Latest Breaking News

Bernardo de La Paz

(60,320 posts)

90. Two weeks after tRump conflict of interest appeared, SC appointed. Also 2 weeks after Biden.

Fri Jan 13, 2023, 08:05 AM

Jan 2023

SC is about conflict of interest. Separation of the executive branch from investigation and charging and prosecution.

SC is not about investigating or charging. That has been happening all along.

If tRump had never announced, there might still be no SC because none would be needed. (Probably. DoJ might still have appointed one just to be sure.)

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

98 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

AG Garland names Robert Hur as special counsel in Biden classified documents matter [View all] BumRushDaShow Jan 2023 OP

Garland is getting quicker, gab13by13 Jan 2023 #1

That's because Biden is fully cooperating with the DOJ, while Trump... AllTooEasy Jan 2023 #54

Broadcast networks all reporting live at the press conference Walleye Jan 2023 #2

Yeah, the coverage is a tad excessive today PatSeg Jan 2023 #44

Garland just did what Trump tried to bribe Zelenskyy to do Walleye Jan 2023 #53

Oh, I think the point PatSeg Jan 2023 #55

Actually, I am over reacting, this is probably the best move Walleye Jan 2023 #56

A lot of people are overreacting right now PatSeg Jan 2023 #57

I just had a bad memory of Ken Starr Walleye Jan 2023 #58

Oh, that's not good PatSeg Jan 2023 #59

Yes... keroro gunsou Jan 2023 #67

No comment. 50 Shades Of Blue Jan 2023 #3

Gee, two years to appoint a special counsel for trump, and two weeks for President Biden. JohnSJ Jan 2023 #4

It's ridiculous. Bluethroughu Jan 2023 #8

Yes it is. JohnSJ Jan 2023 #13

No criminal intent as far as we know... FarPoint Jan 2023 #84

The orange menace was recorded directing his armed rally Bluethroughu Jan 2023 #87

False and not in any way equivalent Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2023 #22

Yes it was. AG Garland knew trump stole classified documents back in January 2021 JohnSJ Jan 2023 #51

Can you direct us to a report on that point? My recollection is the issue began to surface Feb 2022. Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2023 #76

Here............. JohnSJ Jan 2023 #78

Thanks. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2023 #85

I admit Bernardo I took some liberty with the timeline. I guess what frustrates me with this JohnSJ Jan 2023 #86

My best guess is that the crimes are numerous, encrypted, and convoluted that it took Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2023 #89

He was appointed in March 2021. Igel Jan 2023 #80

The National archives knew about it in May of 2021 JohnSJ Jan 2023 #83

Two weeks after tRump conflict of interest appeared, SC appointed. Also 2 weeks after Biden. Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2023 #90

I agree with most everything you said, except I believe the SC mandate is to discover evidence JohnSJ Jan 2023 #94

No. Mandate is to investigate. In Biden's case it will clear him. POSSIBLE, not suspected. nt Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2023 #95

A Special Counsel is appointed to investigate suspected cases of wrongdoing, because JohnSJ Jan 2023 #96

I'm pretty sure it was within days of the turd announcing for 2024. HardPort Jan 2023 #40

Curious, isn't it? Jamastiene Jan 2023 #61

On this point, Igel Jan 2023 #81

I hope this is secretly to call out how different the cases are. forgotmylogin Jan 2023 #71

Federal grand jury next week, indictments PCIntern Jan 2023 #5

Maybe Biden ducks line up quicker. gab13by13 Jan 2023 #19

Yawn, what a load of bollocks. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2023 #23

Another Trump appointee I bet? gab13by13 Jan 2023 #6

Yup SheltieLover Jan 2023 #37

Couldn't Garland have found someone not chosen by Trump? We saw how Trump partisans Lonestarblue Jan 2023 #62

That was my 1st thought! SheltieLover Jan 2023 #64

No, this was wise. Igel Jan 2023 #82

We can be assured that the Maralago docs case is dead in the water. Sneederbunk Jan 2023 #7

Why? It shouldn't be. LymphocyteLover Jan 2023 #16

Because the DOJ will use Biden case as an excuse not to prosecute TFG. Sneederbunk Jan 2023 #18

bull RussBLib Jan 2023 #21

Bullshit. . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2023 #24

They can't prosecute Biden because they could never prove intent William Seger Jan 2023 #29

The RW media will trial Biden and find him guilty. That's all that's needed. Facts do not matter. hadEnuf Jan 2023 #50

Very possible. old guy Jan 2023 #25

f'in garland.... getagrip_already Jan 2023 #9

+1 happy feet Jan 2023 #52

+2! Wuddles440 Jan 2023 #72

Hopefully to put it in perspective. Open/Docs Returned/Closed. TigressDem Jan 2023 #10

I'm really hoping that's what Garland has in mind (nt) William Seger Jan 2023 #34

Smith and Hur were both Trump appointees. gab13by13 Jan 2023 #11

Garland needs to be gone. He sucks as AG. liberalmuse Jan 2023 #12

He's known to be a Republican, and yes, he is a huge disappointment LymphocyteLover Jan 2023 #15

I don't believe there are anymore trustworthy Republicans left. liberalmuse Jan 2023 #20

Geez, a snake in the grass... deliberately slowing things up for Reeps... ananda Jan 2023 #27

Is Biden stupid? sarisataka Jan 2023 #41

Was Poppy Bush stupid for appointing David Souter to the Supreme Court? Polybius Jan 2023 #43

Correct me if I'm wrong sarisataka Jan 2023 #45

Garland is showing his teeth FredGarvin Jan 2023 #14

I usually don't watch msnbc until 4 PM, gab13by13 Jan 2023 #17

Righties avoiding point by point comparison make Biden's case sound the same. RoeVWade Jan 2023 #26

Makes no difference FredGarvin Jan 2023 #30

Corporate media is fed the same facts as everyone else. They CHOOSE to spit out distortion. ancianita Jan 2023 #60

This message was self-deleted by its author chowder66 Jan 2023 #28

So far Bidens properties are still under investigation FredGarvin Jan 2023 #33

thanks. chowder66 Jan 2023 #35

You can bet someone in the House is already drawing up impeachment papers. -nt CrispyQ Jan 2023 #31

Garland laid out a timeline that explains WHY WASN'T THE PUBLIC INFORMED? underpants Jan 2023 #32

What a jackass! Mr. Sparkle Jan 2023 #36

Why a Rosenstein attorney? SheltieLover Jan 2023 #38

May be a naive take, but... AngryOldDem Jan 2023 #39

Biden made two bad, imho, cabinet appointments Deminpenn Jan 2023 #42

I absolutely agree Doug Jones would have been better. Much better. Novara Jan 2023 #47

This gives Garland cover for not prosecuting the orange shitstain Novara Jan 2023 #46

Nonsense. Smith is independent. If he charges tRump, Garland will not veto it. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2023 #92

No reason why this shouldn't conclude quickly... EarthFirst Jan 2023 #48

The best response here: don't give it oxygen... CapnSteve Jan 2023 #49

Loathsome cowardice on Garland's part. Xoan Jan 2023 #63

Nonsense. 2 weeks after tRump conflict of interest (announce) SC appointed. 2 weeks after Biden Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2023 #93

He sure moved fast on this one. Jamastiene Jan 2023 #65

Merrick Garland's idea of fairness... dchill Jan 2023 #66

Merrick "Speedy" Garland in action. (nt) Paladin Jan 2023 #68

Under Sec. 600.6 the SC has independent authority to investigate and prosecute. Those in2herbs Jan 2023 #69

I'm tired of this crap. slightlv Jan 2023 #70

I haven't quite reached... Wuddles440 Jan 2023 #74

I get where you are coming from. Karma13612 Jan 2023 #88

I know that feeling. Jamastiene Jan 2023 #97

I doubt either Trump nor Biden is in serious trouble over this Algernon Moncrieff Jan 2023 #73

Garland trying to be righteous. hamsterjill Jan 2023 #75

Question republianmushroom Jan 2023 #77

Does this square with DU tin foilers who still think Garland is going after Trump? Emile Jan 2023 #79

No tin foil. Appointment of SC is a FACT. :eyes: Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2023 #91

It COULD be interpreted as a Trump indictment being more likely News Junkie Jan 2023 #98