DOJ announces special counsel for Trump-related Mar-a-Lago and January 6 criminal investigations

[Scott]

Attorney General Merrick Garland on Friday appointed a special counsel to oversee the criminal investigations into the retention of national defense information at former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago report and parts of the January 6, 2021, insurrection.

Both investigations implicate the conduct of Trump, who on Tuesday declared his candidacy in the 2024 presidential race, making him a potential rival of President Joe Biden.

“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,” Garland said at the Justice Department on Friday.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/18/politics/justice-department-trump-special-counsel/index.html

 

[Scott]

Who is Jack Smith, the special counsel named in the Trump investigations

Jack Smith, the special counsel announced by Attorney General Merrick Garland on Friday to oversee the criminal investigations into the retention of classified documents at former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort and parts of the January 6, 2021, insurrection, has been a longtime Justice Department prosecutor.

In 2018, he became chief prosecutor for the special court in The Hague, where he investigated war crimes in Kosovo.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/18/politics/jack-smith-special-counsel/index.html

 

[bendejo]

. . . tick . . . tick . . . tick . . .

Counting down to when he receives his first personal insult from you-know-who.

 

 

[animalmagic]

Well, 45 can't claim its politically motivated. His track record, and results of mid term election candidates that he supported, would suggest that the Democrats would be guaranteed to win if he ran.

[ozimoron]

1 hour ago, animalmagic said:

Well, 45 can't claim its politically motivated. His track record, and results of mid term election candidates that he supported, would suggest that the Democrats would be guaranteed to win if he ran.

I think the main reason is that it obviates the possibility that another AG Barr will arrive on the scene in 2024 and kill any ongoing prosecutions. As far as I am aware, a special counsel can't be stopped.

[ozimoron]

Trump spits his dummy out of the pram. This move has to signal an increased likelihood of a prosecution.

 

“I have been proven innocent for six years on everything — from fake impeachments to Mueller, who found no collusion, and now I have to do it more? It is not acceptable. It is so unfair. It is so political,” Trump told Fox, adding “I am not going to partake in it.”

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

That’s not a light at the end of the tunnel Donny.

 

 

[RichardColeman]

Considering 51 FBI agents said that Hunter 'laptop was Russian disinformation and got social media to ban all posts about it,  I have absolutely no faith in any prosecution against Trump (or anyone non Dem) or the politicised US justice system.

 

If there was equality, Hunter would be being prosecuted now.

 

I cannot see how anyone can say it is NOT politically motivated when seeing absolutely no prosecution on Hunter, the US border fiasco and for the BLM riots. Name one current Democrat scandal being prosecuted ? 

 

I'm not pro Trump, but sheesh, the one sidedness here so obvious

[ozimoron]

Just now, RichardColeman said:

Considering 51 FBI agents said that Hunter 'laptop was Russian disinformation and got social media to ban all posts about it,  I have absolutely no faith in any prosecution against Trump (or anyone non Dem) or the politicised US justice system.

 

If there was equality, Hunter would be being prosecuted now.

 

I cannot see how anyone can say it is NOT politically motivated when seeing absolutely no prosecution on Hunter, the US border fiasco and for the BLM riots. Name one current Democrat scandal being prosecuted ? 

 

I'm not pro Trump, but sheesh, the one sidedness here so obvious

While I don't disagree that an SC should be appointed for Biden Jr. there is no equality here. Hunter Biden is not standing for president which is the single reason the SC was appointed. The suggestion that the DoJ should appoint a SC every time there is a politically sensitive case is ridiculous. Some people do have integrity. Obama chose Garland to be an SC nominee precisely because he should have had bipartisan support but the Federalist Society didn't want an even handed justice. They got their way.

[Chomper Higgot]

26 minutes ago, RichardColeman said:

Considering 51 FBI agents said that Hunter 'laptop was Russian disinformation and got social media to ban all posts about it,  I have absolutely no faith in any prosecution against Trump (or anyone non Dem) or the politicised US justice system.

 

If there was equality, Hunter would be being prosecuted now.

 

I cannot see how anyone can say it is NOT politically motivated when seeing absolutely no prosecution on Hunter, the US border fiasco and for the BLM riots. Name one current Democrat scandal being prosecuted ? 

 

I'm not pro Trump, but sheesh, the one sidedness here so obvious

Did it occur to you the ‘Hunter Biden’ laptop might have indeed been Russian misinformation?

 

US Border Fiasco - Is that the bilking MAGA for donations to build a wall and then pocketing g the money? 
 

BLM Riots - Democrats are guilty how?

 

Now try this:

A lawfully executed search of Trump’s property, conducted under a lawfully issued search warrant has recovered TS/SCI documents and evidence that some TS/SCI documents that were in Trump’s possession are no longer accounted for. 
 

The warrant was lawfully issued with specific reference to Federal espionage Acts and the DOJ has recently appointed a prosecutor with specialization in espionage to the case.

 

You can shout Hunter Biden, BLM, Southern Border as loud as you like, it’s all a distraction from the most important question:

 

What threat has Trump caused to US National security, to the security of every man woman and child in the US?

 

Everything other investigation Trump is under pales into insignificance compared to this particular case.

 

 

 

 

[ThailandRyan]

2 hours ago, animalmagic said:

Well, 45 can't claim its politically motivated. His track record, and results of mid term election candidates that he supported, would suggest that the Democrats would be guaranteed to win if he ran.

Yet he did just that....he protested being investigated by a special council. He claims it is all politically motivated and all the stuff found at Mara Lago were his personal items and his Declassified papers....

[Tropposurfer]

Smith is a total legal shark! he will eat anybody who has broken the Law in quick successive bites.

 

Garland is a (Shaolin) Master of the Law and saw Trump coming a long long way off and knew exactly what he had to do to serve Justice and the letter of the Law.

This appointment removes any further credibility to the BS by Trump and his jackals about it being a political witch-hunt and places the investigation and what will most certainly now be actual prosecution of Trump and those around him in the scope of our near future. 

 

Smiths powers are broad, all encompassing, un-tamperable (he's an Independent Prosecutor) or un-sabotage-able. His position is different to by not unlike the Powers of A Royal Commissioner as are formed in Westminster Law countries. A completely independent office of staff who once appointed sits apart from and immune to any line of political Party-line interference of influence. 

 

I just watched some folks on Midas Touch UTube Independent news with a guy named Ben who is an experienced lawyer.

He interviewed a lawyer-lass who worked in the same office, directly and closely with this Special Prosecutor Smith for a decade and she said nothing but good things about him and that he will move very quickly if there is sufficient evidence of crimes and conviction. She also said he would not have been appointed if Garland did not have clear grounds for future prosecution of Trump and his treasonous band.

She outlined how Smith has has a stellar prosecution career, was and is a super-star prosecutor i.e. he gets convictions because he is so vice-tight on the evidence and how he presents that evidence in his cases.

[FritsSikkink]

1 hour ago, RichardColeman said:

Considering 51 FBI agents said that Hunter 'laptop was Russian disinformation and got social media to ban all posts about it,  I have absolutely no faith in any prosecution against Trump (or anyone non Dem) or the politicised US justice system.

 

If there was equality, Hunter would be being prosecuted now.

 

I cannot see how anyone can say it is NOT politically motivated when seeing absolutely no prosecution on Hunter, the US border fiasco and for the BLM riots. Name one current Democrat scandal being prosecuted ? 

 

I'm not pro Trump, but sheesh, the one sidedness here so obvious

What has Hunter Biden to do with the criminal actions of Donald Trump? Stay on topic.

[herfiehandbag]

13 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

What has Hunter Biden to do with the criminal actions of Donald Trump? Stay on topic.

In other news, Marjorie Taylor Greene announced that she will be overseeing the impeachment of Nancy Pelosi's gardener...

[RichardColeman]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Did it occur to you the ‘Hunter Biden’ laptop might have indeed been Russian misinformation?

 

US Border Fiasco - Is that the bilking MAGA for donations to build a wall and then pocketing g the money? 
 

BLM Riots - Democrats are guilty how?

1.  It turned out NOT to be.

 

2. The border is wide open under Biden, 3-4 million migrants walking in. If someone stole money , prosecute them , republican or not

 

3. Lots of Dems are on film telling them to go out and riot ! Billions in damages, lots of deaths and no prosecution at all. Whys that ?

[RichardColeman]

14 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

What has Hunter Biden to do with the criminal actions of Donald Trump? Stay on topic.

Duh, because its a democrat witch hunt - Dems who wont investigate their own - thus speaking volumes about the Dems sole witch hunt of Trump.

 

As said , if Trump is guilty of anything throw the book at him, but when you do it one sidedly then it just stinks. 

[Srikcir]

2 hours ago, ozimoron said:

As far as I am aware, a special counsel can't be stopped.

No, but the threshold for removal of special counsel by DOJ Attorney General (POTUS has no authority to appont nor remove Special Counsel).

 

Case in point was DOJ Barr's appointment of Durham regarding the conduct of the FBI probe in its Russian investigation. Even after Biden became POTUS, Durham was able to continue prosecution of two FBI agents for alledge wrongdoing (both no conviction).

• "Under the regulations, a special counsel can be fired only by the attorney General and for specific reasons such as misconduct, dereliction of duty or conflict of interest. An attorney general must document such reasons in writing."                                              December 2, 2020    https://apnews.com/article/

Even if fired I imagine the special counsel (particularly when another AG is appointed by a different political party with intent to remove the special counsel) can sue the AG for alleged improper discharge. 

[placeholder]

Trump explodes at special counsel appointment: ‘I am not going to partake in it’

“They found nothing, and now they take some guy who hates Trump. This is a disgrace and only happening because I am leading in every poll in both parties.”

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/3742413-trump-explodes-at-special-counsel-appointment-i-am-not-going-to-partake-in-it/

 

Does Trump believe if the Special Counsel gets a grand jury to indict him. he has the right to refuse to attend?

Or that if found guilty he can refuse to partake in the sentencing?

Does Trump have any clue at all about how the legal system works? Well, to be fair, he does understand how to go about filing frivolous lawsuits.

Also, he manage to lie at least 2 times during his interview.

[ozimoron]

Trump still trying to incite a violent political uprising:

 

Dressed in black-tie, the former president attacked his critics and complained about being the victim and labeled special counsel Jack Smith as "super-radical left" without any evidence to back up his claim.

 

"This is a rigged deal just as the 2020 election was rigged," Trump said, repeating his election lies, "and we can't let them get away with it, we can't do it, we can't let this happen to our country."

 

"Joe Biden is a corrupt and incompetent political hack," Trump said, as he pivoted to talking about Hunter Biden.

 

https://www.rawstory.com/special-counsel-trump/

 

[FritsSikkink]

1 hour ago, RichardColeman said:

Duh, because its a democrat witch hunt

Yes, you could call him a witch.

[KanchanaburiGuy]

If we start with the basic principle Two-Wrongs-Don't-Make-A-Right......... I wonder what the point of bringing up Hunter Biden is......... in a discussion about Donald Trump? 

 

Are you suggesting that because they haven't pursued Hunter Biden sufficiently.......... they therefore also shouldn't pursue Donald Trump?

 

But that's classic Two-Wrongs-DO- Make-A-Right thinking: "If you're not going to pursue THAT accused criminal......... then you shouldn't pursue THIS accused criminal!:"

 

Or.......

 

Are you saying that if they DO go after Hunter Biden the way you think they should........... then it's also perfectly okay to go after Donald Trump, too, with, as they say, "Both guns blazing?"

 

Because as far as I can see, the only way it makes sense to connect these two situations is to either say........ "It's okay to go after Trump, as long as you go after Biden too."......... or.......... "You shouldn't go after Trump, if you're not also going to pursue Biden!" (Which then becomes, Two-Wrongs-DO-Make-A-Right! Lol)

 

---------------

 

Honestly, trying to connect the two seems very bizarre, to me. They are extremely different situations with extraordinarily different ramifications!

 

 

[ozimoron]

35 minutes ago, KanchanaburiGuy said:

If we start with the basic principle Two-Wrongs-Don't-Make-A-Right......... I wonder what the point of bringing up Hunter Biden is......... in a discussion about Donald Trump? 

 

Are you suggesting that because they haven't pursued Hunter Biden sufficiently.......... they therefore also shouldn't pursue Donald Trump?

 

But that's classic Two-Wrongs-DO- Make-A-Right thinking: "If you're not going to pursue THAT accused criminal......... then you shouldn't pursue THIS accused criminal!:"

 

Or.......

 

Are you saying that if they DO go after Hunter Biden the way you think they should........... then it's also perfectly okay to go after Donald Trump, too, with, as they say, "Both guns blazing?"

 

Because as far as I can see, the only way it makes sense to connect these two situations is to either say........ "It's okay to go after Trump, as long as you go after Biden too."......... or.......... "You shouldn't go after Trump, if you're not also going to pursue Biden!" (Which then becomes, Two-Wrongs-DO-Make-A-Right! Lol)

 

---------------

 

Honestly, trying to connect the two seems very bizarre, to me. They are extremely different situations with extraordinarily different ramifications!

 

 

The slight difference is that the DoJ had incontrovertible evidence on Trump BEFORE investigating him. In the form of a riot in which people were killed and a complaint from National Archives. The FBI is apparently investigating or has investigated Hunter Biden so we should let the course of justice wend its way up to the bench in both cases. Getting out the political pitchforks wastes everyone's time and is clearly partisan.

[placeholder]

6 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

The slight difference is that the DoJ had incontrovertible evidence on Trump BEFORE investigating him. In the form of a riot in which people were killed and a complaint from National Archives. The FBI is apparently investigating or has investigated Hunter Biden so we should let the course of justice wend its way up to the bench in both cases. Getting out the political pitchforks wastes everyone's time and is clearly partisan.

I think the strongest case against Trump is the illegal possession of documents. That seems very cut-and-dried. Also obstruction of justice charges in denying possession of many documents.  There's not much if any room for semantics in this case.

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

I think the strongest case against Trump is the illegal possession of documents. That seems very cut-and-dried. Also obstruction of justice charges in denying possession of many documents.  There's not much if any room for semantics in this case.

The charges won't come together. I think the documents and the Georgia charges will come soonish but the obstruction charges will be close to the 2004 election. I think that was uppermost in Garland's mind.

[Bluespunk]

5 hours ago, RichardColeman said:

Considering 51 FBI agents said that Hunter 'laptop was Russian disinformation and got social media to ban all posts about it

The fbi banned posts on the “laptop “ conspiracy? 
 

Wow.

 

i thought they warned facilebook book et al that the story may be fake. 
 

Didn’t realise they specifically banned posting on it. 

[ozimoron]

3 hours ago, RichardColeman said:

1.  It turned out NOT to be.

 

2. The border is wide open under Biden, 3-4 million migrants walking in. If someone stole money , prosecute them , republican or not

 

3. Lots of Dems are on film telling them to go out and riot ! Billions in damages, lots of deaths and no prosecution at all. Whys that ?

What a lot of tripe. I suppose you believe the dems are baby smugglers?

[ozimoron]

Smith, 53, seems unlikely to face the kinds of criticism Mueller did about his best years being behind him and allegedly allowing his deputies to play outsized roles in decision-making. And his low profile may make him a harder target for Trump’s allies to undermine. He also has a long history of bringing corruption cases to trial and conviction, a credential that may have made him an attractive choice for Garland — and an ominous one for Trump.

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/11/18/trump-special-counsel-investigation-mueller-00069578

[Dave0206]

4 hours ago, RichardColeman said:

1.  It turned out NOT to be.

 

2. The border is wide open under Biden, 3-4 million migrants walking in. If someone stole money , prosecute them , republican or not

 

3. Lots of Dems are on film telling them to go out and riot ! Billions in damages, lots of deaths and no prosecution at all. Whys that ?

Please share this film so we can all be enlightened. Is it a dem of note ? Or is it a news max special ???? if you show me a member of the senate telling these immigrants to go cause trouble I will make an apology to you on here otherwise at moment easy to say any s*it.

I assume you would not be willing to have mtg or Lauren boebert as spoke person for Republican party?

[bendejo]

If they actually do catch witches then what do you call it?

If the GOP really wanted to get rid of him they could, but as long as they play down the insurrection they are still fiddling DT's stick, the cowards.

 

 

[heybruce]

6 hours ago, RichardColeman said:

1.  It turned out NOT to be.

 

2. The border is wide open under Biden, 3-4 million migrants walking in. If someone stole money , prosecute them , republican or not

 

3. Lots of Dems are on film telling them to go out and riot ! Billions in damages, lots of deaths and no prosecution at all. Whys that ?

1.  Exactly what has been proven about the contents of that laptop?  Give credible sources, please.

 

2.  The border is a problem but not a crisis.  If it were a true crisis there would be aggressive prosecution of the people who hire these illegal immigrants.  I haven't seen any sign of that, or any push for that from Republicans.  Have you noticed how DeSantis has gone quiet on illegal immigration now that Florida needs those illegals for hurricane cleanup and rebuilding?

 

3.  Provide links to those films you claim exist.