Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Let me eat cake. The rest of you could stand to lose some weight, frankly.

Accused of treason; bitches about the ratings. I am in awe.

We are aware of all internet traditions.

Cole is on a roll !

My years-long effort to drive family and friends away has really paid off this year.

Prediction: the GOP will rethink its strategy of boycotting future committees.

This year has been the longest three days of putin’s life.

You are so fucked. Still, I wish you the best of luck.

We cannot abandon the truth and remain a free nation.

A democracy can’t function when people can’t distinguish facts from lies.

T R E 4 5 O N

“Jesus paying for the sins of everyone is an insult to those who paid for their own sins.”

There is no compromise when it comes to body autonomy. You either have it or you don’t.

I did not have this on my fuck 2022 bingo card.

Wow, you are pre-disappointed. How surprising.

I’d hate to be the candidate who lost to this guy.

Why is it so hard for them to condemn hate?

Conservatism: there are some people the law protects but does not bind and others who the law binds but does not protect.

“Squeaker” McCarthy

Ah, the different things are different argument.

Sitting here in limbo waiting for the dice to roll

If you’re pissed about Biden’s speech, he was talking about you.

Republicans in disarray!

Just because you believe it, that doesn’t make it true.

You are here: Home / Open Threads / So Special (Open Thread)

So Special (Open Thread)

by | 211 Comments

This post is in: 

Not quite sure what to make of this upcoming announcement from the DOJ:

[WaPo]  Attorney General Merrick Garland has named a special counsel to oversee the criminal investigation into former president Donald Trump’s possible mishandling of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago club and residence, as well as key aspects of the Jan. 6 investigation, according to a senior Justice Department official.

The decision is expected to be announced Friday afternoon, and comes just days after Trump formally declared himself a 2024 candidate for president.

Well before Trump’s announcement, according to people familiar with the matter, Justice Department officials discussed the possibility of appointing a special counsel to take over investigations involving Trump — such as the Mar-a-Lago case or the attempts to prevent Joe Biden from ascending to the presidency after the 2020 election — if Trump formally declared himself a candidate, people familiar with the matter have said.

It doesn’t say who has been named special counsel. Is there are rule that the special counsel has to be a Republican, similar to the mandatory GOP party affiliation for FBI directors? I hear John Durham is available!

Open thread.

PS: Sorry about the paragraph spacing in the WaPo quote. I can’t fix it because fuck WordPress, that’s why.

Reader Interactions

211Comments

  2. 2.

    A Ghost to Most

    Well, the Eeyores on Raw story are clambering that Garland is no-good, lazy coward who won’t ever do a fucking thing, so I’d say about normal.

  5. 5.

    Mike S

    Special Councils are where investigations go to die. Trump will just delay everything again and his cuckus will muddy the waters the whole time.

  6. 6.

    FastEdD

    Ugh, we saw that one coming. Let’s just continue to investigate for a couple years, right up to the 2024 election cycle, and then we can’t do anything “because it is too close to an election.” Sorry I am so cynical but I am losing hope that these fascists will ever be held accountable. Ever.

  10. 10.

    $8 blue check mistermix

    I try to keep an open mind on Garland by reading Marcy Wheeler (emptywheel) but god damn why does an open and shut case like the Mar a Lago documents drag on and on?  He’s been caught about as red handed as someone can be.  But now we need months of delay while the special counsel office gears up.

  13. 13.

    Anoniminous

    Brought forward from previous thread:

    Word on the Tech Grapevine is Twitter’s entire payroll department has quit.

    Also in the business press.

    “Along with the payroll department resignations, Twitter’s US tax team and its financial reporting team also resigned, two people familiar with the matter said, matching multiple internal messages seen by Insider. “

  14. 14.

    Scout211

    I heard that Alan Dershowitz has free time now that he spends less time in Martha’s Vineyard. Some people say he’s an expert in constitutional law but I think that just may be a rumor. ////////////

    The fact that the investigation has not been dropped is a good thing. We’ll see who gets appointed, though.

    Can the special investigator use the same team that is already in place?

  17. 17.

    Lacuna Synecdoche

    WaPo via Betty Cracker @ Top:

    Well before Trump’s announcement, according to people familiar with the matter, Justice Department officials discussed the possibility of appointing a special counsel to take over investigations involving Trump — such as the Mar-a-Lago case or the attempts to prevent Joe Biden from ascending to the presidency after the 2020 election — if Trump formally declared himself a candidate, people familiar with the matter have said.

    I really don’t get this at all. I mean, sure, appoint a special counsel when investigating a President, but a candidate?

    Trump’s transgressions are a straightforward criminal matter, and I don’t see any reason why the DoJ should treat charges against Trump any differently than they do for any other common criminal.

  18. 18.

    MattF

    Inevitable, IMO. And I’m not sad that inquiries into TFG’s criming will continue for the foreseeable future. I expect a lot of whining from Republicans.

  19. 19.

    Surly Duff

    The special counsel should be someone with a distinguished career of public service. A former senator and secretary of state, perhaps.

  21. 21.

    livewyre

    I don’t envy anyone tasked with convicting a former president. Here’s hoping it’s a cut that heals cleanly, politically speaking.

  23. 23.

    JoyceH

    What baffles me is that this SC is supposed to cover the documents case and ‘some aspects’ of the J6 investigation. Uh.. okay. What aspects? And does that mean that DOJ is retaining ‘other aspects’ of the J6 investigation? Are those other aspects just the rioters, or the bogus electors, or what?

    Fani Willis, our nation turns its lonely eyes to you…

  26. 26.

    Paul in KY

    @Surly Duff: Oh…that would be my choice! She would demur, but hopefully would mention people who she thinks would do the most thourough job possible.

  27. 27.

    Lacuna Synecdoche

    @zhena gogolia: ​

    Because he is the former president of the United States. Like it or not.

    And I guess I’m arguing that the key word in that sentence is former.

  28. 28.

    HumboldtBlue

    @Lacuna Synecdoche:

    I really don’t get this at all. I mean, sure, appoint a special counsel when investigating a President, but a candidate?

    Garland said specifically the fact that Trump and Biden could be opponents in the election is the reason for the SC. He’s trying as best as he can to keep DOJ impartial, but as has been repeatedly pointed out, the right will never claim it’s not a political witch hunt.

  29. 29.

    JoyceH

    @Surly Duff:

    The special counsel should be someone with a distinguished career of public service. A former senator and secretary of state, perhaps.

    Problem is that all of the most qualified and experienced legal minds have already gone on record in interviews or op-eds giving their legal opinion that of COURSE Trump should be charged.

    I’d love to see them name Michael Luttig, but I guess that’s out the window.

  30. 30.

    Betty Cracker

    @Lacuna Synecdoche: I share your bafflement. For transparently political reasons (i.e., to keep his own rogue field agents from leaking damaging info), James Comey announced that the FBI had reopened the investigation into Hillary Clinton right before the 2016 election, FFS.

  32. 32.

    Cacti

    Garland is a gutless wonder.

    If you’re afraid of your fingerprints being on anything remotely controversial, don’t take the fucking AG job.

  38. 38.

    livewyre

    @zhena gogolia: This, and…

    If it was just him and our party involved, and rule of law itself wasn’t a matter of major contention, then I could see him being treated equally to anyone else. That’s the ideal. But with all the support he’s received from the party that relies on his voters, the investigation has to be shored up against political interference to a literally unprecedented degree. This one is going to sting no matter what.

  41. 41.

    HumboldtBlue

    Barb McQuade just said Smith has been brought in to oversee the ongoing investigation, and that bringing in smith means there is a very high likelihood one of these cases results in charges.

  43. 43.

    patrick II

    @JPL:

    I have read of more outlandish right-wing decisions coming out of Texas federal courts so that might be a better place.  However, I can’t picture Trump in a cowboy hat.

  46. 46.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @zhena gogolia:

    Like it or not. He’s not going to be treated like a common criminal.

    To say nothing of limitless funding, (probably) high-powered attorneys, and a good chance of friendly, partisan judges.

    Am I the only one who remembers Iran-Contra? any of the trials of the century of the week of the last thirty years? seen Law and Order, or LA Law? the legal process is complicated and stacked in favor of defendants, especially, again, rich and well-connected ones

  47. 47.

    JPL

    @Baud: I know but since he was president at the time, he might think it needs to be seen by a federal court.    Actually Doug’s favorite paper mentioned that.

  49. 49.

    Scout211

    @Cacti: I think he and the White House may be more concerned about how it could be used against Biden in 2024than Garland’s reputation.  Any of the GOP candidates would use that against Biden.

  51. 51.

    Baud

    @JPL: I suppose he can ask a federal court to recognize he has immunity.  That’s what Lindsey Graham did and partially won on.

  53. 53.

    James E Powell

    Walsh, Fitzpatrick, Mueller, and now this. Republicans can commit crimes in public, brag about them on cable news, and nothing ever happens to them. Oh wait, it makes them more popular with their base & the political media admire them for it.

  58. 58.

    jonas

    Oh great. Another report where an SC can find that Trump is potentially not not guilty of stealing classified government documents…

  59. 59.

    Steeplejack

    Something tells me this is a good time for me to log off and go shop for wine for Thanksgiving.

  60. 60.

    Cacti

    @Albatrossity: The AG is the final decision-maker for any special counsel investigation to proceed to prosecution. Garland will still have to make the call

    Not necessarily. This could give him time to be out of the position before any decision had to be made.

  61. 61.

    Jeffro

    @Lacuna Synecdoche:trump’s transgressions are a straightforward criminal matter, and I don’t see any reason why the DoJ should treat charges against trump any differently than they do for any other common criminal.

    I have to agree.  This is getting ridiculous.  Stand. Up. for the rule of law, Garland.

  62. 62.

    JPL

    @Baud: that’s my biggest fear.   Even in Fulton Cty there are wingnuts so one can’t cause a mistrial.  If Fani Willis brings charges, I hope she sequesters the jury.   Political interference will happen whatever though.

  64. 64.

    ian

    @Betty Cracker:  Comey was incorrect and outside of regular FBI policies when he did that.  I don’t see how someone can say that Comey was wrong and that we should also follow his example

    I see the esteemable Baud has beaten me to this argument

  65. 65.

    UncleEbeneezer

    During his stint at the Public Integrity Section, Smith oversaw the prosecutions of CIA officer Jeffrey Sterling, who was convicted in 2015 of disclosing national defense information and obstructing justice — two potential crimes at the center of the Trump documents probe. Smith also oversaw the convictions of former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell and former Rep. Rick Renzi, an Arizona Republican, both for bribery and extortion charges. McDonnell’s conviction was later overturned by the Supreme Court.
    Since 2018, Smith has been prosecuting war crimes in the Hague stemming from the conflict in Kosovo. He’s registered to vote in the U.S. as a political independent, officials said.

  66. 66.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @James E Powell: my recollection is Walsh had a strong record of indictments and convictions– Weinberger and Ollie North are the ones I remember best, if not that well– and a combination of appeals and pardons and whatnot got them off. Any number of the people we called neocons in the Bush II administration had criminal records. Poindexter, Abrams. Nobody much cared.

    That’s the problem with looking to the legal system to fix political problems. It was Mitch McConnell and the Republican Senate who let trump off. And how many Senators who voted to acquit him were just re-elected: Johnson, Rubio, Rand Paul… I’m sure I’m overlooking a few.

  69. 69.

    WaterGirl

    It’s hard to trust the institutions when we have been let down so many times since 2016.

    But I trust Biden, and I trust Merrick Garland, so I am not going to assume the worst.

    I feel totally confident about one thing: whichever way Garland went with this – either continuing with the in-house investigation or appointing special Counsel – he would have been soundly criticized.  There are good arguments to be made for each option.

  74. 74.

    UncleEbeneezer

    The potential appointment of a special counsel has raised concerns that it would take years to conclude. This fear could be due to the lengthy investigation conducted by former special counsel Robert Mueller, which lasted nearly two years.
    But this case would be different because the DOJ is already investigating Trump and the same FBI agents could work with the special counsel’s office. Some of the career prosecutors at DOJ could be hired and work for the new special counsel. The appointment of a special counsel would slow things down by weeks, not months, if at all. The prosecution of Trump would be more like Mueller’s prosecution of one-time Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, who was indicted within about five months of Mueller’s appointment because much of the investigative work had already been done.

  78. 78.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @Baud: quick check of wiki tells me Piondexter and North had their convictions overturned on appeal, Abrams and of course Weinberger were lame duck pardoned by Poppy, who had pretty clearly perjured himself according to Weinberger’s contemporary accounts.

    The ACLU was part of North’s appeals effort. My father was furious, quit donating for twenty years.

  80. 80.

    PJ

    Feels like a punt.  Can any Republican under DoJ investigation now just announce they are running for President to force the appointment of a special counsel?

  81. 81.

    Josie

    @WaterGirl: ​
     It is not the legal institutions that have let us down (except the Supreme Court). It is politicians interfering with the legal institutions – pardons, interference by corrupt officials, etc.

  83. 83.

    Lacuna Synecdoche

    @HumboldtBlue:

    Garland said specifically the fact that Trump and Biden could be opponents in the election is the reason for the SC. He’s trying as best as he can to keep DOJ impartial, but as has been repeatedly pointed out, the right will never NOT claim it’s not a political witch hunt.

    A special prosecutor wasn’t needed to charge and convict Lyndon LaRouche, who had been a Presidential candidate at times, nor to charge and convict Eugene Debs, also a former presidential candidate.

    To my mind, a special prosecutor undercuts the appearance of fairness, and the presumption that all people are treated equally under the law. It also grants credence to Aileen Cannon’s widely ridiculed argument that Trump deserves special treatment.

    If I were Trump’s lawyers, I would use the DoJ’s decision to assign a special prosecutor as proof that even the DoJ implicitly concedes there are special circumstances that require special treatment for Trump. Assigning a special prosecutor could end up resulting in a legal self-own by the DoJ.

  85. 85.

    UncleEbeneezer

    I have been calling for a special counsel for a while for multiple reasons – but most importantly – TRANSPARENCY. A special counsel must say what they’re investigating, and they have to report to congress any prosecutorial decisions OR declination decisions. 2/

    That means if they decide not to prosecute, they have to say why not. If it were just the DoJ, they wouldn’t be required to explain why they didn’t charge him, or even that they’ve decided not to. 3/

  86. 86.

    zhena gogolia

    If Merrick Garland didn’t think there was a serious possibility that Trump would be indicted, he wouldn’t have appointed a special counsel.He didn’t appoint Jack Smith to wind down these investigations.— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) November 18, 2022

  87. 87.

    WaterGirl

    @Josie: Institutions are only as good as the humans that are running them.  We did not grow up expecting that the bad guys would be overseeing many of the institutions and that they would have their fingers weighing so heavily on the scale.

  88. 88.

    Betty Cracker

    @ian: I’m not saying Comey should be the model here, just that his shitty behavior is evidence that being a presidential candidate doesn’t immunize a person from a criminal investigation. Especially two years out from the election!

    @Baud: If the DOJ investigation is going to proceed despite (or under the auspices of?) the appointment of special counsel and Garland (or whoever is currently AG at the time) has to sign off on any charges that arise from that investigation, what’s the point of appointing special counsel? 

  90. 90.

    PJ

    @UncleEbeneezer: Where does one register as an “Independent”?  In New York, you can register as a Democrat, or Republican, or other recognized party, but this is an affirmative action when you register to vote, and there is no registration to indicate you are “Independent.”  In other words, the system knows that you are not registered with a particular party to vote in their primary, but there’s no identification the voter makes that he or she is “Independent.”

  91. 91.

    UncleEbeneezer

    @Baud: Lol.  You know I agree with that, in general.  But the fact that he recently convicted someone of EXACTLY THE CRIMES THAT TRUMP COMMITTED is a really good sign.  And the screaming if he were a registered Dem (or Republican) would be even more excruciating (and ridiculous) than it already is.

  92. 92.

    livewyre

    I’d keep a sideways glance on any efforts in this thread to stick personal characterizations on the officials involved – their will, their desires, their inner lives, any number of unknowables. The point of the law is that it’s not about who’s carrying it out. This investigation may be the biggest test of that principle that we’ve ever had, and there’s a lot of political incentive to throw doubt on it. Let’s stay vigilant.

  93. 93.

    HumboldtBlue

    @Lacuna Synecdoche:

    Please forgive me, I’m playing the role of the reporter here, you couldn’t find anyone on this site more ill-equipped to comment in any serious way on the legal and political implications of this move. The MSNBC panel is bantering back and forth about all of these issues, and they have raised your concerns and others have addressed them far better than I ever could.

    From what I can gather from the legal eagles, this was done to insulate Garland and the DOJ, and he wouldn’t have appointed the SC is he wasn’t going to file charges.

  94. 94.

    Baud

    @Betty Cracker:

    The same purpose every special prosecutor has:  it lets someone not directly in the presidential chain of command to make discretionary calls as to the conduct of the investigation and which charges to bring.  If Jack Smith decides the evidence doesn’t support treason, Garland isn’t going to overrule him.

  100. 100.

    WaterGirl

    @PJ: I started to google states where you can register as an independent, and as soon as I got to “states where you can” Google popped up with the suggestion:

    states where you can marry your cousin

    Wow, how sad is it that that’s the first match that comes up on google???

  101. 101.

    HumboldtBlue

    @Kathleen:

    No, not really, it’s far more nuanced than that. It’s a very fascinating discussion, to be honest.

    @WaterGirl:

    One of the analysts just discussed that very point. When Garland is inevitably pulled in front of a GOP hearing, he can honestly say he has no knowledge of the status of the investigation.

  103. 103.

    PJ

    @Betty Cracker: When companies want to take an unpopular or improper course of action, but don’t want to take the blame for it, they hire “independent” consultants, who are paid to produce a report which concludes that the company should undertake the unpopular or improper course of action.  That way, the company shifts the responsibility for the policy to the consultant, and gives themselves some cover if they get sued.

    In this case, Garland is shifting the decision to prosecute Trump away from DoJ.  Whatever this guy Smith decides, Garland can say, “It is unfortunate, but because of the Special Counsel’s report, we are forced to (prosecute/decline to prosecute) TFG.”

  104. 104.

    WV Blondie

    No one has mentioned this, but I think it helps a perception that Smith will be even-handed that he’s been out of the country at The Hague much of the time since 2008.

  107. 107.

    Cacti

    @PJ: Thus far, it looks like Garland’s highest priority has been preserving the status quo of the political class being above the law.

    He’s been hell on the J6 peons though.

  108. 108.

    HumboldtBlue

    Emptywheel:

    To my mind, the best part of appointing war crimes and public corruption prosecutor Jack Smith as Special Counsel to oversee the twin investigations into Donald Trump is that it will be a cinch, now, to subpoena Ginni Thomas.

    Otherwise I have mixed feelings about the decision. I think the letter of DOJ guidelines requires it. But I don’t think it will change how much of a clusterfuck Trump makes of it.

  109. 109.

    UncleEbeneezer

    Given how much of the anti-Garland complaining seemed to be about our (the public’s) frustration about not knowing what’s going on, I think this is a good decision.  Now we will get answers on whether or not charges are/n’t brought and why.  I can’t imagine Trump won’t be charged for the stolen documents.  Jan 6th/Obstruction/Sedition are much trickier.  Either way, Smith will be well equipped to explain his recommendations and Garland will still have the final say.

  110. 110.

    Betty Cracker

    @Baud: Seems like a concept that sounds good in theory but mostly fails on execution. Interested parties tend not to buy the impartiality angle in the best of times.

    @WaterGirl: Good lord, I hope not.

  111. 111.

    Denali

    I guess I am pretty much done with hoping that TFG will be held accountable for his crimes. If he cannot be prosecuted for instigating an attempted treasonous insurrection as well as stealing classified documents, there is not really much reason to hope for justice.

  115. 115.

    Lacuna Synecdoche

    @HumboldtBlue:

    Please forgive me, I’m playing the role of the reporter here … The MSNBC panel is bantering back and forth about all of these issues, and they have raised your concerns and others have addressed them far better than I ever could.

    There’s nothing to forgive. I hope that you and zhena gogolia are right, that this is the best and smartest move on Garland’s part.

    I’m just worried that appointing a special counsel will delay the proceedings, and, worse, implicitly concede the Trump team’s arguments that he’s essentially above the law and deserves special treatment.​

  117. 117.

    PST

    Merrick Garland is 70 years old. He has been Chief Judge of the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, but he will never be appointed to the Supreme Court. He has never had electoral ambitions and certainly won’t start now. He really isn’t qualified for any other cabinet post. In other words, being the AG is the end of the road for him. I doubt that he has any motive other than trying to get this right. He has nothing to fear and nothing to gain.

  118. 118.

    NotoriousJRT

    FWIW, I am not stomping my feet, but I think Garland blinked in the face of TFG’s early-announcement gambit.

  119. 119.

    WaterGirl

    @PST: I agree.  Merrick Garland is a boy scout, in the best sense of the word.  What you see is what you get, no hidden agendas, just a belief in the rule of law that goes down to his core, a love of country and a love of democracy.

  122. 122.

    HumboldtBlue

    @Kathleen:

    No, these are DOJ vets and lawyers. Also, I only watch MSNBC for Nicolle Wallace, so I didn’t see any doomsday-ing about Dems chances.

    @Lacuna Synecdoche:

    I’m just worried that appointing a special counsel will delay the proceedings, and, worse, implicitly concede the Trump teams arguments that he’s essentially above the law and deserves special treatment.

    From what I have gathered, Smith is not starting from scratch, he’s in an overseer role, so delays will be very minimal at worst. He’s stepping in while the investigation is underway and his role will be to determine if charges will be filed or not and then Garland makes the final call.

  124. 124.

    livewyre

    @Denali: I feel that. The law is not all we need it to be. But I keep this in mind at the same time – it’s still something to work toward, because we know what’s waiting behind us.

  126. 126.

    rikyrah

    The Evangelicals trying to run away from Dolt45?

     

    He didn’t hide shyt from them.

    He didn’t talk in Frank Luntz approved language and THEN reveal himself.

    Nope.

     

    They didn’t care that he had a dozen accusers for sexual assault.

    They didn’t care that he tore children away from their parents.

    They didn’t care that he had children in cages.

    They didn’t care when he insulted our military families.

    They didn’t care that he was besties with Epstein.

     

    No, they didn’t care at all. So, no, don’t try and get all new now. You went along with all sorts of evil shyt, and when we pointed this out to you, you so-called Christians, y’all always had some sort of excuse.

    Nope.

     

    You bought it. You own it. He’s yours.

  128. 128.

    Betty Cracker

    @WV Blondie: Good point. I don’t know if it will help with public perceptions of impartiality since people tend to fall back on their priors on any political issue (as the comments here so amply demonstrate). But it may be a good thing for the investigation to be overseen by someone who’s been outside the DC maelstrom for awhile.

  131. 131.

    Elizabelle

    @zhena gogolia:

    The Mueller Report is a fantastic document.

    What we’ve been allowed to see of it.  Weren’t they going to disclose more of the redacted material?

    Foo on Bill Barr.  May karma deal him something terrible, and soon.

  132. 132.

    Kathleen

    @HumboldtBlue:  Thank you. I have so much loathing and contempt for TV/NPR “pundits”  and “analysts” I ignore them completely. Good to know substantive and nuanced conversations can be had.

  134. 134.

    zhena gogolia

    @WaterGirl: I think she means she hopes Garland wasn’t influenced by the threat to impeach him.

    I very much doubt that was his motivation.

    People around here have a very hard time seeing things through a lens that isn’t 100% left-of-center. I don’t even watch TV news and I know what kind of bullshit they’d sling about the investigation if Garland kept it in DOJ.

  138. 138.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @zhena gogolia:

    People around here have a very hard time seeing things through a lens that isn’t 100% left-of-center

    also a stubborn feeling, if not belief, that trump will disappear into the bowels of Shawshank Correctional Facility if Merrick Garland goes before a jury and says, “Come ooonnnn! This asshole’s incredibly fucking guilty”

    to the extent that people acknowledge the existence of juries.

  140. 140.

    Nora

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: I can’t speak for wealthy, white collar defendants, but I would dispute the claim that the system is stacked in favor of criminal defendants in general.  Considering how many people take plea bargains just so they don’t have to wait in jail for their cases to come to trial, and how harsh our sentencing system is in general,  and considering all the biases that run through the system in favor of police,  my experience is that most criminal defendants wouldn’t agree the system is stacked in their favor.

  142. 142.

    dr. bloor

    @$8 blue check mistermix:

    why does an open and shut case like the Mar a Lago documents drag on and on?

    Absent being granted superpowers to alter law and procedure to his liking, Garland has been near-perfect in bringing new information to light in a way that minimizes dismissing it as politically-motivated.  Anyone calling the prospect of indicting and trying a former POTUS “open and shut” should be embarrassed.

  143. 143.

    ...now I try to be amused

    Jack Smith is the name of a movie character who will stop at nothing to get his man, and he has the steely eyes to go with it.

  144. 144.

    lgerard

    Looking forward to those emails telling me my contribution to donald trump’s commissary fund will be matched 10 times

  146. 146.

    Betty Cracker

    @zhena gogolia: Correct, and I agree it’s highly unlikely that Garland would let threats from people like MTG influence his decision. To your last point, howler monkeys are gonna howl no matter who oversees the investigation. I hope this move doesn’t delay anything.

  148. 148.

    NotoriousJRT

    @rikyrah: I read a WaPo article in which one of the evangelical leaders came right out and said their relationship with TFG was “transactional.”  Now they may be thinking that the cowardly fly-landing-strip guy is the one to whom they wish to give their transactional love. F those despicable bums.

  150. 150.

    WaterGirl

    @zhena gogolia:

    I think she means she hopes Garland wasn’t influenced by the threat to impeach him.

    I wasn’t sure which Betty Cracker was referring to.  I wondered, which i didn’t express very well, not that Garland would be worried about being impeached, but that he would be protecting the investigation by them not being able to ask him about it during the impeachment hearings.  Not that he is a coward

    Kind of like T****’s lawyers trying to get info on the investigation through the legal proceedings with the special master.

  151. 151.

    Sure Lurkalot

    @$8 blue check mistermix: I go back and forth thinking either Wheeler is spot on or high on her own supply. That and sometimes her screeds border on incomprehensible.  Finally, her thin skin, often denigrating anyone who disagrees with her, is off putting.

  152. 152.

    WaterGirl

    @$8 blue check mistermix: I don’t think they are just trying to prosecute Trump about the documents.  Someone gave him all those documents and never got them back.

    Whose fingerprints are on those documents?  Literally.  But also figuratively, who checked them out, who else might have seen them illegally, etc.

  153. 153.

    Steeplejack

    @Baud:

    Looks like some special uniform from Star Trek: TNG. “Is everything ready for the inspector general’s visit, Number One?”

  154. 154.

    Baud

    The bigger DOJ news from today.

    The U.S. Justice Department has opened an antitrust investigation into Ticketmaster’s owner, Live Nation Entertainment (LYV.N), the New York Times reported on Friday after the company’s sale of Taylor Swift concert tickets this week overwhelmed its website.

  157. 157.

    NotDiggerPhelps

    It’s a club, you ain’t in it, and the law is here to bind the people that it won’t protect.

    Now, if Amy Klobuchar was attorney general, well. where on the barn would she feel comfortable nailing Trump’s balls? Up high for all to see or down low for as a warning to others?

  158. 158.

    Immanentize

    So many thoughts but my top line is that this is a very good move for a prosecution of people around, working for and with Trump, as well as Trump himself. There seems to be a clear organizational theme and good reasons why Jack Smith was chosen.

    First, the AG is a political position no matter how much any AG tries to separate themselves from politics. Garland was appointed AG by the current President Joe Biden. He is in the line of Presidential succession if there is a horrible event (number7). The person who is clearly one target of the investigations given to Smith (Trump) has announced he is running for President in 2024. Garland’s current boss, Joe Biden, has also said he is planning to run against Trump. Bit of a conflict maybe that Trump would exploit.

    Second, the cases going over to the new SC seem to be the ones closest to Trump: the documents investigations (and national threat assessment) as well as some of the J6 cases. This latter category is, to me, plainly those investigations having to do with coordinated congressional efforts to stop the transfer of power (including Congress Critters as defendants?), maybe the Secret Service seditious conspiracy, maybe FBI similar complicity, and certainly the fake electors gambits in several states (Hello, Ginni Thomas). Smith will not be directly involved in the rioting charges and trials, but the things learned there will help the other cases. Some of those cases implicate other DOJ officials which makes a SC almost necessary.

    Third, Smith’s experience in the international realm suggests a broad rule of law perspective, as well as an understanding of international laws and norms, international criminal prosecutions, etc. Maybe the documents case is as much a money laundering case as a stolen documents matter? Maybe an international treasony matter?

    Fourth, Smith’s experience suggests not delay, but rather large joined high level conspiracy and international (criminal and diplomatic) entangled team management skills. Getting the whole thing pulled together on one track under one grand theory linking much of the disparate actions we already know about. And the many we don’t.

    Additionally, Special Counsels cannot be called before the Jim Jordan Clown Congressional Committee the way that a Cabinet member like Garland can. Yes, they can be called to testify, but they can also say sod off. Additionally, SCs can outlast administrations. See the Durham debacle.

    All told, very good move.

    –30–

  161. 161.

    Mai Naem mobile

    Jack Smith was the corporate lawyer for HCA before the War Crimes gig. The same HCA Rick Scott was CEO was before he had to resign because of his criming. I am sure Jack Smith is going to want a GOP king to be tarnished in any minor way. I’ve held back saying anything about Garland but this is just a chickenshit move and Orange Lump gets away with crimes nobody else would. And no I don’t care if he’s paying legal bills out of his ass forever. He should be held accountable. This country just looks like a fucking banana republic.

  165. 165.

    HumboldtBlue

    @Mai Naem mobile:

    May I suggest you read immanentize’s post just above? Because the consensus I am seeing from those who have expertise, this was a needed move and one that doesn’t come as a surprise due to political dynamics. I think it’s far too cavalier to just dismiss this as Garland being a coward.

  174. 174.

    zhena gogolia

    @Baud: I just feel so sorry for animals in zoos that I can’t usually watch videos about them. But this one is great.

  175. 175.

    MisterDancer

    @Mai Naem mobile: Jack Smith was the corporate lawyer for HCA before the War Crimes gig. The same HCA Rick Scott was CEO was before he had to resign because of his criming.

    Yes, because The Hague regularly hires corrupt corporate layers to prosecute some of the most important crimes Humanity deals with, and those same people love leaving their cushy well-paying gigs to work for what I gather is relative peanuts overseas. /s

    Let’s put some details on this, shall we? Smith started that HCA gig in 2017 — almost two decades after Scott was forced out and the company paid 2 billion in fines due to his malfeasance. It’s literally the only corporate gig on his resume per Wikipedia, everything else is him acting for Governmental agencies as a Prosecutor.

    I mean, we might as well point out that Senator Romney’s Bain Capital has a stake in HCA. Or that Smith did work under Trump until his role was replaced in Sept. 2017. You know, if we’re going to rife thru the man’s rhetorical pockets for clues that he’s Secretly Evil (dun dun dun).

    Or…we could also point to his work starting in 2010 for the Obama DOJ as the head of their Public Integrity Section. Or that he’s actually worked for The Hague twice now. A lot of people, and not just in America, clearly put serious trust in his judgement.

    (Found all above data via Wikipedia, looking it up is left as an exercise for the motivated reader.)

  177. 177.

    Jackie

    @WaterGirl: CNN is reporting Trump’s lawyers were worried this would happen; suggesting potential charges are closer along than hoped.
    Barb McQuaid, on MSNBC, thinks Garland wouldn’t have assigned a SC just to drop the investigations.

    I may be a hopeless optimistic, but, like you, I have faith in Merrick Garland.

  178. 178.

    Baud

    @Jackie:

    CNN is reporting Trump’s lawyers were worried this would happen; suggesting potential charges are closer along than hoped.

     

    They should calm themselves by reading this thread!

  180. 180.

    Betty Cracker

    @WaterGirl: That’s a great point (about the AG getting hauled before a House committee, I mean). Maybe it was a factor. IIRC, Garland resisted pressure to appoint a special counselor early in the investigation. Trump announcing for 2024 is serving as a pretext, but maybe there’s more to it than that. I have no idea, of course! :)

  181. 181.

    Mai Naem mobile

    @HumboldtBlue: the stuff about the foreign countries spending huge amounts of money at the Trump hotel just came out. Kushner just happened to be crashing at the hotel at the same time. This is around 5-6 years ago. The documents were taken around 2 years ago. The DOJ has known for at least 18 mos.  The TFG administration not following archival laws has been known for around 5-6 years. The Secret Service paying way higher rates at the Trump properties than the govt was supposed to pay.  Exactly how long does this shit go on and nobody goes to prison. Reality Winner didn’t get to fuck around for 5 years delaying delaying delaying. Hell, even billionaire Martha Stewart got convicted and did time  faster than this whole corrupt POS family.

  182. 182.

    HumboldtBlue

    @Baud:

    Hahahahahahaha!

    Sweet mother of a breakdown, don’t let them read Twitter!

    @Mai Naem mobile:

    I feel you and I understand your frustration, but I’m pretty sure most of what you have mentioned is under investigation. Smith will oversee the investigations into Mar-a-Lago and Jan.6, and he will either recommend charges to Garland or he won’t. That’s all we know right now, and the political calculus involved forced Garland’s hand. I have no clue what if any other investigations are underway related to those ancillary to Trump, again, we have to wait and see.

    If it helps, here’s a cat on a sled.

  185. 185.

    Baud

    @Mai Naem mobile:

    In response, Stewart sold about $230,000 in ImClone shares on December 27, 2001, a day before the announcement of the FDA decision. Stewart’s involvement would have never come to light had Doug Faneuil, Bacanovic’s assistant, not disclosed it to investigators.[1] Although Stewart maintained her innocence, she was found guilty and sentenced on July 16, 2004, to five months in prison, five months of home confinement, and two years’ probation for lying about a stock sale, conspiracy, and obstruction of justice.

     

    It took two and a half years between the crime and Martha Stewart’s conviction, and thats a much simpler case than the one against Trump.

  188. 188.

    Mai Naem mobile

    @MisterDancer: i get what you’re saying. When I first heard Garland say Jack Smith I thought I remembered his name from the Bush Iraq war crimes stuff. Why would one take a gig at HCA after that kind of experience? I am not implying anything evil but the corporate lawyer for HCA? He couldn’t just become the corporate lawyer for Coca Cola or McDonald’s?  There weren’t any academic legal gigs available?

  189. 189.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @NotDiggerPhelps:

    Now, if Amy Klobuchar was attorney general, well. where on the barn would she feel comfortable nailing Trump’s balls? Up high for all to see or down low for as a warning to others?

    it’s almost comical the way you hand-wave away the judicial process in favor of fantasies of Green Lanternism

    I’m surprised you don’t link to that picture of LBJ chuckling with his diminutive friend

  191. 191.

    Sanjeevs

    The Justice Department opened a criminal investigation into Donald Trump even though he was the former president, a likely candidate, and the de facto leader of the Republican Party,” Renato Mariotti, a former federal prosecutor, wrote on Twitter.

    “His announcement today changes nothing. It was already ‘baked in’ to DOJ’s decision.”

    https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/3738066-trump-2024-bid-wont-deter-doj-amid-criminal-probes/

    For months these people have been telling us Trump announcing his candidacy wouldn’t affect DoJ decisions. Then right after Trump announces his candidacy Garland appoints an SC citing … Trump’s  candidacy.

    I don’t think this is going anywhere.

  195. 195.

    NotDiggerPhelps

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: We can come back here in three years and trump will be president, running around doing crazy things in public, and argue about how worthless the law really is when applied to those it does not bind, but who cares, right?

    It’s a club. You ain’t in it. George Carlin was the greatest philosopher of our age.

  197. 197.

    prostratedragon

    @HumboldtBlue: ​

    If it helps, here’s a cat on a sled.

    That’s almost tagworthy. Certainly there are days I make it through only because of the cat videos.

  199. 199.

    Elizabelle

    @Baud:  Seriously, I think we should stop calling Trump’s voters “half of our voters.”

    They are not.  We should not cooperate in inflating their numbers.

    That said, we have too many idiots and autocrat-curious to function as well as a “first world” democracy should.

  201. 201.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @NotDiggerPhelps: but Amy Klobuchar would have ordered trump seized and cast into irons because in the magic fairyland of the Counterfactual judges and juries and defense lawyers and the appeals process don’t exist?
    I confess I cannot prove the contrary to your counterfactual

  203. 203.

    Sanjeevs

    @Elizabelle: Do you think the DoJ should treat political candidates differently to the ordinary person?

    Or not?

    Because that’s the crux of today’s decision

  204. 204.

    livewyre

    @Sanjeevs: It’s already a political case for a whole variety of reasons. The principle here isn’t whether these crimes have the same weight as other ones, but whether they can be prosecuted at all with a whole party defending them. I know which way I’m rooting.

  205. 205.

    Mai Naem mobile

    @MisterDancer:  BTW we heard this kind of stuff about Mueller as well. And Patrick Fitzgerald. They were unassailable public servants. The greatest prosecutors. Took down organized crime. Took down politicians.  Remember Fitzmas? Sand got thrown at the refs.  All he got was Scooter Libby who ended up getting commuted by Dubbya and pardoned by Orange Lump.  I believe most of people Mueller got convicted got pardons from Orange Lump. Eric Holder didn’t want to go after the big fish during the housing crash because basically it was too hard to get a conviction. Go after a few small time mortgage brokers and appraisers who can’t afford a million dollar defense. Apparently Merrick Garland was playing deaf, dumb and blind during Orange Lump’s administration because he couldn’t figure out that he may have some sort of soft deadline of Nov 2022 to get stuff done.

  206. 206.

    UncleEbeneezer

    @Sanjeevs: Non-political defendants don’t have access to highly classified documents like the ones that Trump stole.  They also don’t have Executive Privilege and other powers and rights that only apply to elected Presidents.  There are valid reasons that this is taking longer than it would for DOJ to investigate/prosecute you or I.  Comparing how DOJ treats a Former President to an average Joe, is silly.  The two are legally different in some very important ways.

Comments are closed.