’t indict a sitting president, so he could do all the crimes he wanted and they wouldn’t indict him. The solution, as pointed out by Mueller, would be impeachment. 
 

That’s a political process, not a legal one, so no matter the facts, there was no chance of success. 

 

Then why bother it's just a total waste of money & nothing but a side show especially when so much was fueled by lies and a fabricated dossier . No one should be above the law if so there would be a lot more ex presidents & politicians that would be in jail & rightfully so !! 

[BillsFanNC]

4 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

I rarely do this but let me ask again here. What’s the role of a Special Counsel here? How complicated is this case? Seems to me it’s just a simple question of a legal interpretation. 

 

 

Edited November 25, 2022 by BillsFanNC

[SoCal Deek]

1 hour ago, T master said:

 

Then why bother it's just a total waste of money & nothing but a side show especially when so much was fueled by lies and a fabricated dossier . No one should be above the law if so there would be a lot more ex presidents & politicians that would be in jail & rightfully so !! 

Don’t go down the leftist rabbit hole. That’s right where they want you to go. There’s absolutely zero case here. Zero. 

[ChiGoose]

11 hours ago, T master said:

 

Then why bother it's just a total waste of money & nothing but a side show especially when so much was fueled by lies and a fabricated dossier . No one should be above the law if so there would be a lot more ex presidents & politicians that would be in jail & rightfully so !! 

Because laying down the record of facts for history is always the right thing to do, even if it doesn’t achieve justice. 
 

The Mueller investigation uncovered dozens of crimes and showed that the Trump campaign was absolutely swarming with Russian agents. Mueller couldn’t indict Trump, so he specifically stated that the proper remedy was impeachment. 
 

But impeachment is a political tool, not a legal one. So instead of looking at the facts that showed that the Trump campaign was willingly accepting help from Russian agents and that Trump himself 100% had obstructed justice, the Senate just voted on party lines because it was politically convenient. 
 

BTW: if you think the Russia investigation was started because of the Steele Dossier, you are wrong. And if people are still telling you that, you should recognize that they are not people to be trusted. 

[T master]

10 hours ago, ChiGoose said:

Because laying down the record of facts for history is always the right thing to do, even if it doesn’t achieve justice. 
 

The Mueller investigation uncovered dozens of crimes and showed that the Trump campaign was absolutely swarming with Russian agents. Mueller couldn’t indict Trump, so he specifically stated that the proper remedy was impeachment. 
 

But impeachment is a political tool, not a legal one. So instead of looking at the facts that showed that the Trump campaign was willingly accepting help from Russian agents and that Trump himself 100% had obstructed justice, the Senate just voted on party lines because it was politically convenient. 
 

BTW: if you think the Russia investigation was started because of the Steele Dossier, you are wrong. And if people are still telling you that, you should recognize that they are not people to be trusted. 

 

So other words it was all a bunch of BS because if there was enough evidence as you say that the Trump campaign was crawling with Russian agents & willingly excepting help from the Russians it was right there in front of everyones eyes to see then prosecute the evidence is there .

 

I call BS as most of the supposed russian BS came from lies & a fake dossier & the hacking came from the DNC no protecting their servers as they were told to as the republicans were & did so there's another case of the dum ass for the Dems .

 

Your argument that there was evidence every where yet they still didn't prosecute is so lame even you can't see how foolish that statement is it was all a crook just like everything they have ever brought against him with absolutely no intent of putting him in jail just a continuance of the waisting of tax payers money with no out come of proof as far asa crime just speculation ...

[ChiGoose]

49 minutes ago, T master said:

 

So other words it was all a bunch of BS because if there was enough evidence as you say that the Trump campaign was crawling with Russian agents & willingly excepting help from the Russians it was right there in front of everyones eyes to see then prosecute the evidence is there .

 

I call BS as most of the supposed russian BS came from lies & a fake dossier & the hacking came from the DNC no protecting their servers as they were told to as the republicans were & did so there's another case of the dum ass for the Dems .

 

Your argument that there was evidence every where yet they still didn't prosecute is so lame even you can't see how foolish that statement is it was all a crook just like everything they have ever brought against him with absolutely no intent of putting him in jail just a continuance of the waisting of tax payers money with no out come of proof as far asa crime just speculation ...

I get that you don’t understand how the law works, and if you still think the investigation was based on the Steele Dossier, then you’re certainly getting bad information from untrustworthy sources. 
 

But I would encourage you (and anyone who thinks the Russia investigation was a hoax) to read through just the table of contents in volume one. Anytime you see a member of the Trump campaign mentioned, switch it to the Clinton campaign. Anytime you see a Russian mentioned, switch it to China. And then ask yourself if you’d want those activities investigated. 

[Chef Jim]

5 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

I get that you don’t understand how the law works, and if you still think the investigation was based on the Steele Dossier, then you’re certainly getting bad information from untrustworthy sources. 
 

But I would encourage you (and anyone who thinks the Russia investigation was a hoax) to read through just the table of contents in volume one. Anytime you see a member of the Trump campaign mentioned, switch it to the Clinton campaign. Anytime you see a Russian mentioned, switch it to China. And then ask yourself if you’d want those activities investigated. 

Ask yourself.  What answer do you come up with?

[ChiGoose]

3 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

Ask yourself.  What answer do you come up with?

Yes. That it would be a dereliction of duty not to investigate. 

[Chef Jim]

1 minute ago, ChiGoose said:

Yes. That it would be a dereliction of duty not to investigate. 

So did you call for the Clinton/China connection to be investigated?

[ChiGoose]

3 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

So did you call for the Clinton/China connection to be investigated?

What are you talking about?

[Chef Jim]

3 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

What are you talking about?

This:

 

Anytime you see a member of the Trump campaign mentioned, switch it to the Clinton campaign. Anytime you see a Russian mentioned, switch it to China. And then ask yourself if you’d want those activities investigated.