General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: What Jack Smith isn't telling us [View all]H2O Man
(79,279 posts)convicted Libby on several felony charges, and recommended that Congress investigate Cheney's role. Mr. Mueller convicted numerous people, and listed potential post-presidency charges of obstruction for the defendent. With Barr as AG, he was not able to indict the defendent. However, had Congress been true to their oath of office, the House would have impeached, and the Senate convicted. Neith of these are close to the same.
I can only speak for myself, of course, but I have not compared Mr. Smith to a cartoon character, nor have I seen anyone else on DU or elsewhere doing so. As one of the very few community members who was familiar with him when he was appointed, I have said that he is intelligent, honest, and loyal to the rule of law. Thus, I said that he would indict the defendent, and was but two week's off in my prediction on when that would happen.
There are, as you note, unethical people in DC, including in the House, Senate, and even the Supreme Court. I will respectfully disagree with your calling them an "asshole," as I believe that is giving too much substance to the. Rather, I think they are what passes through the spincter on a daily basis. But that is, of course, merely my opinion.
From the onset of Mr. Smith taking the case, I said I thought it unlikely he would be incarcerated, even if indicted, tried, and convicted. I respect the opinions of several former federal prosecutors who think he might be. I do not in any sense whatsoever take seriously the people who think he might get the death penalty. They are the polar opposite of the equally non-serious Eeyores among us.