General Discussion

brush

(61,033 posts)

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

Reply to Fiendish Thingy (Reply #21)

Thu Jan 12, 2023, 03:44 PM

Jan 2023

we're not talking trump personal lawyers like Giuliani.

Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

71 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

This message was self-deleted by its author [View all] brush Jan 2023 OP

He could have appointed neutral judges. There are plenty. liberalmuse Jan 2023 #1

I know. This stinks to high heaven. ananda Jan 2023 #5

Stinks all the way to Hell!! BunkieBandit Jan 2023 #48

I saw a headline about Senator Gillibrand this morning Walleye Jan 2023 #2

That's kind of her signature move, LOL. Wingus Dingus Jan 2023 #3

Well, her and every other Democratic Senator EXCEPT Joe Manchin. brooklynite Jan 2023 #12

This surprises you. Polly Hennessey Jan 2023 #17

Exactly. That's what I flashed back on Walleye Jan 2023 #36

And willNEVER forgive her for it either. 🤬 a kennedy Jan 2023 #39

ME EITHER. i don't like her one little bit. Trueblue1968 Jan 2023 #40

If she weren't in the Senate, do you think Franken would have survived? News Junkie Jan 2023 #65

I don't know but #MeToo fucked us royally. SMC22307 Jan 2023 #71

Lol Meowmee Jan 2023 #58

We had a coup attempt in the US in January of 2021. Almost every Republican has jalan48 Jan 2023 #4

Appointments of Garland and Comey Meowmee Jan 2023 #60

I think this should dispel the myth that Garland isn't biased against Dems Marius25 Jan 2023 #6

Yup. It's been kabuki theater to date Dave says Jan 2023 #18

Yes it does Meowmee Jan 2023 #59

This explains why Garland has been dragging his feet investigating Trump. Kablooie Jan 2023 #7

When someone shows you who they are... -nt CrispyQ Jan 2023 #8

Smart move ......... Lovie777 Jan 2023 #9

It could work for us... MissMillie Jan 2023 #10

But, but, but, he is investigatinggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg. onecaliberal Jan 2023 #11

Haha... cilla4progress Jan 2023 #13

Sorry, Jack Smith. Both names are so John Doe-ish. brush Jan 2023 #19

I know. cilla4progress Jan 2023 #32

A study of contrasts: how documents came to be where they shouldn't have been and what happened next Freethinker65 Jan 2023 #14

shithole will be investigated as well ..... Lovie777 Jan 2023 #16

What about Smith? iemanja Jan 2023 #15

Yeah, it's Smith not Black. brush Jan 2023 #20

He's not a "former Trump lawyer", he's a Trump appointed US Attorney Fiendish Thingy Jan 2023 #21

This is a discussion board of knowledgeable Dems. Most know that... brush Jan 2023 #27

To me, the headline reads that they were Trump's lawyers. friend of a friend Jan 2023 #30

I said most here are knowledgeable of current developments and don't need every little thing... brush Jan 2023 #55

Words matter- clarity in communication is essential in online discussions. Nt Fiendish Thingy Jan 2023 #46

Smith is not even that. He was appointed assistant US attorney by Eric Holder. onenote Jan 2023 #43

You're missing some information Fiendish Thingy Jan 2023 #47

That's Hur, but not Smith. onenote Jan 2023 #51

I thought you were talking about Hur, not Smith Fiendish Thingy Jan 2023 #52

We both misunderstood. No worries onenote Jan 2023 #54

Hur was appointed by Trump to be a US Attorney, and was confirmed by voice vote. BlueCheeseAgain Jan 2023 #22

It might also mean that Garland is so confident that this is a nothing-burger that having a alwaysinasnit Jan 2023 #23

This.... lamp_shade Jan 2023 #26

It also serves to insulate the findings from the new Insurrection is Legal Committee Volaris Jan 2023 #41

Yup, that would be an added bonus. alwaysinasnit Jan 2023 #53

I'm re-watching west wing. Biden might be smarter than we know lol... Volaris Jan 2023 #56

+1000 alwaysinasnit Jan 2023 #57

Uh huh. And I can't find the clip, but 3 episodes later, CJ decides that the assigned prosecutor Volaris Jan 2023 #64

... alwaysinasnit Jan 2023 #67

What a nonsense thread. tritsofme Jan 2023 #24

Both were trump-appointed attorneys. brush Jan 2023 #25

He is a career Justice Department official. tritsofme Jan 2023 #28

You're right. Things sure move fast though when it comes... brush Jan 2023 #29

Nothing happened "against Biden" tritsofme Jan 2023 #31

Nothing happened? Garland just appointed a special counsel... brush Jan 2023 #33

The appointment of a special counsel will prove to be exculpatory tritsofme Jan 2023 #34

Hope so. But the constrast between the speed on the Biden case... brush Jan 2023 #35

The "foot dragging" is only your flawed perception. tritsofme Jan 2023 #37

Ok. We see things differently. Over a year to appoint... brush Jan 2023 #38

You're using a flawed metric Fiendish Thingy Jan 2023 #49

You are absolutely correct. onenote Jan 2023 #66

Garland named a special counsel for Trump because Trump announced his candidacy onenote Jan 2023 #45

Smith is not a "Trump appointed" attorney. Stop repeating that falsehood. onenote Jan 2023 #44

Yeah juist keep doing that whistler162 Jan 2023 #62

Bullsh*t onenote Jan 2023 #42

Ok, my fault for believing another poster. You made your point. brush Jan 2023 #61

There is no difference in the speed in which the two special counsels were appointed. onenote Jan 2023 #63

You're actuall right, there was no need for a SC in the... brush Jan 2023 #69

Have to agree Meowmee Jan 2023 #70

Only 1 low level judge he appointed appeared to give him a break Just_Vote_Dem Jan 2023 #50

As per DU edict, no comment. 48656c6c6f20 Jan 2023 #68