No Benghazi for you. Why AG Garland appointed a Special Counsel.

[speak easy]

Last edited Sat Nov 19, 2022, 09:09 AM - Edit history (2)

What it means that a special counsel is running the Trump investigations

The appointment has the practical effect of limiting information about the investigation that must be disclosed to Congress, as only details about its budget must be shared with lawmakers.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/18/politics/what-to-know-special-counsel-trump-mar-a-lago-january-6/index.html

Edited for clarity

[RockRaven]

1. This savvy, manipulative, 4D-chess-playing rationale is at odds with the by-the-book, no other

choice, boy scout narrative.

Which portrayal are Garland fans going to endorse?

[brush]

2. Good question. The cache of gov docs at MAL is...

a slam dunk case for indictment and IMO, a verdict of guilty as trump had stolen gov docs, still has some, in his possession. There's no denying that and that's a crime.

Too bad, Garland seems to be reverting back to his previous timidity with this special prosecutor move.

INDICT trump already, Garland. The evidence is there. He's guilty as sin for all to see.

[MyOwnPeace]

4. You nailed it:

Simple.
Bottom line....
DO IT!!!!!
INDICT!!!!!!

[Bernardo de La Paz]

19. If you read the emptywheel tweets, there is no way anybody can indict for about 30 days or more

... due to certain legal machinations that tRump set in motion. They have to play out at upcoming court dates before ANYBODY CAN LEGALLY examine the documents to see what tRump intermixed with what.

tRump will lose, but the delays are all on tRump, who is a master of delay.

[brush]

21. Looks like he did it again. Wish DOJ would stay a step ahead of him for a change.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

22. They have. They got it on a fast-track. tRump's special master ploy got blown up. . . .nt

[mjvpi]

3. That makes sense, especially since it appears that the coup attempt involved sitting members.

[Cha]

5. TY.. that is scary for Dt!

I like what I've read about jack Smith and why he was appointed Special Counsel.

Yay.. from your link..

Smith will also oversee aspects of the probe reviewing efforts to obstruct the transfer of presidential power after 2020, including bids to interfere with Congress’ certification of the vote

Good article..

snip//

Smith will have at his disposal all of the investigatory tools that a US attorney can use, including subpoena power. He will be given his own budget and can build out a staff to support his work. If he chooses to bring any indictments, his team could also lead those prosecutions in court. His investigatory work must comply with all Justice Department regulations, procedures and policies.

Garland said that he “will ensure that the special counsel receives the resources to conduct this work quickly and completely."

[NBachers]

13. My impression is: This new sheriff is not going to accept these "Oh yeah? Whaddyagonna do about it!"

subpoena evasion schemes.

[PufPuf23]

6. That is an insight that calms my own reaction as makes good sense. kr

[Cha]

7. I'm For AG Garland & Jack Smith's

Methodical and Precise Investigations and NOT the Internet's Rush of Impatience.

They're Not doing the work.

[speak easy]

8. Yes. Indicting a former president is not like serving up a TV dinner.

[Cha]

11. And, from what I've read

from those who know Jack Smith.. Dt should be afraid.. Very Afraid!

Link to tweet

Mahalo!

[treestar]

18. +1

There are no "slam dunk" cases in courtrooms. Especially one like this. He could well get a hung jury or even be acquitted. There are plenty of dumb people to pick from the jury pool and Magats will never vote to convict.

[speak easy]

26. +1

[we can do it]

23. Same here. Let the adults do their work so it sticks.

[Cha]

27. TY, we can do it! nt

[Blue Owl]

28. Thanks for helping keep hope alive!

I must admit I’m becoming skeptical that anything will ever happen with the FF45/J6/Espionage investigations…. But goddamnit I hope I am wrong!

[Cha]

33. YVW! & I Hope I'm

right, Blue Owl!

It's certainly going to be interesting to watch Jack Smith take on the Fascist Treasonous Super Assholes

[SledDriver]

9. only details about its budget...

Rs won the house
House controls the purse strings

[Metaphorical]

16. Maybe if it takes longer than a year

Appropriations have already been made for 2023, so cannot be changed at this point, and I suspect that with a Special Counsel coordinating things, we will see indictments made sooner than 2024.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

20. I think McCarthy could try to defund all of DoJ, but not specific expenditures

They can try to write legislation to hold the country hostage or block legislation (govt shutdown or equivalent) until the Special Counsel is dissolved, but it won't work. The office will be funded and will proceed.

[LudwigPastorius]

12. Well, that's good, but...

the Republicans will/do have access to everything the J6 committee uncovered.

That's enough for the lawyers to begin to try to construct a defense for Fuckface.

[pnwmom]

15. They'd get the evidence in discovery anyway, once indictments were filed. n/t

[pnwmom]

14. +1000. nt

[brer cat]

17. That's important, speak easy.

The less the Rs know the better.

[speak easy]

24. No Benghazi for you :)

[brer cat]

25. LOL

[former9thward]

29. I have seen thousands of posts about Trump since the Jan. 6th events.

And the documents search, etc.

Almost none talked about appointing a special counsel. Or if someone did others said it was "not necessary" or a "delay tactic" or a "distraction."

Now that a SC has been appointed people are saying it was necessary, A great move for various reasons, If that is true why didn't people call for a SC before it was announced?

[speak easy]

30. 1. Because Republicans did not control the House

and 2. Opinion changed when Jack Smith was named as SC.

[former9thward]

31. No one knows who Jack Smith is.

I have asked what war criminals he prosecuted and what were the results and I have yet to receive a response. Rs taking over the House does not mean anything about these investigations.

[speak easy]

32. You asked "why didn't people call for a SC before it was announced"

and I gave you answers that are out there. You may not agree with the reasoning, but that is what has changed.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/11/19/garland-special-counsel-jack-smith-trump/

[Kingofalldems]

34. Should we give up and let Trump go?