General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMerrick Garland was right to appoint a special counsel
I agree with Prof. Tribe that the appointment of a special counsel is a good move. The regulations provide for the appointment of a special counsel if there are "extraordinary circumstances" which does describe the current situation.
Link to tweet
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/11/18/garland-special-counsel-trump-right-call/?utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_medium=social
Did Garland need to wait until Trumps campaign launch to make the appointment? Perhaps not, but so long as Trump was not an active candidate, there was little reason for Garland to step aside. Now that Trump is a potential opponent to Biden, Garland believes it is essential to add a layer of separation between himself and the line prosecutors.
Constitutional scholar Laurence Tribe tells me, Looking over Jack Smiths decades of prosecutorial experience, its hard to imagine anyone better prepared to hit the ground running and to sew together whatever loose ends remain as he puts together a comprehensive prosecution of the leaders of the attempted coup, with the former president at its center, as well as a powerful prosecution of the former president for his theft of top secret documents as he absconded to Mar-a-Lago. He adds that, while he previously publicly urged that there was no need to appoint a special counsel, my principal concern was the need to avoid delay, and it appears that this appointment will solve that problem.
Norman Eisen, who served as co-counsel to the House impeachment managers during Trumps first impeachment, agrees. I have no concern that a special counsel will shy away from charging, and Jack Smith has outstanding experience, he tells me. Eisen also thinks the move will not cause much of a delay. He observes: Mr. Smith should move with alacrity. Here, where any other American who had removed the even one classified document would be subject to likely prosecution, and where the former president took dozens, the rule of law demands fast action.
Ironically, Trump was betting that his announcement would somehow protect him from prosecution. Instead, it prompted Garland to take an additional step to diminish the argument that the investigations against him are politically motivated. That, of course, will not matter to Trump and his MAGA cultists, but it might provide a measure of reassurance to ordinary Americans that the Justice Department has gone the extra step to prevent the appearance of a political vendetta.
walkingman
(10,865 posts)brush
(61,033 posts)failing to prosecute trump when his lead investigating prosecutors felt they had the goods and were ready to indict.
With Garland it just seems like he is leery of taking on an ex-president so he's passing the buck...with Bragg, who know. Sounds suspicious to me.
Cha
(319,087 posts)decisions over anyone who isn't doing the work.
Not doing the work and NOT paying attention to WHY AG Garland is appointing Jack Smith NOW.
And I trust Professor Tribe's statement "having read the DETALS" Over anyone who thinks they know more than he does.
walkingman
(10,865 posts)to the political elite so if/when nothing happens it won't surprise me. I am just disappointed that we have two different justice systems in America. Disappointed that we continue the charade.
Cha
(319,087 posts)I'm not.
We have brilliant Dems out there Fighting FOR our Democracy.
nightwing1240
(1,996 posts)We are questioning why it has taken two years for a special counsel to be named let alone an indictment of tRump and his cronies.
Cha
(319,087 posts)know what they're doing.
nightwing1240
(1,996 posts)Should have been done ages ago, cya indeed.
ProudMNDemocrat
(20,898 posts)I will place my bet on the Pit Bull.
sheshe2
(97,637 posts)oxymoron
(4,079 posts)Forgive me for not singing his praises.
WA-03 Democrat
(3,355 posts)Its like a meme
Just A Box Of Rain
(5,104 posts)It is.
WA-03 Democrat
(3,355 posts)What exactly will happen that will make this perfect? Lay it out on a time line please because I see this as just move one part 91.
At best its DOJ is too wimpy.
Cha
(319,087 posts)Exponentially More than those who are on the internet Dragging on him
ecstatic
(35,075 posts)our nation's future and the rule of law were essentially outsourced and put in the hands of a third party with no skin in the game.
I'm really hoping that Garland and Smith at least had conversations regarding this issue and are on the same page, and hopefully that page includes locking up trump.