- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
- Messages
- 80,442
- Reaction score
- 85,095
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
Yes. Just to hear him have to admit he's the biggest ***** since Merrick Garland or even Chuck Schumer.This will not go anywhere. There is no way Trump goes under oath voluntarily. I would love to hear Robert Mueller under oath, though.
Let's hope this happens. Amd they all get tossed in jailIt's all fun and games until Smith is named the AG under a Dem admin in 2029.
There can be no republic unless consequences for this sustained attack on our government is meted out.Let's hope this happens. Amd they all get tossed in jail
I agree.There can be no republic unless consequences for this sustained attack on our government is meted out.
Sometimes Trump speaks the truth"Mr. Smith followed well-established legal principles in conducting the investigations into President Trump, and the courts presiding over the resulting prosecutions have already rejected the spurious allegations that the manner in which Mr. Smith prosecuted these cases was somehow improper,” his attorneys Lanny Breuer and Peter Koski wrote.
The New York Times first reported the letter...addressed to Jamieson Greer, the head of the Office of the Special Counsel, an independent watchdog office that has no affiliation with the office Smith used to run. ...Greer’s office has launched an investigation into whether Smith improperly engaged in political activities through his prosecutions against Trump. The investigation was made public after Republican Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas claimed that “Smith used his DOJ role to influence the election” in favor of Biden’s and Vice President Kamala Harris’ 2024 presidential campaigns.
Smith’s attorneys this week said that the investigation is “premised on a partisan complaint that suggests the ordinary operation of the criminal justice system should be disrupted by the whims of a political contest.”
“But the notion that justice should yield to politics is antithetical to the rule of law,” it says.
The Office of Special Counsel declined to comment.
Link
Smith runs circles around them. Of course the GOP didn't want their candidate standing trial and possibly convicted for crimes, but it was in the public's best interest to know if the candidate is a convicted criminal felon.
What the GOP wanted is "antithetical to the rule of law." Imagine that.
Smith runs circles around them. Of course the GOP didn't want their candidate standing trial and possibly convicted for crimes, but it was in the public's best interest to know if the candidate is a convicted criminal felon.
What the GOP wanted is "antithetical to the rule of law." Imagine that.
Trying to shoehorn a trial for an arbitrary date on the calendar is what is "antithetical rule of law. "
The DOJ has rules against this.
That explains why Mr. Smith is presently under investigation.
Trying to shoehorn a trial for an arbitrary date on the calendar is what is "antithetical rule of law. "
The DOJ has rules against this.
That explains why Mr. Smith is presently under investigation.
Should voters not expect to know the outcome of criminal indictments of candidates ahead of election day?
That isn't the job of the DOJ.
Its not their job to follow through with criminal indictments?
Of course.
But if the objective is to line things up so the "public" knows <something> that would be antithetical to law.
A job of the DOJ is to protect the rights of all, including the accused.
Trying to shoehorn a trial for an arbitrary date on the calendar is what is "antithetical rule of law. "
The DOJ has rules against this.
That explains why Mr. Smith is presently under investigation.
Four years after the alleged crimes, there was still no trial. That was due to filthy delay tactics on the part of Trump and his corrupt defenders. Judge Aileen "Loose" Cannon even challenged 50 years of special council precedent in order to create artificial delays in Trump facing justice. And that was after she got embarrassed by the appeals court for her stupid "special master" ruling.Trying to shoehorn a trial for an arbitrary date on the calendar is what is "antithetical rule of law. "
The DOJ has rules against this.
That explains why Mr. Smith is presently under investigation.
Four years after the alleged crimes, there was still no trial. That was due to filthy delay tactics on the part of Trump and his corrupt defenders. Judge Aileen "Loose" Cannon even challenged 50 years of special council precedent in order to create artificial delays in Trump facing justice. And that was after she got embarrassed by the appeals court for her stupid "special master" ruling.
So don't act like Jack Smith tried to coordinate the trial date to coincide with the election. Trump should've been tried and convicted at least two years before that.
LolololololololololololololololTrying to shoehorn a trial for an arbitrary date on the calendar is what is "antithetical rule of law. "
The DOJ has rules against this.
That explains why Mr. Smith is presently under investigation.
If you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you.
Or ... and sit down for this... we didnt know because we never went to trial to find out.Mr. Trump is allowed to present a defense. Part of the problem is that, in DC at least, Smith had a very weak case and so it afforded a target rich environment for the defense.
"Rich" environment indeed. Trump had an endless treasure chest to pay for every possible legal recourse he could to delay delay until he won the election.Mr. Trump is allowed to present a defense. Part of the problem is that, in DC at least, Smith had a very weak case and so it afforded a target rich environment for the defense.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?