General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums
a reminder: Merrick Garland's investigation of Timothy McVeigh, Terry Nichols and the Unabomber
had zero leaks before indictments, 100% convictions, and no turnovers on appeal.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
malaise
(296,118 posts)Last edited Mon Jul 25, 2022, 08:28 PM - Edit history (1)
RFN!
Response to elleng (Original post)
malaise This message was self-deleted by its author.
Thanks for that reminder!!!!
yes
sagetea
(1,559 posts)is loud, but creation is silent. I keep repeating this to myself.
sage
ARPad95
(1,672 posts)+1,000
pandr32
(14,272 posts)
Cha
(319,082 posts)
pandr
It's like that's being Totally Ignored.
Focus!
Please Fight to Save Our Democracy💙 in 2022 & 2024! 
JanMichael
(25,725 posts)"Approximately 90 minutes after Timothy McVeigh bombed the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building on April 19, 1995, killing 168 people, Oklahoma State Trooper Charlie Hanger pulled him over on I-35 for driving without a license plate. When McVeigh reached for his driver’s license, Hanger spotted a Glock handgun under his jacket and arrested him for carrying an illegal concealed weapon."
An hour and a half the idiot was in cuffs.
wnylib
(26,019 posts)of the connection to the bombing, militias, and his accomplice that would convict and hold up against appeal was not so simple.
Since the J6 crimes are so complex and extensive, the investigations are also complex and extensive.
JanMichael
(25,725 posts)wnylib
(26,019 posts)about McVeigh was his arrest, which was not for the bombing, but for lack of plates. The real work, which was not simple, was in finding his accomplice and getting the solid evidence that would hold up in court, prosecuting him successfully without loopholes, and without losing on appeal.
Good experience and qualifications for the current investigations. Good reasons to have faith in Garland's capabilities.
Phoenix61
(18,829 posts)obviously just blew up a building. Got it.
Trumpdumper
(227 posts)... and just imagine the hue and cry had there been a hung jury, which is exactly the situation he dare not risk in the present case. I love Adam Schiff, but he should just shut up.
wnylib
(26,019 posts)Daily Kos - forget which - that pointed out what a disaster it would be for the country if Trump was indicted, tried, and not convicted. It would be much worse than when he was impeached and not convicted. We would see a total unleashing of MAGA hatred and power grabs like never before. Justification of all that they do and believe, without even the few restraints that they now have.
krkaufman
(13,961 posts)… does not map to historical evidence.
wnylib
(26,019 posts)It's about feeling even more emboldened than they already are.
SoCalDavidS
(10,599 posts)So he's been indicted? He's been arrested and charged?
Because that's what you're implying.
Using someone's DU post as "Game, Set & Match" is a bit ridiculous, when he's traveling around the country holding rallies, and living comfortably at Mara Lago.
getagrip_already
(17,802 posts)They were PHYSICAL crimes (bombings and other physical acts of violence). Garland is prosecuting the physical crimes of 1/6 as well.
What he is not doing is prosecuting the political crimes at the inner circle.
I am decidedly not convinced he will get anywhere near trump. Clarke is a doj stooge who likely broke multiple laws in plain sight, and which his own IG is running with. Eastman an outsider. The fake electors are way out of state.
The real leaders? Not so much.
He is free to prove me wrong any time, but we will be having this argument until he resigns I'm afraid.
Phoenix61
(18,829 posts)getagrip_already
(17,802 posts)The entire cabinet will resign at the end of bidens last term. Many will resign at the end of his first term. At some point, he will resign.
Being a cabinet sec can be an extremely stressful position,
RobinA
(10,478 posts)committed by nobodies there was nothing to lose by indicting. Trump - very high stakes. And I'm not speaking ill of Garland, I just think going after an exPresident is a is a whole 'nother ball game than going after McVeigh.
Mr.Bill
(24,906 posts)was on the brink of announcing a campaign for his second term as president.
BlackSkimmer
(51,308 posts)
Blue Owl
(59,109 posts)malaise
(296,118 posts)😀😀
calimary
(90,021 posts)I’m not exactly a card-carrying member of the Merrick Garland Fan Club.
brooklynite
(96,882 posts)The US Constitution (Article II, Section 9, Row H, Seat 13) REQUIRES the Attorney General to share all his investigations with the blogosphere, doesn't it?
Novara
(6,115 posts)Today, the "experts" were surprised and stunned that the DOJ had Pence's chief of staff in front of one of their numerous grand juries.
The fact that these "experts" were surprised shows the DOJ is not leaking. They're getting pretty close to the top when they've got the VP's CoS testifying in front of a grand jury.
The closer they get to the top, the tighter the ship has to be. This is what I'd expect from Merrick Garland's DOJ.
The DOj is NOT doing nothing. This is the first time a top WH official who has inside information has gone before a grand jury in this investigation. That we know of. Do any of you naysayers think they'd bother with Pence's chief of staff if they weren't going after the orage fuck? This CoS has already testified to the J6C earlier in the year and IIRC, he said the orange fuck was trying to get him to convince Pence not to certify the election.
Still think he's not going after the orange fuck?
ShazzieB
(22,591 posts)I've quit trying to argue about what the DOJ is or isn't doing, but I appreciate those who are still willing to do so.
Personally, I happen to believe Garland is doing his job, but I can't prove that to anybody who is determined to believe he's not. Trying to convince anyone that Trump will ever be made to pay for his crimes is an even bigger reach. I hope he will, but the reality is I have no freaking idea. I'm not convinced he will, but I'm also not convinced he won't, as some here are. I think it could go either way.
What will happen, will happen, and what hasn't happened yet remains to be seen. I don't understand why some claim to be absolutely sure about things none of us actually have any personal knowledge of (i.e., Garland is goofing off, Trump will be never be prosecuted, etc., etc.), but I've lost interest in trying to convince people to keep an open mind when they're determined not to.
I appreciate your efforts, and I hope someone is listening. I really, really do.
Novara
(6,115 posts)The arrogance to proclaim what Garland and the DOJ are doing - with such certainty! - when none of us knows tends to bug me.
It's OK to admit you don't know. It's also OK to admit you fear he'll never be prosecuted because, hell, look at his history. But that isn't fact. Not yet, anyway.
None of us knows, and I have just a tiny bit of schadenfreude about the so-called experts being completely blindsided by Marc Short's testimony to a grand jury. Even they don't know but they're being paid to give opinions as if they are facts. People tend to absorb their opinions as facts because they are well-informed opinions. But they are opinions. And like the rest of us, sometimes these people are wrong.
I operate under the knowledge that I certainly don't know, and neither does anybody else outside the DOJ themselves.
Some people are just so invested in their narrative that their ego doesn't allow them to back down when given facts that challenge that narrative. It's OK to admit you were wrong about something. In fact, it's humbling, and humility is something in short supply these days. I dunno about anyone else but I respect people when they admit they're wrong about something. I admire that humility.
MarineCombatEngineer
(18,060 posts)MarineCombatEngineer
(18,060 posts)I quit engaging the doom and gloom crowd here, we all have our own opinions, but that's all they are, opinions, nobody here, nor in the general public, hell, I doubt even Congress knows the true progress of this wide ranging investigation, as it should be.
My honest opinion is that AG Garland and the DoJ are closing in on the Mango Menace and I think we're going to see indictments here pretty soon.
Question for the Lawyers on DU, if the Feds and GA indict, who gets first crack at him?
LakeArenal
(29,949 posts)Negative conjecture is still negative. It spawns more negativity.
There is a good chance democracy might fall, or maybe not. Orange boy might (I fervently hope) go to jail, or he might fly off to Russia, or he might choke on a Whopper. We live in momentous times, with much uncertainty. Nobody can be blamed for being unable to, or refusing to, get comfortable with not knowing what comes next. Especially when one of the players has a history of no leaks.
Joinfortmill
(21,169 posts)Bets anyone?
Hekate
(100,133 posts)
trof
(54,274 posts)Phoenix61
(18,829 posts)
PJMcK
(25,048 posts)Thanks, elleng.
Reality is too often unseen. Especially online.
kacekwl
(9,148 posts)McVeigh blowing up the building ? What if they had audio of McViegh asking for a Secartary of State to get him the explosives he needed to blow up the building ?
48656c6c6f20
(7,638 posts)I haven't seen that.
Presidents ever convicted and punished?
We all know how this is going to go. The imperial king is alive in well.
dchill
(42,660 posts)Which democracy DOES NOT HAVE. The media can't wait to bothsides the slim Democratic majority and the Biden administration into irrelevance for "fairness' sake."
I'm all out of patience.
calimary
(90,021 posts)I’m there, myself.
uponit7771
(93,532 posts)
former9thward
(33,424 posts)Last edited Mon Jul 25, 2022, 10:09 PM - Edit history (1)
McVeigh was arrested a few hours after the bombing. Nichols a couple days later. Their indictments were formalities. Plenty of material was given to the media. Not sure what "investigation" you are posting about?
The Unabomber had almost a 20 year crime run with his bombs and other crimes. His manifesto was published by the Washington Post. The only reason he was caught was because his brother hired a private detective and a law firm to investigate his brother. The DOJ tried to ignore their findings but finally arrested the Unabomber. There was nothing to leak. It was all out there.
BumRushDaShow
(169,761 posts)and then for having an illegal gun. It wasn't until 3 days later when he was matched with the sketches of the renter of the truck and it took 4 months before he was indicted for the actual bombing.
So yes the comparison IS valid regarding the time it takes to actually bring charges.
former9thward
(33,424 posts)So another bad analogy. And everyone knew within hours of McVeigh's involvement. Once you have a person behind bars you can take your time for formalities like indictments. Maybe you should go back and read some newspapers at the time.
BumRushDaShow
(169,761 posts)ETA note, I WORKED for the federal government for over 30 years before retiring INCLUDING when the Oklahoma City federal building was bombed. And MY federal building's entire security posture (like every other federal building in the country) CHANGED after that happened. I *worked* in the midst of that AND 9/11.
So you need to start over.
former9thward
(33,424 posts)BumRushDaShow
(169,761 posts)here (unedited version) -
And here -
Were completely wrong.
The white supremacist McVeigh wasn't the "suspect" that the media "heard" about and promoted.
Everyone was looking for a "Middle East man" -
Published 12:00 a.m. CT April 21, 1995
FBI agents have pursued a number of leads in the deadly bombing of the federal office building in downtown Oklahoma City. In London, an Oklahoma resident was stopped and flown back to the United States for questioning Thursday. U.S. officials described Ibraham Ahmad, a Jordanian-American, as a possible witness in the attack. Italian officials said his bags, seized in Rome, contained possible bomb-making tools.
Italian officials said the three duffel bags contained electrical tape, silicone, a hammer, tweezers and a photo album with pictures of missiles and other weapons. Officials said one of the bags contained a luggage tag bearing the handwritten name "Abrahim Ahmad" and an Oklahoma City address.
Officials in London said Ahmad held a U.S. passport and is believed to have flown from Chicago. Neighbors told the FBI they saw Ahmad leave his home at 1820 NW 40 with another man about 30 minutes after the 9 a.m. Wednesday blast.
Ute Draper, who lives across the street from Ahmad, said she looked out her front window about a half hour after the explosion and saw Ahmad standing beside a pickup, which had a suitcase in the back. Draper said she went to get a cup of coffee, and when she looked back outside a few minutes later, the pickup was gone.
(snip)
https://www.oklahoman.com/story/news/1997/04/22/arab-american-sues-on-bombing-city-resident-says-us-violated-his-rights/62317057007/
The "suspect" who was worked over, eventually sued -
John Parker
Published 12:00 a.m. CT April, 22, 1997
An Arab-American Oklahoma City resident who claims he was wrongfully detained in Chicago, London and Virginia after the Oklahoma City bombing filed a lawsuit Monday against the government. Gary L. Richardson, a Tulsa attorney representing Abraham Ahmad, said the lawsuit was filed because settlement talks with government officials failed and a deadline to file the lawsuit was approaching. The settlement negotiations were based on Ahmad's $1.9 million tort claim against the government filed in November 1995.
Ahmad rejected a $10,000 offer last year from the U.S. Justice Department when he was previously represented by a Washington, D.C., attorney. Richardson declined to disclose other settlement figures. "Their offers haven't been sufficient enough," he said. The civil lawsuit is seeking actual and punitive damages, but does not state how much money is sought.
The lawsuit claims Ahmad was repeatedly detained and questioned solely because of his ethnic heritage. Richardson said Ahmad's experience went far beyond a routine inquiry into a possible bombing suspect. "It's kind of like: What is a major or a minor surgery? Major is when it's on me," Richardson said. "I think most people would consider what happened to him far more than just checking him out."
The U.S. District Court lawsuit alleges federal agents falsely arrested Ahmad on April 19, 1995. He was traveling from Will Rogers World Airport to Amman, Jordan, to visit relatives and deal with a family emergency. Ahmad's plane left Oklahoma City less than two hours after a massive truck bomb exploded outside the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building. The blast left 168 people dead and injured more than 500.
(snip)
https://www.oklahoman.com/story/news/1997/04/22/arab-american-sues-on-bombing-city-resident-says-us-violated-his-rights/62317057007/
Maybe you were a kid when this happened but plenty of us remember it as it happened and what it took to get the damn focus off of "Arab" terrorist nonsense and the media's gasbags terrorizing a whole community, and get it focused on a couple of "white terrorists".
In direct relation to the OP - here is what was going on the down low - while Reno was investigating (with little or no leaks) -
By David Johnston
April 21, 1995
(snip)
But the focus of investigators remained solidly on the two "John Does" who rented the truck. Officials from the Federal Bureau of Investigation released sketches of the two suspects and said warrants would be issued for their arrest. Attorney General Janet Reno announced a reward of up to $2 million for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the perpetrators.
The two men who rented the truck, the authorities said, did not appear to be Middle Eastern, nor did they speak with any discernible accent -- hints that the widespread speculation that Islamic militants were responsible for the blast might be premature or incorrect. But law-enforcement officials said they did not rule out any group or motive.
(snip)
https://www.nytimes.com/1995/04/21/us/terror-oklahoma-investigation-piece-rented-truck-offers-clue-2-suspects.html
Meanwhile the broadcast and print media were going hogwild on "Islamic terrorism" angle -
Mr. Ahmad lives in Oklahoma. He checked into O'Hare International Airport in Chicago on Wednesday night for a flight to Rome, with connections for a flight to Amman, Jordan. In addition to fitting the suspect profile, he was dressed in a jogging suit similar to one that a witness in Oklahoma City had reported seeing worn by a man at the scene of the explosion.
Mr. Ahmad was questioned by Federal agents before he boarded his flight. The questioning led the agents to discount the possibility of the man's involvement. But it went on for so long that he missed his flight. His luggage, which was flown on to Rome, was opened by Italian officials. They found nonexplosive materials, like three jogging suits, pliers, kitchen knives, aluminum foil, spools of electric wire, silicon, photographic materials, a video recorder and a photograph album with pictures of military weapons, including missiles and armored vehicles, Italian officials said.
Apparently as a result of the search, when Mr. Ahmad himself arrived in London, where he had flown to make a connecting flight to Rome, he was detained and returned to Washington for additional questioning. Televised news accounts portrayed the British detention of the man as a major break in the case. But the authorities said that they were unsure whether the man, whom they called a potential witness, had any knowledge of the Oklahoma City bombing and that they regarded him as one of hundreds of leads that could be either potentially significant or a dead end.
https://www.nytimes.com/1995/04/21/us/terror-oklahoma-investigation-piece-rented-truck-offers-clue-2-suspects.html
So no, "everyone" didn't "know about McVeigh's involvement 'within hours'". That's just preposterous.
former9thward
(33,424 posts)We were told by the OP that Garland did the investigation. How did that change?
BumRushDaShow
(169,761 posts)that was being refuted.
Garland was the LEAD prosecutor of McVeigh and how he methodically did what he did in that role for that case most certainly will influence how he might recommend the handling of very public, very violent complex cases like what happened January 6.
But maybe you missed that. 
MarineCombatEngineer
(18,060 posts)Janet Reno was the AG at the time and Timothy was prosecuted by Joseph H. Hartzler.
former9thward
(33,424 posts)MarineCombatEngineer
(18,060 posts)She authorized the investigation and assigned the prosecutors to investigate and prosecute in court.
former9thward
(33,424 posts)"investigation". Remember, the one the OP said Garland did? I wonder why that is being ignored?
BumRushDaShow
(169,761 posts)after being shown over and over to have been wrong about details regarding these cases and are too lazy to even look things up.
DU has been littered with "impatience" posts about the plodding but methodical development of evidence (although I don't blame people for their frustrations).
I have had to take evidence development courses and labwork that I did was subject to use in court (and a few work assignments did end up in court as part of a prosecution of our agency's regulated industry). So I know "the other side" and what it is needed when pursuing a conviction. In most cases, the accused either pleads guilty or does some other settlement before there is even a trial.
There have been multiple articles over the past 6 years regarding former colleagues of Garland pointing to both cases mentioned in the OP (yes including the Unabomber investigation) and how they impacted his meticulous investigative style. For example from 2016 -
By James Rowley
March 24, 2016 at 5:00 AM EDT
The killer known as the Unabomber was methodical, patient and meticulous. So was the U.S. Justice Department official who directed the investigation that took him down. Former colleagues of U.S. Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland cite his legal skills in the courtroom and in overseeing the mid-1990s Unabomber and Oklahoma City bombing investigations as evidence that pragmatism and common sense, not an elaborate constitutional philosophy, would guide his decisions as an associate justice.
Garland led the investigation task force and helped make “the hard decision” to ask the Washington Post and the New York Times to agree to publish the Unabomber’s 35,000-word manifesto, said former Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick. That led to the arrest of Theodore Kaczynski after his brother recognized the writing style and alerted the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
“He is smart, smart, smart -- he blends the theoretical and the professorial part of the law with the retail aspect,” said Marshall Jarrett, a retired Justice Department official who helped recruit Garland for the U.S. attorney’s office. Garland’s experience as a courtroom prosecutor and later as a senior Justice Department official makes him “attuned to the kinds of issues faced in criminal law enforcement," said Jarrett.
Even as they laud Garland’s temperament and legal ability, these former colleagues are unlikely to get a chance to sing his praises at a confirmation hearing any time soon. Garland’s nomination is turning into a bitter contest between President Barack Obama and Senate Republicans, who say the next occupant of the White House should choose who succeeds the late Justice Antonin Scalia.
(snip)
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-03-24/unabomber-case-helped-hone-supreme-court-nominee-s-legal-skills
In fact, excerpts of the answers he completed from his questionnaire submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee when he was nominated to be an Associate Justice on the SCOTUS, were included in the below article (in part) -
He was a Dukakis volunteer, the top 'Unabomber' prosecutor and wrote a theater review
By Todd Ruger
Posted May 10, 2016 at 2:59pm
The questionnaire that Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland submitted Tuesday to the Senate Judiciary Committee is full of the standard biographical information, such as a list of the most significant legal matters he has handled.
But the
142-page document
also contains interesting nuggets about the life of the federal appeals court judge whom President Barack Obama picked to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia. Here are the some of the highlights from the filing:
(snip)
Terror cases
Garland listed the prosecutions of the Unabomber in 1996 and the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995 among the “ten most significant litigated matters” which he personally handled. “I was the supervising attorney for the prosecution of Theodore Kaczynski, the ‘Unabomber,’ until I became a Circuit Judge,” Garland wrote.
Garland also mentioned his anti-terrorism efforts in a section about his appearances before Congress. “In addition, I met with Members of Congress and staff to discuss security preparations for the Salt Lake City Olympics in the fall of 1996, and to discuss the explosion of TWA Flight 800 in the summer of 1996,” Garland wrote. “I do not have statements or notes.”
(snip)
https://rollcall.com/2016/05/10/7-things-merrick-garland-told-the-senate-about-himself/
And as a note, I knew one of the victims of TWA Flight 800 who lived up the street from me, and my sisters and I were friends of his kids, and we would play in his yard. He was a teacher at schools we had attended as well. It was shocking to see who perished on that plane and realize you knew someone who was a neighbor.
With respect to Garland at the time of the Unabomber case, he was the Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General supervising the case upon indictment in 1996 - as part of DOJ's Criminal Division (appointed to that position in 1993) and the trial came 2 years later with guilty pleas (Garland had been appointed as a D.C. Circuit Court judge the year before in 1997). But it took almost 20 years to nab Kaczynski and from that point on, he sat a in Supermax cell for 20 years before being moved to a prison hospital last year.
So as usual, another refusal to research and instead make meaningless declarative statements.
former9thward
(33,424 posts)The crime spree that went on for almost 20 years despite pleas and evidence given the DOJ by the Unabomber's brother. You seem to double down and have no problem with that statement. You want Garland to claim to be the investigator on that case? That is what the OP says.
BumRushDaShow
(169,761 posts)THIS is what the OP says -
had zero leaks before indictments, 100% convictions, and no turnovers on appeal.
And then you pull this out of thin air -
You have now pivoted with complete nonsense. The posts were addressing Garland's "investigations" and how these were handled. You then went on and on with incorrect information about what happened with McVeigh and then when that was pointed out, you quickly dropped that.
I then added an article that you failed to read, so I'll include a smaller amount for you to read -
By James Rowley
March 24, 2016 at 5:00 AM EDT
The killer known as the Unabomber was methodical, patient and meticulous. So was the U.S. Justice Department official who directed the investigation that took him down. Former colleagues of U.S. Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland cite his legal skills in the courtroom and in overseeing the mid-1990s Unabomber and Oklahoma City bombing investigations as evidence that pragmatism and common sense, not an elaborate constitutional philosophy, would guide his decisions as an associate justice.
(snip)
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-03-24/unabomber-case-helped-hone-supreme-court-nominee-s-legal-skills
NEWSFLASH: When you are at the GS-1000 level as he was in the Criminal Division of DOJ from 1993 - 1997, you are a supervisor directing the work of multiple teams of investigators whose work ultimately leads to the building of a case. This includes individuals working across different agencies, in this case to include the FBI, ATF, and the U.S. Postal Service (since Kaczynski was mailing bombs).
You are now going into a bunch of psychobabble about DOJ and Kaczynski, when Kaczynski started his crime spree when Jimmy Carter was President and the AG was Ben Civiletti, and continued through 3 Presidents and 7 Attorney Generals.
https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/unabomber
The final investigations, arrest, and indictment happened under the purview of Garland while he was in multiple SES leadership roles that included directing the investigations of multiple major cases during that time that have been posted about in this thread.
It's obvious that when one is losing an argument, one attempts to obfuscate with unrelated minutia, throwing things at a wall to see if anything sticks.
Your continued lack of knowledge of the federal government's employment structure is not surprising and is laid bare in this thread.
(the above was the org chart during that period from the DOJ archives)
Grasswire2
(13,849 posts)AND......even if they never had been caught, the American system of governance would have remained intact, and functioning just fine.
Unlike this time.
Apples and oranges.
uponit7771
(93,532 posts)
Ford_Prefect
(8,613 posts)Nichols. That is to say there were holes in the investigation which have never been satisfactorily filled. This was long before social media became a thing among Militia types.
sop
(18,626 posts)JanMichael
(25,725 posts)Half are probably dead not the rest over 50. Probably a few there on January 6th too.
Ford_Prefect
(8,613 posts)malaise
(296,118 posts)will be aired tonight during Prime Time news
dalton99a
(94,134 posts)or a major political party behind them
duhneece
(4,510 posts)It soothes and heals a pain, a fear.
uponit7771
(93,532 posts)
Martin68
(27,749 posts)It's still ticking. There have already been statutes of limitation pass. If you methodically, meticulously and brilliantly investigate long enough, all the others will run out as well.
jaxexpat
(7,794 posts)RANDYWILDMAN
(3,163 posts)now they have Fox news and questions
We have 5 years of Trump "life is unfair to me and my followers" 
Jan 6th should be a no brainer, but repubs are in a cult. The hardest thing to tell a cult member is that they are in a cult.
Garrland better bring it.
My concern is on MSMBC they had panel people who were concerned that DOJ and Garland were following and not leading with witnesses and evidence related to the house committee. IF DOJ was really on it they would have been there first not last.
I wonder and Garland could prove me wrong, If doj is dragging it's feet so it does not have to go to that area it does not want too, inditement of a formet president, we will see
Stuart G
(38,726 posts)
Ruby the Liberal
(26,665 posts)The internet was basically just compuserv and AOL for most people back then, so if he pulls this off now, he'll be a hero.
I just hope I see it in my lifetime!
prodigitalson
(3,193 posts)Trump might since there are a lot more of them these days. The zero leaks part is reassuring though. Hope he is tried in DC.