This message was self-deleted by its author

[brush]

This message was self-deleted by its author (brush) on Sun Jan 15, 2023, 06:14 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

[liberalmuse]

1. He could have appointed neutral judges. There are plenty.

Something in the milk ain't clean.

[ananda]

5. I know. This stinks to high heaven.

Sheesh

[BunkieBandit]

48. Stinks all the way to Hell!!

[Walleye]

2. I saw a headline about Senator Gillibrand this morning

And this shit is so bad my first thought was oh no she calling on Joe to resign? Sorry about that

[Wingus Dingus]

3. That's kind of her signature move, LOL.

[brooklynite]

12. Well, her and every other Democratic Senator EXCEPT Joe Manchin.

[Polly Hennessey]

17. This surprises you.

I believe she was in the vanguard for Senator Franken to resign.

[Walleye]

36. Exactly. That's what I flashed back on

[a kennedy]

39. And willNEVER forgive her for it either. 🤬

[Trueblue1968]

40. ME EITHER. i don't like her one little bit.

[News Junkie]

65. If she weren't in the Senate, do you think Franken would have survived?

Honest question.

[SMC22307]

71. I don't know but #MeToo fucked us royally.

Funny, I don't hear a peep about the *movement* now.

[Meowmee]

58. Lol

[jalan48]

4. We had a coup attempt in the US in January of 2021. Almost every Republican has

worked to deny or downplay the event and yet here is Garland worried about looking "fair". WTF? Think COUP ATTEMPT Merrick and what that means for our Democracy.

[Meowmee]

60. Appointments of Garland and Comey

Were imo the biggest mistakes ever.

[Marius25]

6. I think this should dispel the myth that Garland isn't biased against Dems

[Dave says]

18. Yup. It's been kabuki theater to date

There is so little fair justice in the world. Makes me glum.

[Meowmee]

59. Yes it does

[Kablooie]

7. This explains why Garland has been dragging his feet investigating Trump.

He's a Republican and dances to their tune.
I think this is becoming clear. He's not neutral at all.

I'm convinced that Trump will never be held accountable to anything.

But Biden will.

[CrispyQ]

8. When someone shows you who they are... -nt

[Lovie777]

9. Smart move .........

[MissMillie]

10. It could work for us...

(No, I don't mean I want the House to investigate us... I just get the sentiment...)

[onecaliberal]

11. But, but, but, he is investigatinggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg.

[cilla4progress]

13. Haha...

Jack "Black...".

[brush]

19. Sorry, Jack Smith. Both names are so John Doe-ish.

[cilla4progress]

32. I know.

I like your idea, tho. Nickname? School of Rock?

🤣

[Freethinker65]

14. A study of contrasts: how documents came to be where they shouldn't have been and what happened next

I would welcome the comparison and find a way to prevent such occurrences, whether intentional or not, from occurring again.

[Lovie777]

16. shithole will be investigated as well .....

he don't like, 3...2....1....

shithole screams, it won't shut up the bad circus GQPs, but damn, it will again make them look like idiot that they are.

[iemanja]

15. What about Smith?

[brush]

20. Yeah, it's Smith not Black.

[Fiendish Thingy]

21. He's not a "former Trump lawyer", he's a Trump appointed US Attorney

Words have meaning.

[brush]

27. This is a discussion board of knowledgeable Dems. Most know that...

we're not talking trump personal lawyers like Giuliani.

[friend of a friend]

30. To me, the headline reads that they were Trump's lawyers.

[brush]

55. I said most here are knowledgeable of current developments and don't need every little thing...

explained. Perhaps I'm wrong.

[Fiendish Thingy]

46. Words matter- clarity in communication is essential in online discussions. Nt

[onenote]

43. Smith is not even that. He was appointed assistant US attorney by Eric Holder.

He held that position for two years before he automatically became "acting" US attorney when the US Attorney was asked to resign by Trump. He stayed in that position for six months, leaving the US Attorney's office as soon as Trump named a replacement US Attorney. Before he was named the assistant US attorney in 2015, he had served 5 years (all during the Obama administration) as Chief of the Public Integrity Section of DOJ's Criminal Division -- a position for which he was hired by Criminal Division Chief (and Obama appointee) Lenny Breuer with the approval of Eric Holder.

[Fiendish Thingy]

47. You're missing some information

From CBS news:

Hur served as the top federal prosecutor for Maryland from 2018 to 2021, having been appointed to the role by Trump and unanimously confirmed by the Senate.

Hur was appointed by Trump to be US attorney, and that’s what give Garland, and Biden, cover.

[onenote]

51. That's Hur, but not Smith.

The OP's claim is that both Smith and Hur are Trump appointees. Smith was not. Hur is the one that was named US Attorney for Maryland by Trump.

It was not clear from your post whether you were addressing Smith or Hur. To the extent I thought you were referring to Smith, I apologize and I've updated my post to clarify I'm discussing Smith.

But my point that Smith is not and never has been a "Trump" appointed lawyer stands. And the OP should correct his/her post.

[Fiendish Thingy]

52. I thought you were talking about Hur, not Smith

Guess I should’ve read slower.

[onenote]

54. We both misunderstood. No worries

[BlueCheeseAgain]

22. Hur was appointed by Trump to be a US Attorney, and was confirmed by voice vote.

He was not one of Trump's personal lawyers. There's a big difference there.

[alwaysinasnit]

23. It might also mean that Garland is so confident that this is a nothing-burger that having a

Trump appointed attorney actually find nothing, will negate any future complaints the Repukes can make. Just a thought.

[lamp_shade]

26. This....

[Volaris]

41. It also serves to insulate the findings from the new Insurrection is Legal Committee

Jordan can piss off lol.

[alwaysinasnit]

53. Yup, that would be an added bonus.

[Volaris]

56. I'm re-watching west wing. Biden might be smarter than we know lol...

[alwaysinasnit]

57. +1000

[Volaris]

64. Uh huh. And I can't find the clip, but 3 episodes later, CJ decides that the assigned prosecutor

just isn't gonna be hateful enough, and so tells Leo she needs a worse enemy:

''Leo, we need someone to investigate us who wants to kill us just to WATCH US DIE. We need someone the American People will perceive as partisan, irresponsible, untrustworthy ,ambitious, and thirsty for the limelight. Does this not sound like a job for the United States HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES?!'

That sounds like Kevin, Matt and Marge to me lol...

[alwaysinasnit]

67. ...

[tritsofme]

24. What a nonsense thread.

He is not “Trump’s lawyer”

I have seen no reason to believe that he will not handle the matter fair and expeditiously.

[brush]

25. Both were trump-appointed attorneys.

I didn't think that needed explaining considering the breaking news story of Garland's appointment.

[tritsofme]

28. He is a career Justice Department official.

Who cares?

[brush]

29. You're right. Things sure move fast though when it comes...

to making things happen against Democrats. Garland has delayed for months making a move against trump, but he's quick and on the ball against Biden.

[tritsofme]

31. Nothing happened "against Biden"

This is the quickest way to close the matter. That’s why I find this so called controversy so ridiculous.

[brush]

33. Nothing happened? Garland just appointed a special counsel...

to investigate the recently uncovered classified docs found in a former Biden office and lastly a garage. He took over a year to appoint Jack Smith to investigate the trump, stolen doc case but moves in a few days on the Biden case.

You call that nothing happening?

[tritsofme]

34. The appointment of a special counsel will prove to be exculpatory

It’s the fastest way to clear this fake controversy.

[brush]

35. Hope so. But the constrast between the speed on the Biden case...

against the apparent foot-dragging against trump is quite apparent.

The speed in appointing a special counsel against to Biden case makes appear Garland is equating it with the trump stolen docs case, which he recently and finally appointed a special counsel to also.

[tritsofme]

37. The "foot dragging" is only your flawed perception.

Trump’s many legal issues are complex, Biden’s issues can be cleared up rather quickly, and this is the fastest and most transparent way to do it.

[brush]

38. Ok. We see things differently. Over a year to appoint...

a special counsel to the trump case but a few says to appoint one to the Biden case.

Who has a flawed perception?

[Fiendish Thingy]

49. You're using a flawed metric

Garland appointed Smith two days after Trump declared his candidacy- if Trump hadn’t declared, Garland likely wouldn’t have named a special prosecutor, and proceeded with his regular DOJ investigation.

[onenote]

66. You are absolutely correct.

Not that it will make a difference to many DUers who can't seem to grasp certain facts.

[onenote]

45. Garland named a special counsel for Trump because Trump announced his candidacy

It took Garland less than a week to make that appointment. It was not because Trump was a former president, it was because he was a candidate for president.

Here is what Garland said when he appointed Smith: Based on recent developments, including the former President’s announcement that he is a candidate for President in the next election, and the sitting President’s stated intention to be a candidate as well, I have concluded that it is in the public interest to appoint a special counsel.

You've gotten more wrong in this thread (starting with Smith's name) than you've gotten right.

[onenote]

44. Smith is not a "Trump appointed" attorney. Stop repeating that falsehood.

See post #42.

[whistler162]

62. Yeah juist keep doing that

Republican thing you do so well!

[onenote]

42. Bullsh*t

Jack Smith was not a "Trump lawyer"

In 2010, Smith was hired as the Chief of the Public Integrity Section of DOJ's Criminal Division, a career position within the Senior Executive Service. While not a political appointment, at the time he was hired, the head of the criminal division was Obama appointee Lenny Breuer and the Attorney General was Obama appointee Eric Holder -- both of whom would have signed off on Smith's hiring. In that position he prosecuted Republican Governor Bob McDonnell of Virginia and Republican Congressman Rick Renzi.

In 2015 - again, during the Obama administration -- Holder named Smith to be assistant U.S. attorney in the Middle District of Tennessee. When the Obama appointed US Attorney for the Middle District of Tennessee was asked by Trump to resign in March 2017, Smith automatically became the "acting" US Attorney -- he wasn't appointed to the position by Trump and, when Trump finally named a new US Attorney for the Middle District of Tennessee in September 2017, Smith did not return to his previous position - he left the US Attorney's office entirely.

In short, the claim that Smith was a "Trump lawyer" is a lie. The spreading of misinformation on this site is becoming a real problem, and if you don't correct your post, you are part of that problem.

[brush]

61. Ok, my fault for believing another poster. You made your point.

Last edited Fri Jan 13, 2023, 05:51 PM - Edit history (1)

But my poing was the break neck speed at which the Biden doc SC was appointed and the glacial pace it took for an SC to be assigned to the trump stolen doc case.

Quite a huge difference. IMO trump should've been indicted — not necessarily convicted months ago — as charges would have to be proven.

[onenote]

63. There is no difference in the speed in which the two special counsels were appointed.

There was no cause for a Special Counsel to be appointed in the Trump investigation until Trump announced his candidacy for President. As soon as he did, Garland named Smith. The cause for a Special Counsel with regard to the Biden investigation arose because he currently is president.

Garland's statement upon naming Smith was quite clear:"Based on recent developments, including the former President’s announcement that he is a candidate for President in the next election, and the sitting President’s stated intention to be a candidate as well, I have concluded that it is in the public interest to appoint a special counsel."

[brush]

69. You're actuall right, there was no need for a SC in the...

trump case. He should've been indicted by the DOJ because of the glaring evidence (boxes of stolen docs at MAL) right in front of everyone's face. No special counsel needed to see that.

[Meowmee]

70. Have to agree

If he had done the job in a timely manner there would have been no need for sp according to his proposed reasons that he did it for. Also I think, maybe incorrectly, that the appointing of a special counsel suggests laws were broken and it is a criminal investigation.

[Just_Vote_Dem]

50. Only 1 low level judge he appointed appeared to give him a break

The rest have followed the law and struck down his nonsense when it appeared before them.

[48656c6c6f20]

68. As per DU edict, no comment.

He's a wonderful gent.
Brought to you by Carl's Jr.