I guess Garland slowly building the case from the bottom up

[bigtree]

101. you haven't show here why that would have made any difference

...most of the evidence seized as early as 2021 was tied up in challenges and appeals for at least a year afterward, like Guiliani's phone.

It's not as if Garland's prosecutors were just sitting around waiting for Smith. There wasn't any need for him until Trump had declared.

It's just not valid to say that appointing an SC from the start would have solved anything about the time it took for evidence to become available, either in appeals courts, or in Garland's fight for the successful removal of attorney'client privileges from KEY witnesses in the indictment which took YEARS for the courts to resolve, fighting those court battles in severalsuccessive courts up to the SC, all fought by GARLAND's prosecutors well into Smith's term as SC.

The stuff about Smith doesn't measure up with the facts. There's nothing all that special about what an SC does, other in the different requirements they have in reporting to Congress. Smith inherited a 'fast moving case' with over 20 prosecutors working on the investigation.


https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/11/politics/jack-smith-special-counsel-high-profile-moves-trump-criminal-investigations/index.html