A Special Counsel Will Decide Whether To Charge Trump With Crimes

[Blkfyre]

https://apple.news/AeSwf42HgRligRh4iLDjFKA

"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," he added.

[HighStepper]

Attorney general Merrick Garland has started his press conference by announcing a special counsel will be appointed to handle two inquiries.

The first is "the investigation into whether any person or entity unlawfully interfered with the transfer of power following the 2020 presidential election, or the certification of the Electoral College vote held on or about January 6 2021."

The second is "the ongoing investigation involving classified documents and other presidential records, as well as the possible obstruction of that investigation, referenced and described in court filings... in the Southern District of Florida." That is likely the inquiry into government secrets found at Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort. Link

Think about it: There is no need to appoint a special counsel if there was no there, there. It sounds like they have a good body of evidence against Trump.

[CigarMan]

And like so many of these in the recent past, not a damn thing will be learned or done.  A waste of resources.

[HighStepper]

Friday, November 18, 2022

You cannot view this attachment.

Statement of Special Counsel Jack Smith
Following his appointment by Attorney General Merrick B. Garland today, Special Counsel Jack Smith made the following statement:

"I intend to conduct the assigned investigations, and any prosecutions that may result from them, independently and in the best traditions of the Department of Justice. The pace of the investigations will not pause or flag under my watch. I will exercise independent judgment and will move the investigations forward expeditiously and thoroughly to whatever outcome the facts and the law dictate." Link

[bats]

And like so many of these in the recent past, not a damn thing will be learned or done.  A waste of resources.

First, it's not exactly true that nothing has been learned or done in the recent past. With Mueller, for example, we learned a lot about the criminality in the 2016 Trump campaign and about the criminality of Trump himself. The investigation led to several felony convictions of Trump staffers, and Trump would have been prosecuted if not for a corrupt AG and an obviously flawed DOJ policy against indicting sitting presidents.

Beyond that, in the case of the stolen documents, the prosecution should be relatively straightforward. It boils down to whether there was a theft of government property by Trump. (Spoiler alert: there was.)

[dogwalker]

I kind of agree with CigarMan.   All this stuff drags on forever and results in little at a lot of expense on both sides.  It can help or hurt the politicians but meanwhile what are they doing for the people that vote for them?  I saw on the news that, among Republican VOTERS, going after Biden was ranked as the 17th most important topic yet seems to be the #1 priority among House Republicans....  Democrats go after Trump with not a lot of results so far.

[Hobby]

This tells me they wont charge Trump...they already have enough to go before grand jury for indictment.  I say put him on trial and let a jury decide. This special prosecutor nonsense with Trump is a waste of money..

[Danno]

Bet AG Barr would do it differently if he had to do again.

First, it's not exactly true that nothing has been learned or done in the recent past. With Mueller, for example, we learned a lot about the criminality in the 2016 Trump campaign and about the criminality of Trump himself. The investigation led to several felony convictions of Trump staffers, and Trump would have been prosecuted if not for a corrupt AG and an obviously flawed DOJ policy against indicting sitting presidents.

Beyond that, in the case of the stolen documents, the prosecution should be relatively straightforward. It boils down to whether there was a theft of government property by Trump. (Spoiler alert: there was.)

[HighStepper]

Mueller's investigation acquired somewhere between $26 million and $42 million worth of revenue for the federal treasury.

[Bande]

4th special counsel investigations yet Trump is still unchained.
Waste of OUR MONEY..

[HighStepper]

4th special counsel investigations yet Trump is still unchained.
Waste of OUR MONEY..

Where did you come up with 4? Can you list them?

[lifes_good]

I doubt Trump will be charged. The democrats see him as easier to beat than the alternatives in the 2024 presidential election. That's a little scary, because it could lead to a repeat of 2016, when the democrats thought they could easily win against trump. We could end up with the extreme wannabe authoritarian back in office. It would be nice if we could have an election with more moderate candidates from both sides.

[bats]

I doubt Trump will be charged. The democrats see him as easier to beat than the alternatives in the 2024 presidential election. That's a little scary, because it could lead to a repeat of 2016, when the democrats thought they could easily win against trump. We could end up with the extreme wannabe authoritarian back in office. It would be nice if we could have an election with more moderate candidates from both sides.

I'm not so cynical that I see the charging decision influenced as much by politics as this. That would be truly corrupt. In fact, I think the appointment of the special counsel is an indicator that the case against Trump is so strong that Garland believes charges could be forthcoming.