The Lords of War: The Perils Facing Trump, Garland, and Smith in Washington’s Legal Arms Race

Below is my column in The Hill on the appointment of a special counsel to investigate former President Donald Trump. All of the three main players — Trump, Attorney General Merrick Garland, and Special Counsel Jack Smith — will face immediate challenges in the legal arms race unfolding in Washington.

Here is the column:

There seemed to be enough torpedoes in the water in Washington this week that you could walk across the Potomac without getting your feet wet. On Capitol Hill, the new House Republican majority announced a series of subpoena-ready investigations of President Biden and administration officials. At the Justice Department, Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed a special counsel to investigate former President Trump for possible crimes ranging from the 2020 election to the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot to the Mar-a-Lago documents controversy.

It was all reminiscent of the movie “The Lord of War,” in which a fictional arms dealer warns that “the problem with gunrunners going to war is that there is no shortage of ammunition.” The same appears true of rival government officials having no shortage of subpoenas.

In this atmosphere of politically and mutually assured destruction, there are some immediate threats for the three main combatants:

Attorney General Garland

When he announced the appointment of Jack Smith to investigate Trump, Garland explained that “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.”

In making that case for a Trump special counsel, however, Garland may have made a case against himself for refusing to appoint a Biden special counsel in the Hunter Biden scandal. Garland’s department is investigating potential wrongdoing that could involve the other referenced candidate, President Biden, in the Hunter Biden matter. That investigation should be looking at numerous alleged references to the president using code names such as “the Big Guy” in the context of receiving percentages on foreign deals and other perks. Yet Garland has refused to appoint a special counsel in an investigation that not only could prove highly embarrassing to the president but, in the view of some of us, could implicate him as well.

Congressional Democrats repeatedly voted to block an investigation of this alleged multimillion-dollar influence peddling by the Biden family. House Republicans are now poised to look into these foreign deals — and how the Justice Department may have stymied or slowed any investigation before the 2020 election.

While the special counsel appointment helps insulate Garland from claims about the use of his department for political purposes on any Trump charges, he may soon face new challenges, including possible contempt referrals if Biden officials or Democrats refuse to supply information or testimony to Republican House investigators. Garland has sharply departed from prior cases in which the Justice Department largely refused to prosecute such contempt referrals; he has been very active in pursuing Trump officials who failed to cooperate with Congress. He now may be asked to show the same willingness to pursue those who obstruct or defy House Republican investigations.

Former President Trump

The greatest threat clearly faces Trump himself. His announced intention to run for the presidency in 2024 may have expedited the appointment of a special counsel. With the expectation of a possible indictment, Trump may have wanted to frame the optics as a vendetta against a declared Biden opponent before his administration took any major step toward prosecution. Instead, it likely sealed the need for a special counsel.

Trump already has declared the move to be political and says he will not “partake in” an investigation.

A special counsel could make fast work of controversies such as Mar-a-Lago, which have been investigated for months and already have secured grand jury testimony. For Trump, having a special counsel in control, rather than an attorney general, may prove even more precarious. Some of the potential charges for unlawful transfer or possession of classified material historically have resulted in relatively minor charges. If this investigation produces the basis for an obstruction charge or misdemeanors, Garland might have been inclined to use his discretion to forgo prosecution and avoid political disruption or questions of bias. In contrast, after the expense and effort to create his office, a special counsel may feel less inclined to overlook a chargeable offense. The majority of people charged by former special counsel Robert Mueller faced relatively minor charges and served short terms in jail.

Trump also will face practical barriers. Prosecutors usually start with the low-hanging fruit in an organization, to coerce people to cooperate by threatening criminal charges. On issues such as obstruction, Trump did not allegedly act alone; there were staff and lawyers who made what the FBI claims were knowingly false or misleading representations. Those individuals must now be viewed by Trump’s counsel as having potential conflicts of interest, including his former counsel. The only way to avoid conflicts or vulnerabilities is to assemble a largely new staff that was not involved in either the Jan. 6 or Mar-a-Lago episodes.

That is the difference between “partaking” in a personal excursion and a criminal investigation: The latter does not depend on your participation.

Special Counsel Smith

Smith faces the unenviable task of investigating a presidential candidate less than two years before the election. Given the advanced stage of prior investigations, he could bring charges before Sept. 5, 2024 (or roughly 60 days before the election under Justice Department guidelines for election year filings). It is unlikely, however, that a charge against Trump could be tried in that time.

However, Smith’s first test will be to avoid the initial mistakes of a predecessor, Mueller.

Like Smith, Mueller was considered a natural choice as special counsel, given his extensive experience as a career prosecutor. However, Mueller’s investigation was undermined by his selection of a team — starting with his top aide, Andrew Weissmann, a controversial prosecutor who was accused of political bias. The investigation was further undermined by FBI personnel, including Special Agent Peter Strzok, who was later removed from the team and fired by the Justice Department; Strzok has since filed a wrongful termination lawsuit.

Smith can avoid tripping a similar explosive wire by selecting a team that is defined by its prior professional expertise, not its prior political views or associations.

He also needs to be wary of creative avenues to indict Trump. Smith was part of the prosecution team that convicted former Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell (R) on federal corruption charges in 2014. The Supreme Court unanimously overturned that conviction as having stretched the law beyond its breaking point. If Smith is going to be the first prosecutor to indict a former president, he needs to do so with unimpeachable evidence of an unchallengeable crime.

Only one thing is certain in any of this: It will not end well.

With both sides loading up staff and subpoenas, the start of the 2024 campaign season has all of the makings of an utter bloodletting. There will be ample support for both sides to fulfill their respective narratives — and no shortage of legal weapons — in this political war of attrition.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. Follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.

180 thoughts on “The Lords of War: The Perils Facing Trump, Garland, and Smith in Washington’s Legal Arms Race”

  1. Trump’s appointed attorney general refused to investigate Hunter Biden. Hunter my be a sleazy drug addict but so far there has been only accusations and no evidence of malicious fraud. JT is becoming very boring with this story.

    1. Bzzt Wrong.

      The investigation of Hunter Biden started in 2019 Under AG Barr

      Unlike the nonsense the left engages in – there were no leaks.
      There appear to have been significant internal efforts to obstruct.
      Regardless, the investigation continues to be run by a US Attorney appointed by Barr.

      The real problem is that While Trump was being impeached – the FBI had this massively exculpatory Laptop hard drive and refused to provide it to Trump or the house or the senate.

      Releasing the HD at that time would have killed the impeachment, and Biden’s run for PResident and we would have been saved the past 2 disasterous years.

      1. Are you saying the FBI is “corrupt” and intentionally affected the outcome of the 2020 election? This is serious and treasonous, but no one will be held responsible and they will do it again, in fact are still doing it under Wray. The FBI leadership is cancer in America.

        1. “Are you saying the FBI is “corrupt” and intentionally affected the outcome of the 2020 election?”
          I am saying the FBI is Politically corrupt. Absolutely, that is without any doubt. We have plenty of evidence of that from the collusion delusion, through to internal efforts to supress the investigation of the hunter Biden laptop.
          Based on the FACTS there is no doubt of that. There is also no doubt that they CONTINUE to be politically corrupt.
          There is lots of evidence of all of this – from the Collusion Delusion, through the Whitmer Kidnapping entrapment. To the slow drip drip of increasing admissions of knowledge and involvement in J6, and the active efforts to supress the Hunter Biden investiogation.

          I am not saying that the entire FBI is politically corrupt, only that there is an extraordinarily large number of in many instances ranking agents who are admittedly acting politically within the FBI.
          Strzok’s email about an “insurance policy” is emblematic of the problem. It does not matter at all what that “insurance policy” is -= what matters is that the context of his communications with Lisa Page were thwarting the election and presidency of Donald Trump.

          Those in the FBI are free to have whatever political views they want.
          They are not free to use the power of the FBI to advance their political views.
          It is inarguable today that many have, and continue to do so. That they are politically corrupt.

          Did some in the FBI try to effect the outcome of the 2020 (and 2016) election ? Without any question.
          I doubt that effort is limited to attempting to supress investigation fo the Hunter Biden laptop.
          But we KNOW that several ranking agents ACTIVELY tried to STOP and succeeded in stalling that investigation.
          That is inarguably political corruption.

          I would note that the FBI was not alone in efforts to influence the 2020 or other elections.
          The Media was actively doing that, both political parties do that.
          ANYONE is free to try to influence elections – we all do that all the time.
          We vote – that influences elections.
          The political parties run adds, give speaches, send people door to door
          These are all efforts to “influence elections”

          Attempting to influence an election is a RIGHT – Until you are improperly using the power of government to do so.

          The Press and Social Media suppressing the hunter Biden laptop story was yellow journalism. It was politically corrupt.
          It was immoral. But it was also legal.

          Zuckerbergs funding and takeover of local election operations – INSIDE government, and using those to drive GOTV efforts favoring democrats – that is politically corrupt, and immoral, and either is or should be illegal – you may not use the machinery of government – especially the election machinery to favor an outcome. You may do almost anything outside of govenrment to get your desired outcome.

          The 50+ inteligence officials claiming the Hunter Biden laptop was russian disinformation – was legal, though corrupt and immoral, for everyone of those no longer part of government. It must be illegal for any still within government.

          “This is serious and treasonous,”
          It is very serious – it is not treasonous.

          “but no one will be held responsible and they will do it again, in fact are still doing it under Wray. The FBI leadership is cancer in America”
          I do not think Wray is litterally a part of this. But he is complict to the extent that it is occuring under his watch, he is aware of it, and he is doing nothing about it.

          There are two HUGE driving factors to this, that go well beyond the FBI or even government.

          The first is that modern progressive ideology accepts that the ends justify the means.
          Therecent public remarks by Sam Harris – a renowned public intellectual that he was OK will all sorts of misconduct, even criminal conduct, if that meant Trump would not be president. Exemplifies this. The harris remarks are particularly problematic because Harris is a well respected moral philospher who has openly given his impramatur to immoral conduct that ultimately leads to destruction.

          If you can do anything to get rid of Donald Trump – what of Ted Cruz, Ron DeSantis, Rand Paul, Tulsi Gabbard, or a neighbor you do not get along with ?

          If you are willing to actively suppress the truth to get rid of Donald Trump – then you would harvest ballots, rig voting machines, inject ballots, ….

          Once you accept that the ends justifies the means – you can not be trusted.
          Once you accept that the ends justifies the means – you justify the same lawlessness in your opponents.
          If Democrats are openly stating that they will do anything to get rid of Trump, then Republicans are free to beleive they mean that.
          And free to do whatever they can to thwart lawless actions on the part of democrats, and even to engage in lawless actions on their own.

          Once one side accepts that the ends justifies the means – we no longer have a political conflict, the debate of ideas. We are at war. Any tactic that you can get away with is acceptable.

          The 2nd problem is that though progressives make up only a small portion of the country, they dominate many institutions, And even where they do not literally control the institution, they have effectively silenced dissent. Our education system has leaned heavily left for Decades. But until recently opposing voices were still heard. Today – whether it is Colleges, Public Schools, the Press, or inside government – when SOME are prepared to act immorally for “the greater good” no one within those institutions is willing to stand up and say NO.

          We do not need political equality anywhere. But we need sufficient political diversity everywhere that there will always be people willing an able to speak out when someone says the ends justifies the means. The extremists on the left remain few in number but they are surrounded by super majorities that though often much less extreme, are unwilling to say – “No You can not have an Insurance Plan against Trump or any other politician you do not like getting elected or taking power”

          Everything I wrote about is true – whether it is the left or the right.
          Today the threat is from the left not the right.

      2. LOL that you think HB’s purported laptop has “massively exculpatory” evidence about Trump. You’re deluded.

        1. You are ill informed. There is a mountain of evidence including emails, bank records and Tony Bobulinski testimony pertaining to Biden Crime Family foreign influence peddling corruption. Just because you refuse to acknowledge it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

        2. The delusion is entirely yours.

          The ACTUAL standard for whether Trump was free to request Zelensky investigate the Bidens, is reasonable suspicion of a crime.
          Actually it is lower – because Trump did not ask Barr to investigate – unknown to Trump Barr was already investigating.

          Regardless, the 2015 NY Times article meets the reasonable suspicion standard.
          The hundreds of documents that John Solomon produced in 2019 meets reasonable suspicion.

          The information on the HB laptop goes beyond probable cause and comes very close to beyond a reasonable doubt.

          An impeachment is not a criminal trial – but if it was – the HB hard drives would easily meet the defintion of Brady material.

      3. Lets take a look at Who on THE LIST needs to be Investigated, Subpoenaed, Tried, and Punished:

        Adam Schiff | Alexander Downer | Andrew McCabe
        Andrew Weissmann | Andrew Whitney | Azra Turk
        Barack Obama | Bill Taylor | Bruce Ohr
        Charles H. Dolan | Christopher Steele | Christopher Wray
        Cody Shear | Dana Remus | Don Berlin
        Donna Brazile | E. W. Priestap | Eirc Holder
        Emmet Sullivan | Eric Ciaramella | Evelyn Farkas
        Fiona Hill | Gen. Milley | George Soros
        Gina Haspel | Glenn Simpson | Hillary Clinton
        Huma Abedin | Hunter Biden | Igor Danchenko
        Jake Sullivan | James Baker | James Clapper
        James Comey | James E. Boasberg | Jeff Sessions
        Jerry Nadler | Joe Biden | John Brennan
        John Kerry | John Podesta | Joseph Mifsud
        Kadzic | Kathy Ruemmler | Kevin Clinesmith
        Kurt Campbell | L. Jean Camp | Laycock
        Lisa Page | Lois Lerner | Loretta Lynch
        Marc Elias | Merrick Garland | Michael Cohen
        Michael Kortan | Michael Sussmann | Mills
        Nancy Pelosi | Nellie Ohr | Paul Vixie
        Perkins Coie | Peter Fritsch | Peter Strzok
        Raymod Epps | Richard Dearlove | Richard Schiff
        Robby Mook | Rod Rosenstein | Rodney Joffe
        Ron Klain | Sally Yates | Simpson
        Stefan Halper | Strobe Talbot | Susan E. Rice
        The Mueller-Team | Valerie Jarrett | Victoria Nuland
        | … | …


    Justices swore an oath to support the literal “manifest tenor” of the Constitution, not to illicitly modify the Constitution, or to illicitly modify the Constitution through “interpretation.”

    The Supreme Court must strike down the newly undertaken egregious acts of the executive branch.

    Where is the Supreme Court?

    “Judicial Review in the United States”

    “The legitimacy of judicial review and the judge’s approach to judicial review are discussed.”


    “The doctrine of judicial review holds that the courts are vested with the authority to determine the legitimacy of the acts of the executive and the legislative branches of government.”

    – Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs

    Judicial Review

    The best-known power of the Supreme Court is judicial review, or the ability of the Court to declare a Legislative or Executive act in violation of the Constitution, is not found within the text of

    the Constitution itself. The Court established this doctrine in the case of Marbury v. Madison (1803).

    – United States Courts

  3. The Manhatten DA is going to reopen the Non disclosure agreement between Trump and Strormy. I guess Manhatten doesn’t have any crime, its going to waste a wad of money on already settled law.

    1. It’s too bad that New Yorkers didn’t elect Lee Zeldin. The NYC DA picks and chooses which crimes to prosecute.

  4. Nothing left to say anymore but Trump is a largely harmless blowhard; our Democrats are disgusting and a real threat; and the modern Dem party is largely made up of people who are either not well, oblivious, or are epically selfish and completely insulated from most people’s daily reality. I thought I left junior high decades ago. Guess I was mistaken. Never voting Dem again, and I’ve got at least 15 more voting cycles remaining in my life, assuming no one takes an actual lighter to the Constitution in that time. Nothing else poignant or insightful to share at this point. Gen Z is mistaken if they think people in their 40s or beyond are going anywhere anytime soon.

    1. Real President Donald J. Trump was, in fact, so effective on energy, the economy, foreign relations, etc., that the communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs, AINOs) and their allies in China were compelled to release “China Flu, 2020” on the eve of the 2020 election to diminish Real President Donald J. Trump’s prospects.

      That is certification of Real President Donald J. Trump’s being incredibly and huuugely effective, comrade.

      1. George: the orange swine was never a “real President”–he doesn’t deserve any title that places him the the same league as Washington, Lincoln, FDR, JFK, Eisenhower, Reagan or even the Bushes because he cheated to get into office, was impeached twice and started an insurrection after Americans rejected him a second time. He never had any viable “prosepects” to be re-elected because, despite 4 years’ time, he failed to capture even a 50% approval rating. There has never been any “China flu”, and Democrats had nothing whatsoever to do with this mutation of existing strains of coronavirus. I have a 1970 edition of “Control of Communicable Diseases in Man” that identifies coronavirus. COVID 19 was a more-virulent mutation of this same virus. The COVID 19 virus was first identified the year before Americans put Trump out of our White House–that’s why it’s called COVID 19–the 19 stands for the year it was isolated and identified, so it wasn’t the “eve of the 2020 election”, either. So, your conspiracy theory about the list of people you hate being responsible for scotching his re-election is nonsense.

  5. What exactly is Hunter Biden accused of? Soliciting favors from foreign governments in exchange for a ‘good word’ placed with the Vice President of the US? Obfuscation? WTF? Now compare the worst of the allegations against the Bidens, father and son. They amount to next to nothing when compared with the Trump administration. Kushner comes off big time with billions invested by Arabs, immediately following his representing the US there for four years. Trump makes big bucks by renting out rooms. Trump openly and in a recorded telephone call attempts to bargain US aid to Ukraine in exchange for assistance in attacking the Bidens. Trump pleads with an elected official to pad the vote count in his favor. Joe Biden and Hunter Biden come off as choir boys when compared with Trump, Kushner, and the rest of America’s latest and greatest disgrace. Let the Republicans mess themselves more and more. Come 2024, the Congress, Senate, and Presidency will be overwhelmingly Democrat. It will take a generation for America to forget this cesspool which is the Trump era.

    1. hunter biden was selling access to his father, the VP. Dad was part of that deal by getting his part of the money. When people buy access, it is for a reason. They want something. They are willing to pay or trade. So, what did Joe use his influence or power as VP to do for other countries and what was the payoff through Hunter? What about the no bid contracts Joe got for his brother and inlaws to build houses overseas when he had never been a builder. There were plenty of deals going on. They were structured so that Joe got kickbacks which is sometimes complicated to unwind, but they can be unwound. Other countries paying MILLIONS to Hunter for no reason is beyond belief. The mayor of Moscow wife paid him 3 million. Russia, Russia, Russia and for less evidence than this, Trump was investigated for 4 four years with over $35 Million in costs. Trump renting out rooms and making a fortune is laughable. The govt sets the rates for what they pay and I am certain it never met the normal going rate. And people were treated to a luxury and impressed which is a good thing when entertaining dignitaries from other countries.

      Trumps phone call IF you believe it to be quid pro quo, which most of us don’t, was obscure. Where as Joe as VP is on film detailing how HE threatened Zelensky with if you don’t fire the prosecutor, you don’t get the money we promised you. And “son of a bitch, he fired him”, says Joe on the film. WHY aren’t you wanting that prosecuted? THAT is blatant.

      If you go back and listen to the phone call with GA governor, not what was first reported without people hearing actual words…. Trump did not ask him to pad the votes. He asked him to ensure the votes were accurate. To check for illegal votes, the problem areas, etc BECAUSE the totals were so close, these things could make a difference. That’s a hell of a lot different than asking him to pad it. He was asking him to do due diligence ESPECIALLY because there were suspicions about irregularities.

      And if you think Biden and family come off as choir boys in any comparisons, you must mean the choir boys of Rikers Island Prison. Hunter with his drug habits, sex addictions, lying on firearm form (which sends others to prison), allowing people to attack and drive out of business a man who did nothing but fix his laptop, and when abandoned, because of who it belonged to and the child porn and other illegal stuff on it turn it over to legal authorites. He let people believe this man was framing him, so that he lost his business, and feared for his life due to death threats all because he and his father claimed it was “russian disinformation.”

    2. Hunter Biden is accused of Tax Evasion. Failure to register under FARA, false statements under oath when purchasing a gun,
      money laundering.

      Pretty much the same list that Manafort was convicted of.
      Because those are the crimes that tend to go along with influence peddling.

      It is quite often not possible to convict someone of the crime you know they committed – take Al Capone – he was convicted of Tax Evasion.

      Regardless, Hunter Biden is not “the target”.

      If you are asking me who I demand behind bars for a decade – that would be the attorney’s in NYC that firebombed a police car.
      Nothing Hunter Biden did comes close.

      Regardless, the House is not going to be “investigating Hunter” – they are going to be investigating Joe Biden.
      Hunter is just the road kill along the way.

      “Now compare the worst of the allegations against the Bidens, father and son. They amount to next to nothing when compared with the Trump administration.”

      That you honestly beleive that is disturbing.

      “Kushner comes off big time with billions invested by Arabs,”
      Yes, Actually invested – i.e. NOT Kushner’s money.

      “immediately following his representing the US there for four years.”
      That is right AFTER, not while.

      “Trump makes big bucks by renting out rooms.”
      What he is supposed to provide Rooms for free ?

      “Trump openly and in a recorded telephone call attempts to bargain US aid to Ukraine in exchange for assistance in attacking the Bidens.”
      Removing the spin, “Trump openly asks Ukraine to investigate the misconduct of the Bidens in Ukraine”
      Do you think the Biden’s misconduct is somehow immune from investigation because Trump is president, or because Biden might be running for president.
      Biden threatened the Saudi’s with loss of military aide if they did not delay raising oil prices until after the election.
      According to YOUR rules – why is Biden in office ?

      The Biden admin Appointed an SC after Trump announced for 2024 – by Your rules – Biden must be impeached or Trump is not prosecutable so long as he is running for president.

      The FACT is that there is nothing illegal about Trump asking Zelensky to investigate the Bidens.
      There is nothing illegal about Biden threatening to delay military aide if the Saudi’s do not delay oil price increases until after the election.
      It is actually improper for Garland to appoint an SC to investigate Trump – because there is no conflict with DOJ.
      It is legal for the DOJ to investigate Trump – if they have a valid basis for doing so. So far they have not actually demonstrated that.
      This resembles Collusion Delusion II.

      “Trump pleads with an elected official to pad the vote count in his favor.”
      Again removing spin – Trump demands that an election official that he has no authority over look for fraud.

      “Joe Biden and Hunter Biden come off as choir boys when compared with Trump”
      Not in the real world.

      You constantly conflate legal acts that do not involve the use of government power, with actual corruption.

      “Kushner, and the rest of America’s latest and greatest disgrace.”

      I still can not make sense of your Kushner nonsense.

      The Saudi’s did not give Kushner billions of dollars.
      It is NOT Kushner’s money, it is the saudi’s.
      He is getting paid a fee in return for investing it profitably.
      If he fails to do so, they will take their money back.

      ” Let the Republicans mess themselves more and more. Come 2024, the Congress, Senate, and Presidency will be overwhelmingly Democrat. It will take a generation for America to forget this cesspool which is the Trump era.”
      Believe as you wish.

      It is clear at the moment that Republicans can not do anything about corrupt mailin elections, and ballot harvesting, and other forms of fraud that Democrats engage in.
      It is clear that despite the fact that 80% of american’s wnat real voter ID, and 80% of americans want the vote completely counted on election night – that neither of these is happening anytime soon, and that democrats will figure out how many votes they need to manufacture by about midnight on election day – and then produce enough ballots to win close elections.

      As to what will happen in 2024 or the future.

      Sorry Democrats are screwed.
      We are in the midst of a massive voter realignment.
      But for Covid and the lawless mailin voting it brought – republicans would have controlled the house and senate and presidency in 2020,
      and would have a 60 vote majority in the Senate now.

      Republicans did not pick up as many minority votes as expected in 2022 – but they are making gains in every demographic except under 30 and single women.

      Further, in the end Democrats are their own worst enemies.

      The mess that is the US, the world, the Biden admin, the country right now, is not an accident.
      The mess at the border is democrats fault.
      Inflation is democrats fault.
      The weakening economy and coming recession is democrats fault.
      The violence in our streets is democrats fault.
      The problems in our schools are democrats fault.
      The high price of gas, and food, and the world wide violence that is likely to follow is democrats fault.
      And on and on and on.

      Your policies do not work
      I do not need to say that at all – look around, you have done all this to yourself – and to the rest of us.

      I am very sorry that the american people have chosen to suffer through 2 more years of the absolute disaster that is the Biden presidency.

      “One day as I sat musing, sad and lonely without a friend, a voice came to me from out of the gloom saying, ‘Cheer up. Things could be worse.’ So I cheered up and sure enough—things got worse.”

      One thing is for certain – so long as they retain power – Democrats will make it worse.

      How many more working class, hispanic and black voters do you think you can lose – before Fraud is not enough ?

    3. Should your forecasts prove to be true – which is doubtful.
      The results will be more damage to the country.

      You do not seem to grasp that you can not govern as you please.
      What you do must actually work.

      I am watching Ken Burns documentary on Prohibition right now.
      When the Volstead act was passed – those who passed it really beleived they were bringing utopia about.
      Williams Jenning Bryant spoke on the night it went into effect of how much better the country would be.
      No drunks in the street and end to domestic violence – in nearly every possible way the country would be waking up to a new, brighter, better day.

      How well did that work out ?

      It always works out badly when people seek to create utopia on earth by force over the objections of others.
      Those seeking to impose their will can be the majority – the results will still be BAD.

      If the next two years are not so bad as to preclude anyone with a D after their name from being elected – then the next two will.

      You can not help but fail horribly.

      You can “get Trump” – though that is unlikely. It will change nothing.

      If you wish to keep the democratic party from falling apart – you must succeed.
      And you do not know how to do that.

    4. What is it that you expect in the next two years ?
      Do you honestly think inflation ends without recession ?

      Look at what happened arround the world last time oil and food prices shot up.

      Europe expects 10,000 people to freeze to death this winter.
      And that does not address the impact of limited energy on business.
      The EU has a choice between killing people and killing their economy.
      And probably both will occur.
      And at somepoint much of the world is going to grasp this is all Biden’s fault – if they have not already.
      Worse still the Nordstream pipelines have been severed.
      They will not be fixed easily, even a quick peace in the mideast is going to leave the EU in deep trouble for a long time.
      Europeans are restarting nuclear plants – and coal plants.

      We have yet to see the impact of spiking food prices int he rest of the world
      but last time we saw that – we had arab spring. Violence throughout the mideast.

      We have a mess in China of unknown size – the good news is that China did that to themselves – Biden is not responsible.
      The bad news is it increases the odds China will act militarily.

      There is no good end to what is going on in Ukraine – and we are stupidly risking nuclear war.

      “Nuclear War Cannot be Won and Must Never be Fought”
      Ronald Reagan.

      I will admit that the risk of nuclear war as a result of the Ukraine war is low.
      But the price is impossibly high
      300 million dead in hours. 3 Billion in a year.

      That risk has been gone for almost a generation – you brought it back.

      1. Re.n John Say …that is a lot to unpack. Well I don’t know the “elements” the DoJ needs for: Special counsel….it must be more than comey r” no easonable prosecutor ” sstandard. .and there in lies the rub. The appointed smith….might be as turley says ‘inclined to over…charge.’ Like in McDonnell. And Smith will need unimpeachable evidence…which he can’t get when the accountant Sings to save his own skin! Think of it like this….Trump is breaking a “accounting” law. His tax guy says you can’t do that. ( if the tax guy even warned) ….tax guy does it at Trump’s demand. (Allegedly) ..if you are going to beleive the accountant…. Then he per se…..broke the law himself…hotly impeachable now. say anything to save his own skin. But before the special counsel he
        Was given immunity!!! Worse where are the victims? The harm? The doj has “standing”…..because their “law” was violated? If only it was so easy for everyone else!. Then there are his lawyers doing. Mara largo…but I am sorry respondent superior is not enough for crime al charges! No reasonable prosecutor…would convert man’s rea like this… is seemingly all ppolitical… policy left right left. And it’s a shame….this .man had a very comfortable life….and he risks it for peons….you and me. Love him more daily…but he’s in so deep now the “mafia” can’t let him out alive.

        1. There can be no special prosecutor if there is not sufficient predication for an investigation.

          There was not sufficient predication for the Collusion Delusion investigation EVER.
          We now know the FBI/DOJ knew it was a hoax from the start.
          not from a week later but from day one.

          That means no legitimate investigation can follow.

          The constitution bars law enforcment for investigating whatever and whoever they want at anytime.
          An investigation must have predication.

          A separate element for an SC is a conflict between DOJ/FBI and those being investigated that means that DOJ/FBI can not be trusted to conduct the investigation.

          That conflict existed with the collusion delusion – but predication did not.

          With MAL and J6 minimal predication exists, but conflict does not.
          But I am not worked up over this. I have no idea what Smith will do – he could be another Mueller psychopath.
          No matter what this is Garland’s effort to unload a hot potato. And to attempt to thwart congressional inquiry.

          I do nto think that predication with respect to J6 or MAL is sustainable.
          All the so called J6 conspiracies are “real” – but a conspiracy to do something legal that democrats do not like is not a crime.
          But the J6 nonsense is the most dangerous – because it would involve a DC jury, and DC judges.

          MAL has better predication – it appears that had insider reports that classified documents were present.
          It does not matter if the documents found were actually classified. A credible claim is enough for the Warrant.

          But even finding actual classified documents is not enough to prosecute.

          There are only two fact patterns for MAL that lead to a crime

          The first is that Trump shared documents that can be demonstrated to still be classified with people unable to see them AFTER he was no longer president. There is no evidence of that todate, outside some stupid early stories, there is not even a claim to that effect.

          The 2nd is that Trump or someone at his direction snuck back to the white house and stole classified documents after he was president.

          Every scenario that involved the transfer of these documents while Trump was president, either results in their being declassifed, or still classifed, but no actual crime – and most scenarios actually result in their being declassified.
          It is actually very hard to argue that Trump did not defacto declassify them when he ordered their transfer to MAL as his presidency was ending.
          Just as a president giving classifed documents to another person with no clearance declassifies them,
          so does the president giving them to himself as ex-president. Trump was incorrect when he said he can think documents declassified.
          But he is correct there is no magic formula. Any presidential ACTION that intentionally results in classified documents outside secure control, declassifies those documents.

    5. And it will take a lot more than that to undo the damage caused by Dem policies. You all will stand in sewage YOU CAUSED rather than call a republican septic tank pumper!

      So if you like government intrusion, economic misery, schools who sexually groom your child, millions of people we know nothing about steaming across our border, homelessness, drugs, and crime – keep electing Democrats and the whole country will be SanFran, Chicago, NYC.

      There’s a new game and the Dems are sipping our asses – it’s called screw with the election process.

    6. “. . . in exchange for a ‘good word’ placed with the Vice President of the US?”

      That “good word” is propaganda value for America’s greatest enemy: communist China. That “good word” compromises *President* Biden on any decision related to China, and the other authoritarian regmies he and HB received money from. And that “good word” opened economic opportunities (e.g., via licenses and special dispensations) to *communist* Chinese companies — which thereby provides more wealth for the *communist* Chinese to enslave its own citizens and to support its desire to export communism.

      If you believve that that “good word” is benign, then you are either ignorant or a dupe.

  6. If the laptop is “genuine” (h/t CBS), not ‘Russian disinformation’, over 50 top national security officials in the Intelligence Community (IC) have some explaining to do.

    That’s the story.

    *The former Trump administration officials who signed the letter include Russ Travers, who served as National Counterterrorism Center acting director; Glenn Gerstell, the former NSA general counsel; Rick Ledgett, the former deputy NSA director; Marc Polymeropoulos, a retired CIA senior operations officer; and Cynthia Strand, who served as the CIA’s deputy assistant director for global issues. Former CIA directors or acting directors Brennan, Leon Panetta, Gen. Michael Hayden, John McLaughlin and Michael Morell also signed the letter, along with more than three dozen other intelligence veterans. Several of the former officials on the list have endorsed Biden.”

    1. Yes, alot of smart people said very stupid things.

      The Biden laptop is not Russian disinformation.
      And these people all knew or should have known at the time.

      This is not even a close call.

    1. Name the year when the Republicans, when they controlled Congress, defunded the US Department of Energy, or the US Department of Education, heck, let’s make it easy: when did they ever defund National Peoples Radio? NPR has been around since 1970 and yet they continue to throw molotov cocktails at Americans with gusto

      NPR’s funding has been a point of controversy since its founding in 1970. NPR is officially a private company, but up until 1983, it received over half of its funding from the federal government through the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB).

      Prediction: Republicans will be a charlie foxtrot in the US House because that’s what they always do.

      1. I was at a pre-thanksgiving meal yesterday were I was told, that Ginny Thomas lead an insurrection, republicans were going to ban interracial marriage, and birth control, and that Democrats had actually done very important work on climate change in the inflation reduction act.

        And this was some smart people that I respected.

        The best we can hope for from republicans is that they do nothing.
        And we can not even expect that from democrats.

        1. You need some new friends, John. Here in Richmond, which is as democrat as they come, I have heard no one mention any of those histrionic predictions. Mind you this is land of 50% blacks and a major state university that sees “woke” as a badge of honor

          I just started reading the following book and thought you might appreciate it

          The Song of the Cell: An Exploration of Medicine and the New Human
          by Siddhartha Mukherjee

          Anything by Dr Mukherjee is an intellectual feast. Medicine is finally turning more and more to cell biology and genomics, and Mukherjee writes well for both scientists and lay folks. It is a fast read

          1. Thanks for the recomendation.

            If Richmond is not so nuts – I am surprised.

            But I was not surprised by my friends. These are the people who saved the democrats bacon a few days ago,
            and they come close to matching what the polls say.
            They mostly agree that the economy is going to hell, that Biden is a poor president.
            But they are convinced that Republicans are ogres who drink the blood of babies – which is really odd given that the want to kill fetuses,
            and think abortions are healthcare.

            What I am surprised by is that this nonsense worked.

            The left, the media and democrats have been caught in so many big lies for so long.

            Durham’s last nails in the collusion delusion were way way way too much for me.

            These people are the threat to democracy.
            You can not have any form of self government if prosecutors and law enforcement can investigate whoever they want for reasons they KNOW are made up.
            And this was not a few people. large portions of DOJ, the FBI and the SC’s office had to know this was all built on a hoax.

  7. Far more importantly, Garland has just cemented his guilt in criminal conspiracy to violate President Trump’s Constitutional rights. First the illegal Mara Lago warrant (it is Constitutionally impossible for any POTUS to “steal secret documents”), now by appointing a special prosecutor for things which cannot be crimes in the first place (Trump had nothing whatsoever to do with the election theft protest).

    This man needs to rot in a dark cell for a century or more, along with all his co-conspirators.

    1. I do not think the SC is a big deal.

      I think it is a highly political move on Garland’s part.
      I think it is improper – Trump is not a proper target for an SC – as there is no conflict with DOJ.

      But the BiG reason is Garland has been under pressure to do something.
      and this insulates him from that pressure.

      I am not saying Garland is right, only that he has passed the hot potato to someone else.

  8. “If Smith is going to be the first prosecutor to indict a former president, he needs to do so with unimpeachable evidence of an unchallengeable crime.”

    This assumes Smith and the DOJ in general are acting in good faith.


    A better legal authority for you to have cited was H. L. Mencken, writing the Baltimore SUN, 9 February 1920, viz:

    “The accusation will be quite as potent as the proof. In such matters, one does not need convincing evidence,; one merely needs an effective charge.”

    The Niagara of leaks from Smith’s boiler room will be amplified by the press into a conviction. No need for an actual trial. Don’t even need to have Big Don be the GOP ’24 nominee. Just fodder the press propaganda.

  9. I find it very amusing that CBS is trying to regain it’s reputation after years of misleading us. They have begrudgingly now admitted that the Hunter laptop is for real. Hey CBS, Why don’t you believe the 51 intelligence experts now? So CBS, you boycotted Twitter for all of about two weeks and now you want to rejoin the club. Alfalfa says, “Sorry Spanky, once you have let the club down we can never trust you again.” Sorry CBS, we will never trust you again and we don’t wish you well.

    1. Garland and Smith are in serious jeopardy. What we will see is a Durham type investigation that has no end because the DOJ is now just trying to save face. This comes on the heels of the FBIs recent admission of finding nothing criminal at Trump’s residence in Florida, and the Tweets released by Elon Musk last Friday showing President Trump pleaded with the protestors to remain peaceful on January 6th. The DOJ investigation of Trump is obsolete on day 3.

  10. Jonathan: Your column doesn’t contain anything revelatory about AG Garland’s appointment of Jack Smith as Special Counsel. That was dictated by Trump’s announcing he is running in 2024. Since Garland works for Biden he didn’t want any appearance of a conflict of interest. The significance of the appointment is this. Had Garland believed there was insufficient evidence to prosecute Trump he wouldn’t have appointed Smith. And Smith is the perfect person to be Special Counsel. He is a junk yard dog and experienced prosecutor –willing to lose two high profile cases against well-known politicians. He won’t hesitate to prosecute a former president if he thinks he has the goods.

    Trump says he won’t “partake” in Smith’s investigation. His perfect right under the Constitution. But that doesn’t mean the criminal investigation will be hindered. I think Smith will first go after the “low lying fruit”–people like Rudy Giuliani, Mark Meadows, John Eastman, Jeffrey Clark and others involved in the conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election. Might Ginni Thomas also be charged? That could cause serious problems for Clarence Thomas. He has already refused to recuse himself in 2020 election related cases. If any case against involving the above is appealed to the SC, what will Thomas do? Not a pretty scenario.

    What you don’t mention is that the GOP controlled House is already making plans to obstruct Smith’s investigation. Marjorie Taylor Greene, the bomb thrower and who has McCarthey’s ear, wants to cut DOJ funding. Greene has not had any success in passing her own legislation so her threat will probably go nowhere. But the GOP can hold “oversight” hearings, force DOJ officials to testify, and in general try to gum up the wheels of justice. That probably won’t work either.

    One thing is certain. If Smith decides he has sufficient evidence to prosecute Trump he will likely get Garland’s approval. If that happens we are headed to a modern version of the “War of the Worlds”! For Smith maybe the third time will be a charm!

    1. Actually, all that Smith is tasked with is reviewing all of the evidence and making a recommendation to Garland as to whether to prosecute or not.

    2. HAHAHA, this will be a sh1t show for progessives, nothing more, nothing less. They realize J6 is closing up shop so they need a new inproved show. This equals Russian collusion show = Mulluer show = Ukraine show/impeachment show = J6 show. Progressive NEED a show……and Garland just gave them one. This will have absolutely no bearing on 2024 other than to make DJT even more popular.

    3. “That was dictated by Trump’s announcing he is running in 2024. Since Garland works for Biden he didn’t want any appearance of a conflict of interest.”
      There is no conflict of interest. This is entirely Garland getting rid of a hot potato.

      “The significance of the appointment is this. Had Garland believed there was insufficient evidence to prosecute Trump he wouldn’t have appointed Smith. ”
      Mueller was appointed based on “evidence” that was a known HOAX.
      You can not infer anything about evidence from an SC appointment anymore.

      “I think Smith will first go after the “low lying fruit”–people like Rudy Giuliani, Mark Meadows, John Eastman, Jeffrey Clark and others involved in the conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election.”
      That would be meaningful if there was a crime. There isn’t.
      We have been through this over and over.

      “Might Ginni Thomas also be charged? ”
      Democrats are running the world – mother Theresa might be charged speculating as to what lawless democrats might do is a fools errand.

      “That could cause serious problems for Clarence Thomas.”
      because magic ?

      “He has already refused to recuse himself in 2020 election related cases. If any case against involving the above is appealed to the SC, what will Thomas do?”
      What ever he wants.
      You seem to be under the delusion that you can manufacture a basis for recusal.
      You can not.
      Further if you beleive Thomas must recuse – your only remedy is impeachment.
      Have fun with that.
      BTW why must Thomas recuse himself from 2020 election cases ?
      Shouldn’t all democrats who beleive there was no fraud have to recuse ?

      Disagreeing with you is not a conflict of interest.
      “What you don’t mention is that the GOP controlled House is already making plans to obstruct Smith’s investigation. Marjorie Taylor Greene, the bomb thrower and who has McCarthey’s ear, wants to cut DOJ funding. Greene has not had any success in passing her own legislation so her threat will probably go nowhere. But the GOP can hold “oversight” hearings, force DOJ officials to testify, and in general try to gum up the wheels of justice. That probably won’t work either.”

      Republicans announced plans to investigate the crap out of DOJ and withold funding long before the 2022 election.
      Garland can not avoid being investigated by appointing a special counsel.

      Again – please refer to Iran Contra – it is Common for congress to keep its distance from ongoing investigations.
      But it is a curtesey, not a priviledge.
      There is absolutely no “ongoing investigation” priviledge.

      I fully expect – as they did from 2016 forward, Democrats to forcefully stall in every way possible.
      But I expect that the GOP is fed up with that.

      Yes, they absolutely can interfere with these fraudulent democratic investigations.
      They can get what they want from Garland or they can call whatever witnesses they like – democrat or republican, and give them immunity for testifying.
      You listed people that Smith might investigate. Jordan can call every single one of them, offer them transactional immunity, get the actual truth out, and End this nonsense.
      Jordan can call Hunter Biden and grant him immunity.
      Jordan can call FBI agents and give them immunity.

      Jordan can call anyone inside government and force them to testify. The only priviledge that these people ACTUALLY have that Jordan can not waive is executive priviledge – and getting any of these people to claim executive priviledge poses a huge problem with Biden.
      Executive priviledge only applies to communications with the President.
      Raising executive priviledge proves that Biden was involved.

      “One thing is certain. If Smith decides he has sufficient evidence to prosecute Trump he will likely get Garland’s approval.”
      Nope. There is very little Smith needs Garlands approval for. That is how SC’s are designed to work.

      Mueller got Barr’s approval for almost nothing. And frankly ignored what Barr told him.
      Barr told Mueller that his report had to be immediately publishable – without any GJ or other information requiring redaction.
      Mueller agreed and then provided a report that required extensive editing to be legally publishable.

      “If that happens we are headed to a modern version of the “War of the Worlds”! For Smith maybe the third time will be a charm!”
      Wishful thinking.
      Everything MAL related must be prosecuted in Florida – have fun. FL is not DC.

      And you are getting nowhere trying to criminalize challenging a likely fraudulent election through entirely constitutional means.

      1. John Say: You say there is “no conflict of interest” In AG Garland’s appointment of the Special Counsel and that Garland was simply “getting rid of a hot potato”. Shows you don’t know the difference between an actual conflict of interest and the “appearance” of a conflict of interest. The latter is defined as the “impression that a reasonable person might have, after full disclosure of the facts, that an appointee’s judgment might be significantly influenced by outside interests, even though there may be no actual conflict of interest”. See the difference? There was no actual conflict in Garland’s appointment of the Social Counsel. But since he works for the President who has announced he is running in 2024 and Trump has done the same, the AG felt there might be an “appearance” of a conflict of interest if he alone decided to prosecute Trump. Thus the appointment of a Special Counsel. Got that straight? Garland is not the kind of guy to get “rid of a hot potato” in his decisions.

        There is a lot of other nonsense in your comment but I don’t have the time here to address it. But I would be remiss if I did not address your false claim that SC Smith doesn’t need the AG’s approval to prosecute Trump. See 28CFR Part 600 regarding the general powers of a Special Counsel. Under Section 600.3(b) a Special Counsel is appointed as a “confidential employee” of the DOJ. And who heads the DOJ? The Attorney General. That means Garland is Smith’s boss. Read the entirety of Part 600 and it is quite clear SC Smith could not prosecute Trump without Garland’s approval.

        I can’t begin to tell you how tiresome it is to have point out all the misinformation and glib statements you make on this blog without backing them up with facts. But I suspect you will be back at it tomorrow!

        1. Dennis – this is nonsense.

          This is not about the appearance of a conflict.

          There point blank is none. There is not a question. There can be no “appearance” where it is OBVIOUS there is no conflict.

          The “appearance” standard applies when things are not black or white.
          It essentially says they if there could be a conflict you must act as if there is.

          But there can not be a conflict.

          Biden is president. Trump is not. Trump has no role at all in the federal government right now.
          There is no conflict of interest. The DOJ under Garland is once again acting outside the law.

          There is no “appearance” of conflict because Trump is running in 2024.
          If Trump is elected the AG will resign, as will all US attorney’s at DOJ.
          It is incredibly rare for a US attorney to remain from one administration to the next.

          AGAIN there is no conflict.

          Yes. you DO have the problem that Biden/Garland/Democrats are violating what YOU claimed was an inviolable principle when you impeached Trump.

          But YOU have no work arround for that.

          The REAL standard – which I shouted repeatedly at the time, is that The current administration – President, AG, …. can investigate a political rival, when the constitutional requirements for an investigation are met.
          They were NOT met for the collusion delusion – and that is a huge deal as that was a REAL coup attempt.
          They were met when Trump asked Zelensky to look into the Biden’s.
          I do not think the current MAL case against Trump is going anywhere, but there is enough for an investigation.
          Conversely the J6 nonsense does not meet the constitutional standard.
          It is legal to actually overturn an election. The constitution gives congress the power to overturn an election.
          It can do so because there was fraud, it can do so just because it feels like it.
          It is not easy to do, but the process exists.

          You are free to disagree with me – but doing so requires impeaching Biden.
          Whatever the the standard – it must be applied regardless of politics.

        2. DM – you clearly do not understand what a conflict of interest is or what the appearance of one is.

          I would note that – there is an actual problem of political bias at DOJ/FBI – but that can not be fixed by an SC.

          I would note that your misreading of the appearance of a conflict would make Trump uninvestigatable – and require the appointment of an SC to deal with J6 and parents of school kids, and …

          Do you actually think before you post ?

          There is an actual conflict with Garland’d DOJ even investigating parents of school students – given how he was suckered into issuing a directive based on the false NASBA letter.
          There is the appearance of conflict in ALL J6 related cases – do we have to retry all of those that have taken place because Garland has the appearance of a conflict. Actually there is a REAL conflict – had the election successfully been overturned Garland would not be AG.

          Garland’s DOJ is corrupt – but an SC will not solve that problem.
          And if YOU doi not beleive that Garland is corrupt – then there is no conflict.

        3. Garland is absolutely the kind of guy to get rid of a hot potato.

          He has been having problems since he was appointed. He has been played and duped repeatedly by the WH.
          He has been left to fend for himself making stupid arguments in the house and the senate.

          Garland is corrupt, but not as corrupt as Biden.
          Further Garland gives a damn about his legacy.
          He wants to be remembered as the guy who should have been on the supreme court.
          Not the guy who proved we dodged a bullet.

        4. Are you honestly stupid enough to think that Garland must approve every single one of the tens of thousands of prosecutions the DOJ engages in ?

          You claim my argument is nonsense – but your employee argument is ludicrously stupid.

          Clarence Thomas is an employee of the federal Judiciary. Can John Roberts fire him ? Must Roberts approve of everything Thomas does ?

          “I can’t begin to tell you how tiresome it is to have point out all the misinformation and glib statements you make on this blog without backing them up with facts. ”

          I do not give a schiff about your “feelings”

          The FACT is that you are WRONG – pretty much always.

          The facts exist to “back up” my claims.
          And YOU remain among the millions duped by the collusion delusion,
          you have a long way to go to reach neutral credibility.

          Something is not wrong because you do not like it.
          It is not misinformation because you have constructed a poor counter argument.

        5. “SC Smith could not prosecute Trump without Garland’s approval.”

          Speaking of glib shorn of facts:
          [T]he Special Counsel shall exercise, within the scope of his or her jurisdiction, the full power and independent authority to exercise all investigative *and prosecutorial functions* of any United States Attorney.” (§ 600.6 Powers and authority” of Special Counsel, emphasis added;

          SC’s do *not* need AG approval to prosecute.

          1. Sam: Under CFR Section 6004(b) and (b) it specifically provides that “the jurisdiction of a Special Counsel shall be established by the Attorney General”. If the Special Counsel wants additional jurisdiction he/she must obtain the approval the AG. Everything in Part 600 makes it clear the AG supervises the work of a Special Counsel. Do you really naively believe that if Jack Smith believed he had a solid case to prosecute Trump in this high profile case he wouldn’t consult with AG Garland first? When John Durham brought those two failed prosecutions do you think he didn’t consult with Bill Barr first?

            You are the “glib” one, living in an alt universe like your friends John Say and S.Meyer. If Jack Smith gets approval to prosecute Trump he probably will hold a press conference to make the announcement. Who do you think will be standing next to him? Answer? AG Garland. If Smith had the authority to prosecute Trump on his own without the AG’s approval do you think Garland would do that? The final decision on whether to prosecute Trump will be made by the AG. Just like others on this blog you don’t know what you are talking about. It’s a phrase I have to keep repeating because you guys refuse to deal in facts.

            1. “You are the “glib” one, living in an alt universe like your friends John Say and S.Meyer. “

              Dennis, why am I in this discussion? I have proven you factually wrong numerous times. You have never been able to do the same, and you never correct your errors, instead you repeat them. This present argument is between you and Sam, and isn’t of great importance. What is important is your inability to be logical, constant, and able to respond to those with valid disagreement.

              1. “What is important is your inability to be logical, constant, and able to respond to those with valid disagreement.”

                Exactly! Just be man enough to admit that you made a mistake. Say “thank you.” And move on.

                It’s always the cover-up that makes the person look so defensive and foolish.

                1. Thanks, Sam, Dennis’s problem is his refusal to believe there is more than one side of the story. He is defenseless in an argument. That is why instead of responding, he runs away.

                  I think John Say’s response (below) to Dennis says it all. “So you can not think as well as read.”

                2. Admitting you made a mistake would be the holy grail.
                  Or admit nothing – but do not continue to claim as facts things that have been repeatedly and obviously proven wrong.

                  I would settle for making actual arguments rather than spewing nonsense and ad hominem.

            2. So you can not think as well as read.

              Jurisdiction is the scope of the SC investigation.
              The current scope is whatever Garland placed in the order appointing an SC.
              the SC is free to investigate and prosecute anything within that scope.
              If he wishes to broaden the investigation to include the Colorado Gay Bar shooting – he would have to ask Garland.

            3. Did John Durham consult with Barr over prosecuting Danchenko or Sussman.
              Without a doubt he did not. Barr has not been AG for 2 years.

              It is possible that Durham INFORMED Garland, but he did not ask or require his permission.
              Garland as AG can Step in and Order the SC to not do something.
              But within the scope of the appointment letter he needs no further permission.

            4. If Trump is indicted – the SC will likely have a press conference.
              Garland may or may not be invited.

              I doubt he was present at any Durham press conference and Barr was not present at Mueller press conferences.

              It is correct that Garland has the power to overrule decisions by the SC should he choose – something that is highly unlikely.
              It is not true that the SC needs the AG’s prior permission.
              It is also not true that the AG MUST be involved – such as at press conferences.

              I strongly suspect Garland will avoid public association with the AG like the plague.
              Garland’s further involvement would make his own position worse.

              While I think Garland is tossing a hot potato,
              He is also trying to defuse the claims of political bias.
              Except that this will not accomplish that.
              As we learned from Mueller – the same pollitical hack FBI agents will be involved.

            5. The FACT is you can not actually read the law.
              Not even when you quote it.

              This is not rocket science.
              It is just legal overreach on your part.

              I do not know why this is important to you.

              The SC appointment is error – because there is no conflict with DOJ.
              But the appointment of an SC to chase after Trump does not change anything for Trump.
              The appointment of an SC to look into the Biden syndicate – something that IS required, would change things.

              Whether the SC needs the AG’s permission to prosecute someone is purely a function of the language of the law.
              The law could have been written as you claim. But it was not.

              The difference is not really relevant to Trump or this case.
              But it is relevant to Garland trying to escape a political hot potato.

            6. “[SC JS] wouldn’t consult with AG Garland first?”

              You’re changing your tune. In other words: You are lying about your initial claim, because you are too dishonest to admit that you made a mistake.

              You did *not* claim that JS would “consult” with Garland. You alleged that an SC, by statute, is reguired to secure the AG’s approval before prosecuting a case. And *that* claim is categorically false.

          2. DM is unable to understand the difference between SHALL and MAY.

            Garland MAY fire Smith. He MAY exercise whatever oversight he wishes, including approving every single subpoena or warrant, or indictment issued.
            But he is not obligated to do so, and in fact the Appointment of an SC is specifically to isolate the DOJ from the actions of the SC.
            The SC is supposed to be as independent as possible, and the DOJ is supposed to be as divorced as possible from the decisions of the SC.
            The HOPE is that the SC is thus insulated from the politics and alleged conflicts of the DOJ.

            I would further note – in this case that is exactly what Garland wants.
            I fully expect that from now on – Garland will answer all questions that he can by refering to the SC’s office.

            While Garland’s decision here was WRONG – there is no conflict requiring an SC.
            Appointing an SC was politically brilliant for Garland. It tosses a hot potato to someone else.
            It is well known that Biden and the democratic party have been pressuring Garland to act illegally and unconstitutionally.
            Those on the left believe any attempt to thwart them is a crime, and the law is a political weapon.

    4. “That was dictated by Trump’s announcing he is running in 2024. Since Garland works for Biden he didn’t want any appearance of a conflict of interest”

      Dennis, what was the conflict of interest? How does Trump’s announcement lead to a conflict of interest? The spelling and punctuation are good but your logic fails.

  11. I’ve sometimes wondered if Hunter left the computer on purpose (maybe a way of opening this up to investigation so that the madness might end) vs. sloppiness from being protected by the powerful. He left many more trails than the laptop. There is the 26,000+ emails in Bevan Cooney’s account (former partner and now prisoner) and all the electronic communications that were turned over by Toni Bobulinski. The laptop is the tip of the iceberg and the implications for the Biden family syndicate is sobering. The coverup is an even bigger story.

    The legal advice I received more than once is do not put anything in an email that you do not want on the front page of the New York Times. Yet, politicians and business folks put sensitive information in electronic form frequently thinking that they are on a secure form of communication.

    All we want for Christmas (which I know that will not occur) is that all the politicians put down the knives and daggers and actually do something to solve problems for the citizens of this nation. Wishful thinking.

    1. E.M., Hunter leaving the laptop was just a call for help because he was always paying daddy’s bills.

      1. Think it Through,
        I agree with you. Hunter wrote as much in a letter to his daughter. He was the one brokering the deals to sell Joe’s inside knowledge and influence and funding “Pop’s” lavish lifestyle to the tune of millions of dollars. Joe did not get an ocean front mansion on a Senator’s salary. It would take an experienced and determined forensic accountant a week to make short work of this whole affair. If he has nothing to hide, bring on the audit and he will come out squeaky clean. That won’t happen.

  12. I did not even read, if you can’t call out those damned thugs for targeting a PERSON with the LAW then you are just as bad as them, when men like you allow this BS to go on without calling them thugs were have lost the country.

    1. Yep we have lost our country. Remember Pelosi piine-ing about “Marshall law” in 2008? 6 months after Lehman? The liquidity…crisis… the ftx unwind is going to be Worse…..because there are going to be ….if it’s a “$ecutity” ….a ton of gambling losses…that offset tax revenue: everyone who gambled…individually writes it off……which while they take serious hit….it’s a loss…so uncle Sam allows a write off…on taxes they would otherwise pay on incomes Think like this… are one of 30 million living in mom’s basement delivering pizza for 25k per year. Playing the crypto slots. …now you lost so much in crypto….”securities” you got a write off….and carryover write off…and it adds up. So our economy is getting no where….in the “aggregate” but growing 2 pot plants or 500 pounds of wheat….that’s enough for the usgs commerce power…to regulate? But they wouldn’t regulate crypto despite the constitution? Now we all get screwed because even regulated company’s owned ftx? Again the honest people have to bail out the dubious….I’m sick of this plan.

  13. CBS now states Hunter Laptop from hell is “genuine” according to “experts”. If only Hunter had paid his $85 repair bill, none of this would have become known, per Gayle King. MSM ace reporters like Gayle King show Americans how not to defend democracy and instead spread disinformation

    1. A repair shop owner who has an abandoned laptop you should be able to wipe the computer and sell the hardware, perhaps. Not give the emails and pictures to whomever you want. Obviously, this story misses a step between “the owner has laptop” to “the [Trump-run] FBI subpoenaed the laptop.” The FBI does not know this computer repair shop owner has a laptop until someone goes through Hunter’s personal emails and tells them about it.

      1. Nope, evidence of a crime – as several of the emails and photos seem to indicate – would make you potentially culpable if it came up later. The owner did the correct thing in turning it over to the FBI…or trying to.

      2. The repair shop owner was covered under the repair agreement, and should not be expected to cover up organized crime and child porn.

          1. No, there isn’t a “suspect chain of custody” – it was given to the FBI and the other clone of the hard drive with Congress and Giuliani is the exact SAME hard drive. The media has even admitted the laptop is real and have verified materials on it. You have people addressed IN THE EMAILS AND MEMOS that corroborate the provenance of the material, the facts, and further testify to the potential illegal, corrupt, and or crimimal circumstances and arrangements in the materials.

            1. Wally is right: the first person to lay hands on the alleged hard drive was former (now suspended) attorney Giuliani. That puts a stink on the entire matter that cannot be explained away. The owner of the computer shop called Giuliani, who took custody of the item instead of suggesting that the shop owner call the FBI or another neutral and turn over the item to it, so the store owner is a Trump ally, too. It’s obvious that he looked at the hard drive before contacting Giuliani, who, before turning it over to the FBI, had copies made which he distributed to Republicans and Trump-sympathetic media. Who knows who handled the item before Giuliani, erased or added new items, or if it is even original. If this were on the up and up, Giuliani should have suggested that the shop owner himself turn over the item to law enforecement, instead of taking the item, copying it and distributing it before turning it over. Don’t forget the reason why Giuliani got suspended: for lying to multiple courts about nonexistent election fraud. It all smells, and nothing can erase the stench. Chain of custody is an insurmountable problem, IMHO.

              1. You are just flat wrong. The owner turned the hard drive over to the FBI over a year before he gave a copy to Giuliani. Why did he then give a copy to Giuliani? Because the FBI were hiding it and not investigating it. So he gave a copy to Giuliani – a mirrored copy – that is in the Congressional record. You haven’t seen anybody running forward saying it is a fake copy, have you? NOPE. In fact, the media has verified that they are NOT fake.

                Woooommmmpppwahhhh! Thanks for playing.

                1. Giuliani’s copy can’t be a mirror copy, as changes were made on Giuliani’s copy after the date that the hard drive was turned over to the FBI.

                  “You haven’t seen anybody running forward saying it is a fake copy, have you? NOPE. In fact, the media has verified that they are NOT fake.”

                  No, actually, the media confirmed that much of it cannot be verified:

                  1. An excellent article addressing every single claim of yours and then some back in October 2020.


                    “First, the claim that the material is of suspect authenticity or cannot be verified — the excuse used on behalf of Biden by Leslie Stahl and Christiane Amanpour, among others — is blatantly false for numerous reasons. As someone who has reported similar large archives in partnership with numerous media outlets around the world (including the Snowden archive in 2014 and the Intercept’s Brazil Archive over the last year showing corruption by high-level Bolsonaro officials), and who also covered the reporting of similar archives by other outlets (the Panama Papers, the WikiLeaks war logs of 2010 and DNC/Podesta emails of 2016), it is clear to me that the trove of documents from Hunter Biden’s emails has been verified in ways quite similar to those.”
                    Glenn Greenwald Oct 2020.

              2. I what you claimed was true – that would be fine. Rudy Guilliani Was a US DA who successfully prosecuted the Mob despite death threats Who as a republican won the Mayors race in NYC and made NYC substantially safer. Who led NYC though that Terrorist attack on 9/11

                And you want to piss over him, because he stood by Trump ?

                Rudy Gulliani is a great person who has done great things in his life.
                Joe Biden is not. Frankly it is hard to think of a democrat who could shine Guillianis shoes.

                I do not agree with Guilliani on somethings. While I think he was well meaning in his post election assistance to Trump.
                He was out of his depth and the wrong person for the moment, he was also tool old and frankly too intoxicated,
                and republicans were hurt by that.

                But that does not make him an evil person. Just someone who did not know when to letter younger people carry the load.

                Regardless, it it was actually True that Guiliani was the first person to get the Hunter Hard Drive – there would be nothing wrong with that.
                But he was not. The FBI had the Hunter Hard Drive and was investigating Hunter while the Democrat house was busy impeaching Trump.
                And THAT is actually criminal. That is a failure of AG Barr. The Hunter Biden hard drive should have been turned over to Trump’s lawyers when the house first started impeachment hearings because Trump wanted the Biden’s investigated in Ukraine.
                Had the Hunter Biden hard drive surfaced then – The first impeachment would not have happened – even democrats would have been afraid to go forward, Joe Biden never would have been able to run for present and we would not be in the mess we are in now, because an old fool went woke.
                ‘Don’t underestimate Joe’s ability to F$%K things up’ Barack Obama.

              3. Gigi;

                If Comer can deliver 10% of what he claims he can already prove Democrats and Biden are in deep Schiff.
                House republicans are claiming they can ALREADY connect the Biden crime syndicate to deals involving very shady people in over 50 countries,
                including Drug Dealers, and human traffickers.

                While some of this was While Joe was out of office – when it is ever a good thing to be dealing with human traffickers and drug dealers ?

                This BTW is what they have WITHOUT the power to subpeona records. The GOP will get 150 Suspicious foreign bank activity records shortly after taking power in January – or there will be a fight going all the way to the supreme court, which Frankly Biden can not win.

                There is now purportedly hundreds of instances in which Joe Biden participated in business meetings arranged by Hunter – if even 10% of that is true – this “I was never talked about my sons business” is malarkey.

                And again remember what they have now is all WITHOUT subpeona power.
                Banks, Treasury all kinds of sources are going to have to turn over records.

                I suspect that Rep. Comer may be overstating a bit what he can already prove – but what is new ? Republicans are learning to lie half as much as Adam Schiff.

                It is clear from the last election that lying about your opponent and demonizing them wins elections.
                Republicans need to learn how to win.

                Turn about is fair play Gigi.

                Oh and the Colorado Night Club shooter ? Was arrested after a several hour standoff with police where he had a bomb and threatened to blow up his mother – over a year ago. He was released without prosecution by a Colorado DA, and his records sealed – which is why he was able to buy a gun. Why exactly should we let democrats make new gun laws if they do not enforce the laws we have ?
                And he was on the FBI’s radar – except how did that work out ?

                Whose administration is it that lets this happen ? I would note that Bomb making is an ATF/FBI matter, so no matter what the Colorado DA did, this is still a DOJ/FBI/ATF/BIDEN Fubar.

                So Democrats own the guy who killed 5 people and shot 25 at a gay bar in colorado, and who was stopped by a decorated Vet.

                If you do not enforce the law – people comitt crimes over and over until you do.

                Some on the right are saying that this is an example of not enforcing a red flag law.
                No it is an example of not prosecuting a guy who kidnaps people and issues bomb threats.

                In my community you go to jail for more than a decade for that.
                And the last “mass shooting” we had was 2 decades ago when a couple of black gang members fleeing a robbery shot up the Central business district – but did not manage to hit anyone. They are still in jail and will be for a long time.

              4. ” It all smells, and nothing can erase the stench.”

                Gigi, let us use a bit of logic and place emotion back into the bottle.

                Was Giuliani a good or bad mayor of NYC? Explain your position.

                If you thought he was a good mayor, why wouldn’t give him credit and think twice about the media’s character assassination?

                This is a simple two part question which can be directly answered by anyone who isn’t rabid or crazy.

                1. Your question goes far beyond Was Guiliani a good or bad mayor.
                  We had crime Spike in the 60’s and 70’s and into the 80’s.
                  We had it decline from then until about 2018 when it started rising again.

                  There have been numeorus theories regarding the causes of the decline, and of the current increase.

                  It is near certain at this time we have enough data to regress to determine the relative strength of each of the claimed causes for reduced rates of violence.

                  Does stop & frisk work ?
                  Does mass incarceration work ?
                  Do 3 strikes laws work ?
                  Does broken windows policing work ?
                  Did abortion reduce the crime rate ?
                  Regulation of lead paint ?
                  and on and on and on.

                  I have my own views on those, but we have sufficient data to determine what likely worked and what did not.

                  These issues are actually important.

                  Neither government nor law enforcement are perfect.

                  There are legitimate places to compromise on SOME issues.
                  These are nearly always where we grasp that utopia is not acheivable, and we seek the best balance.

                  As an example – lets assume – as is likely true that proactive policing decreases the rate of violent crime.
                  But that is also increases the frequency of actually innocent young black men killed by police.

                  What should we choose ? Should we choose to accept the deaths of 5 innocent young black men at the hands of overly agressive, possibly racist police – if the result is thousands less homocides per year ?

                  I am not answering that question. But I AM making clear that may well be the actual choice we have.

                  I will personally favor the protection of individual rights from government, over protection from harm and criminality by government.
                  But that position is not absolute. I do not choose the deaths of millions through crime to acheive zero deaths of innocent people at the hands of police .

                  The social contract LITTERALLY is the surrender of SOME of our rights to imperfect government in return for a net positive protection of our lives and the remainder of our rights.

                  It is very important that we are HONEST that utopia is not acheivable. That we do not have perfect solutions.

                  But today we do not have honest discussions.

                  Those on the right are trying to pretend that every criminal justice reform – enacted, or even thought about, is bad and has caused the spike in violent crime.

                  While those on the left are pretending that nothing they have done has triggered the spike in crime.

                  Both are wrong, but the lesson of history is the right will win on this issue.
                  We will ultimately revert all of the reforms of the left, and likely enact even more draconian measures.
                  In doing so we will with all likelyhood reverse current trends. But we will also do significant additional harm – because instead of trying to figure out what worked and what did not, or what reforms worked and which did not, we will respond with blunt force. add several hundred thousand to our prisons and what violent crime go down.

          2. Why do we all have to debunk this kind of garbage constantly.

            There are idiots still posting here that still believe the Steele Dossier has been proven.

            What is it with left wing nuts that muddles their brains.

            PLEASE PLEASE use google before you say such total nonsense.

            There is no problem with the chain of custody – and it would not matter if there was.
            The laptop is Self Authenticating.

            Please read the Glenn Greenwald article I linked earlier.
            Glenn is not a right wing nut.
            He is another lefty whose brain still functions.
            He is also a real journalist who knows how you verify the authenticity of trove of documents.

            Are you going to claim there is a chain of custody problem with the Pentagon Papers ?
            With Bradley Manning’s wikileaks dump ?
            With Snowden’s treasure trove ?
            With the Clinton DNC emails ?

            All of these as well as the Hunter Biden laptop are all real and verified.

            What is disturbing is that no one doubted the Pentagon papers,
            No one doubted the Bradly Manning Afghan war records,
            No one doubted the Snowden files.

            But progressives have batschiff crazy doubts about things that were pretty clearly true from the start.

      3. In a properly run justice system, evidence that convicts would be admissible and would exonerate the gatherer of any crime committed in the gathering of it. Truth, once judiciously confirmed, should never be excluded on technicalities. Punish the hell out of false witnesses and malicious snoops but open up investigations and trials to all that aids the delivery of justice. If lawyers are incapable of doing the job, give it to retired fishermen, truckers and farmers .. they won’t fiddle-fart around.

      4. So, What about Hunter’s Right to Privacy, you are more concerned about Hunter’s right to privacy than his relationship with the Chinese government. We recognize the seriousness of your concern.

  14. “Hunter Biden Scandal” “Hunter Biden Scandal” “Hunter Biden Scandal”. Turley, you’ve just become nothing but a joke over your harping on this and pathetic efforts to equate anything Hunter Biden did or didn’t do with the pig you defend who IS a PROVEN cheater and liar who started an insurrection because his massive ego won’t allow him to admit he is a loser. Even you have to admit, Turley, that all there is regarding Hunter Biden is “allegations”…nothing proven. Nothing along the lines of “I just need you to find 11,780 votes” that we all heard or, “Fight like hell or you’re not going to have a country any more”, inciting his fans to attack Congress to prevent the rightful election winner from taking office..

    Trump started an insurrection because he lost in 2020, something that has never happened before in our history. Congress is investigating, which it should, since the insurection is unprecedented, and especially since it was incited on the command of the sitting POTUS based on a lie he continues to tell, and will never stop telling. That same person, who stole classified documents just to prove he can, lied about returning the documents, had his lawyer file a false affidavit claiming the documents had been returned, ignores subpoenas, as have many of his compatriots, and Turley has the gall to criticize the DOJ for being “political” for pursuing contempt charges? What former President has ever stolen classified documents or refused to return them and then fundraised over the theft and lies? These matters are NOT “allegations”–they are facts. We’ve all seen the proof. What do you have against Joe Biden other than the fact that you are paid to try to continue breathing life into the “Hunter Biden Scandal”? Nothing, and you know it, too.

    Ignorant white-trash hillbilly Marjorie Taylor Greene has been attempting to impeach Joe Biden since he took office, and other Republicans are threatening the same thing, too? Based on what–exactly? Because the pig Turley defends was impeached twice, which he deserved because the things he did deserve his removal from office? Turley, once again, tries to equate the bald political motives of Greene and other Republicans by arguing: “He (Garland) now may be asked to show the same willingness to pursue those who obstruct or defy House Republican investigations.” Uh, Turley the “House Republican investigations”, which have been threatened for months, are BASELESS AND PURE POLITICAL THEATER. Democrats are investigating the unprecedented attack on our Capitol instigated by a former POTUS. That’s the difference, and your use of your credentials to try to equate Republicans’ abuse of power with the valid investigations into Trump and his crimes is truly sad.

    Turley claims: “There will be ample support for both sides to fulfill their respective narratives — and no shortage of legal weapons — in this political war of attrition.” The problem with this is that all Republicans have are “narratives”–no facts.

    1. Gigi, RussiaGate, RussiaGate, RussiaGate. You harped on it for five years but now you don’t like it when Professor Turley writes about Hunter Biden’s laptop. The difference is that RussiaGate was never real but the Hunter Biden laptop is. You stood behind a false conspiracy for years and now you want us to forget something that is a reality. Perhaps you enjoy escaping reality but most of us would rather live in a the real world. You tell us that Trump is a danger to the nation as you continue to scream RussiaGate, RussiaGate, RussiaGate. Thanks for sharing.

      1. There is no “RussiaGate”–Russian hackers received insider polling information on where to direct lies about Hillary Clinton from Trump’s campaign to sway enough voters in key districts in swing states where support for her was soft enough to tip the Electoral College votes, despite losing the popular vote. These matters were proven, and it was the ONLY way he could get into the White House because the American people never did, and still don’t, support him. Trump did NOT cooperate with the investigation, and was NOT exonerated. Former, and now suspended attorney Giuliani, drafted responses to discovery that were incomplete and misleading, and refused to amend or supplement the responses. There is NO “false conspiracy” at all–it really happened according to Dan Coats, lifelong Republican, former member of Congress, who headed all US Intelligence Agencies, as well as the findings of a Republican Senate Committee. There were 36 indictments that came from the investigation. Trump would have added even more if he had cooperated, which he refused to do.

        If anyone is living in a world of alternate reality, it’s you and other Trumpsters who believe anything and everything put out by Fox and other alt-right media. Yeah, the “Hunter Biden Scandal” is real, but the Trump investigation isn’t. All lies.

        1. It has been well established that Hillary and Dems invented all the BS in the Steele Dossier, which was the basis for the entire conspiracy allegation and rumors. Showing people polling data isn’t remotely illegal or nefarious nor is it evidence of collusion. That is why Mueller flatly stated that no US Citizen, including Trump, colluded with any Russians to affect the 2016 election. And yes, that is WITH Mueller examing all of your so-called “connections”. He concluded there was no there there. Of course, the proof of Hillary making it all up came AFTER the Sentate report you are talking about…and they all look like idiots now.

          But here you are, still believing made up BS and denying an ACTUAL laptop, actually concrete evidence, right in front of your face. Remember Hillary lying to your face about not having a server? Then she had a server, but didn’t use it for government emails. Then, oh, yeah, well yes they were government emails but not classified. Then they were classified…and Comey let her off becuase he said she didn’t INTEND to break the law. As a Lawyer….as SOS…you can’t say she wasn’t knowledgeable about what she was doing – and the server didn’t magically appear in her house nor did somebody else write her emails using it.

          That is by way of illustrating to you that you believe people WHOLLY who have lied to your face MULTIPLE times, but don’t believe the results of a Federal investigation. Doesn’t this tell you something about your thinking? About what THEY think of YOU that you will keep buying it?

          1. Just HOW MANY TIMES do you Trumpsters have to be reminded that the Mueller investigation was NOT based on the so-called “Steele Dossier”? That is a lie put out by pro-Trump media, and it is a LIE. In fact, the “Steele Dossier” was started bya Republican who opposed Trump receiving the nomination. Clinton’s campaign took it over once he got the nomination. But, the Mueller investigation started because of a brag by someone in a pub in England to an Australian diplomat about having access to HIllary Clinton’s server. The diplomat contacted US Intelligence. Mueller absolutely did NOT exonerate Trump–he said so in his report, along with his explanation that Trump could not be exonerated because refused to cooperate–just like he won’t cooperate with the Jan 6 committee and the investigation into his theft of classified documents.

            The entire saga of the Hunter Biden Laptop Scandal stinks. A computer repair shop owner contacted now suspended, former attorney, Giuliani, instead of the FBI. Giuliani had the so-called “hard drive” copied and distributed to Trump allies, including pro-Trump media, before turning it over to the FBI. The computer shop owner may well have made up some of the entries or deleted others–it’s clear that he reviewed it, and intended for it to be used for political purposes, so if anything stinks it’s the “Hunter Biden Scandal”. You have to ask yourself why didn’t he contact Hunter Biden instead of turnng it over to a political operative like Giuliani? And, unless you forgot, the reason for Giuliani’s suspension as an attorney was misrepresentation of lies about nonexistent election fraud, that he made to several courts. So, you should look in the mirror if you want to view someone with disordered thinking or someone who is gullible and believes lies.

            1. You liberal moonbats keep convincing yourself it WASN’T about the dossier simply because the FBI claimed it was based on Carter Page…oh, no…then it was based on minor comments to a CIA plant in a bar in England (that were not true) that an Australian diploment then relayed to….oh please. The timeline for when Strozk actually started everything pre-dates ALL OF THAT as was their surveillance of Trump’s campaign.

              Just more gullible BS from you liberal Dems who still believe something that never was, for which there never any evidence because it was made up. If you believe what you say….then ask yourself why Mueller, for all he supposedly did examining election interference, never took one look (he said) at the supposed dossier evidence? Of course, we now know that Weissmann did try to verify it…HARD…but, of course, couldn’t. So they ran away from it…which is, of course, a dereliction in their duty to examine it for HILLARY’S collusion and election interference in creating the dossier they then KNEW to be fake.

              But your that gullible that you are still here arguing it all long after it has been debunked.

              1. Gigi has post-concussive syndrome from Bosnia sniper fire with Hillary. Here’s the 411:

                Gigi was Natacha was an attorney in Indiana who was a Nurse Practitioner without an MSN degree though Natacha claimed to have written a thesis on oxygen saturation in infant newborns but she went down a rabbit hole when I threw some basic physiology at her because…..blah, blah, blah

                TL; DR: Gigi took one for Hillary when Hillary was caught in sniper fire in Bosnia hence Gigi’s diarrhea of the mouth/keyboard and boy does her cup overfloweth!

            2. “Just HOW MANY TIMES do you Trumpsters have to be reminded that the Mueller investigation was NOT based on the so-called “Steele Dossier”?”

              Except it inarguably WAS.

              In early august 2016 the Papadoulis/ Andrew Downer clinton Email claim fizzled as the FBI investigated further.
              Shortly after the Aphpha Bank nonsense proved a Dead when the CIA reported that the data was massaged.
              The entire investigation was DEAD in early Jan 2017 when The FBI interviewed Danchenko and the last hope that Steele Dossier was even slightly credible was debunked.
              The FBI was in the process of trying to close the investigation – when Strzok begged them to keep it open a few more days while he tried and failed to frame Flynn.

              The entire mess would have died – except that Trump fired Comey, and even though Rod Rosenstein recomended that Trump do so,
              he responded by appointing Mueller special counsel with no foundation at all.

              Absolutely the Mueller investigation had NO FOUNDATION.
              It took the rest of us years to learn how entirely corrupt the whole mess was.
              Horrowitz gave us MOST of the sordid story – and Yes ALL THE WARENTS rested on the debunked Steele Dossier.
              Durham unlike Horowitz could investigate and subpeona people outside the Govenrment, and was able to establish that
              Not only was NOTHING True – but that the FBI knew that in 2016.

              So yes absolutely everything that took place after the first few weeks in January 2017 was an incredible hoax perpetrated by the left.

            3. Peter Strzok – not the most pro Trump guy – debunked the “some guy in a pub” nonsense in early august 2016.

              The “some guy” was George Papadoulis., and Andrew downer was the person he talked to.
              And both confirmed to Strzok that Clinton emails were NOT part of their conversation.
              We learned that the “some guy in a pub” nonsense had died from the Horowitz report.

              In the event you can not do math – Mueller was not appointed until 7 months after the Clinton emails nonsense was debunked.

            4. “Mueller absolutely did NOT exonerate Trump–he said so in his report, along with his explanation that Trump could not be exonerated because refused to cooperate–just like he won’t cooperate with the Jan 6 committee and the investigation into his theft of classified documents.”

              So false.
              Trump provided litterally millions of documents to Mueller.
              Today Trump is fighting absolutely everything in court.
              But Trump did not take a single Mueller demand to court.
              Mueller got everything he asked for.

              What you can Trump not cooperating – was constantly calling the Mueller investigation a witch trial in the press – which he did, and which it was.
              Mueller was also unhappy that Trump was repeatedly talking in the WH of firing – which he could, but he did not.

              Mueller’s thin skin is not obstruction.
              Further you can not obstruct an unconstitutional investigation.

              Finally – absolutely you can be exonerated without cooperating.
              You have a very twisted view of the world.

              If you value your freedom you NEVER cooperate with law enforcement if you are the target.
              And you should be incredibly careful how you do so if you are not.

        2. “Russian hackers received insider polling information on where to direct lies about Hillary Clinton from Trump’s campaign to sway enough voters in key districts in swing states where support for her was soft enough to tip the Electoral College votes”
          None of this is true.
          Not only is it not true, it is not even the normal left win hoax version.
          The 2020 election hinged on 22K votes in 3 states. 100K votes would have flipped the presidency, the house and the senate.
          Yes, the 2016 election was close – about 200K votes would have made Clinton president.
          Though there is a difference – Trump flipped 2M votes in the rust belt – not 20K or 200K but 2M,
          that was not fraud or Russian hackers.

          “These matters were proven”
          In an alternate reality.

          “it was the ONLY way he could get into the White House because the American people never did, and still don’t, support him.”
          Trump is STILL leading Biden in head to head matchups.
          DeSantis is tie.

          “Trump did NOT cooperate with the investigation”
          He did, but no one is required to.
          “was NOT exonerated.”
          When the sources of the entire mess claims in court that Yes, it was all a hoax, but they are not guilty – because the FBI knew it was a hoax – that is about as exonerated as you can get.
          Trump was not just exonerated – he was not merely proven not guilty of anything.
          IT was PROVEN that Clinton paid to have the whole thing made up.
          You can not get more exonerated that that.

          “Former, and now suspended attorney Giuliani, drafted responses to discovery that were incomplete and misleading, and refused to amend or supplement the responses.”
          Again more batschiff crazy nonsense.
          Gulliani had nothing at all to do with Russia Gate. He was one of the early people chasing down the Biden family corruption in Ukraine.
          And that all proved true.

          “There is NO “false conspiracy” at all–it really happened according to Dan Coats”
          Not what Coats said.

          “There were 36 indictments that came from the investigation.”
          That speaks volumes itself – Hillary Clinton funds a HOAX, and DOJ/FBI run out and indict a small army of people – all based on a HOAX,
          And you have no problems with that ?

          You do not seem to grasp that your own claims are PROOF of political corruption within the DOJ/FBI/Mueller.

          “Trump would have added even more if he had cooperated, which he refused to do.”
          Do you read what you write ?
          You are probably correct – had Trump coopoerated more with Mueller – Mueller would have manufactured a way to indict him.
          But that reflects badly on Mueller – and you.

          “If anyone is living in a world of alternate reality, it’s you and other Trumpsters who believe anything and everything put out by Fox and other alt-right media.”
          Not Fox, the Horowitz Report, the Mueller Report, The testimony in the Durham prosecutions,
          You are wrong based on sworn testimony in court, or before congress.
          Not Fox.

          “Yeah, the “Hunter Biden Scandal” is real, but the Trump investigation isn’t.”
          Litterally correct.
          AGAIN the whole Trump investigation rested on several Hoaxes.
          Not only didn’t they ever find anything – but it was all a lie from the start.
          The authors of the lie have testified in court that it was a lie, and that the FBI KNEW it was a lie.

          Typical defense of the left

          We Lied,
          But you can not hold us accountable
          Because you knew we lied.

    2. In time the Insurrection narrative will join the Covid pandemic and climatastrophe as shameful scams run by the greatest cabal of liars the world will ever know. Republicans are pikers at propaganda compared to the Democratic Party and its sycophants.

      1. You are both 100% correct and completely wrong.

        We have seen scam after scam.

        But so many on the left do not believe actual evidence. Bald faced in your face evidence.
        They do not beleive it when the Hoaxsters at the core of everything say – It was all a hoax and the FBI/DOJ knew it was a hoax.

        And many of these people are not certifiable nut jobs.

        I was at a pre-thanksgiving dinner on sunday with some people who are friends for decades several of them lawyers who know better.
        And the batschiff crazy nonsense that went on was beyond beleif.

        I remember listening to Biden’s “reichstag speach and going – no one will beleive this nonsense.
        But millions of voters did.

        Look arround here – those on the left still are trying to sell the collusion delusion.

        I grasped that The Mueller SC appointment was a politically corrupt fraud after the Horrowitz report.
        I remember Horowitz testifying that the FBI’s predicate for investigating teetered from August to January. but in Early January when Danchenko testified the investigation was no longer justified.

        Yet Mueller was appointed afterword.

        Durham has done a poor job of convicting people – but an incredible job of getting them to confess in public that it was all a big lie – and that the FBI/DOJ knew it.

        And still there are LOTS of people who continue to beleive this rot.

        And they are going to go to their graves believing.

        These are men of faith not reason. They beleive and therefore it must be True.
        Trump and republicans oppose their poorly conceived policies – therefore they must be evil.

  15. Well well well, I see that after the good folks at CBS News got there panties in a bunch and left Twitter in protest they have decided to rejoin the Twitter fray. Very strange indeed. If Twitter was wrong a week ago why isn’t it still wrong today. This is Elons answer. 🤭🤭🤭 on the way to the bank.

      1. The corrupt, Soviet-style, show trial special prosecutor, appointed by an evolving communist dictator acting, not juridically, but entirely politically, antithetically, unconstitutionally and treasonously.

        “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

        – Declaration of Independence, 1776

  16. Politics is the Court of Public Opinion. No Legal basis for any Congressman or Committee Member to be bound by truth or threat of perjury. Appointing Special Prosecutor Smith will insure the Jan 6 Committees dream will live beyond the end of the 117th Congress January 3, 2023. As it involves the Jan 6 Committee providing documentation of their work to the special prosecutor I doubt the 14,000 hours of video or any other exculpatory evidence will see daylight. Discovery is not part of the Jan 6 Committee or Special Prosecutor evidence and the Grand Jury is never aware of anything not presented by the Prosecutor. Discover is only present in a Court of Law. Therefore I do not think this will go to Court, The Court of Public Opinion satisfies their goal. Daylight is a sanitizer. Please correct if I am off key on my assumptions.

  17. All this is comparative to two rival Squirrels trying with all their wit to find the opposed bounty of stored nuts. What good is the discovery when all that will happen is being chased off?

    Karma at play: The absurd behavior of the democrats and specifically the house democrats these last two sessions has been normalized and has come home to roost. The old adage “Watch what you wish for” applies, does it not, or could it be said “Cooked Goose”?

  18. OT – ICYMI


    Chuck Schumer admits that American women are not producing enough Americans, that the American fertility rate is in a “death spiral” and that the communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs, AINOs) are illegally importing millions of Haitians, Cubans, Mexicans, Guatemalans, Nicaraguans, Africans, etc., to replace Americans. Americans are now only 76%, and falling, of the population in America and Comrade Schumer plans antithetical and unconstitutional “amnesty” as the title for their plan of conquest.

    Schumer is committing treason in with his allies, Biden, Mayorkas et al. by facilitating “…or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.” Article III, Section 3, Clause 1: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. Schumer et al. must be impeached, recalled, or otherwise removed from office.


    ‘Maybe quit promoting abortion,’ one conservative Twitter user advised’

    “Senate Minority leader Chuck Schumer claimed that the solution to America’s declining birth rate was to grant a path to citizenship for 11 million illegal immigrants that are currently in the country. On Wednesday, conservative Twitter users berated Senate Majority leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., for claiming that the solution to America’s declining birth rate was to grant a path to citizenship for 11 million illegal immigrants that are currently in the country. Many reminded Schumer of the irony that he and the Democratic Party support abortion yet are complaining about low birth rates and looking to absolve illegal border-crossers to solve that problem. Speaking to the press outside the U.S. Capitol grounds, Schumer declared, “Now more than ever, we’re short of workers, we have a population that is not reproducing on its own with the same level that it used to.” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., claimed that granting amnesty to 11 million illegal immigrants would solve America’s low birth rate crisis. He added, “The only way we’re going to have a great future in America is if we welcome and embrace immigrants, the DREAMers and – all of them. Cause our ultimate goal is to help the DREAMers but get a path to citizenship for all 11 million, or however many undocumented immigrants.”

    – Gabriel Hays

    Schumer was born in Midwood, Brooklyn, the son of Selma (née Rosen) and Abraham Schumer.[7] His father ran an exterminating business, and his mother was a homemaker.[8][9] He and his family are Jewish,[10] and he is a second cousin, once removed, of comedian Amy Schumer.[11][12][13] His ancestors originated from the town of Chortkiv, Galicia, in what is now western Ukraine.[14]

    – Wiki

Leave a Reply