Below is my column in The Hill on the one thing that the forthcoming report of Special Counsel Jack Smith will not address: how he destroyed his own case against Donald Trump. Smith will be something of a tragic figure for future special counsels. The only thing missing is a shirt reading, “I spent over two years and $50 million dollars and all I got was this lousy t-shirt (and a redacted report).”
Here is the column:
The expected release of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s report will occur as early as this weekend, albeit without those sections dealing with the Florida documents case. (Other defendants are still facing prosecution in that case.) However, the most glaring omission will be arguably an explanation of how Smith lost this war without firing a single shot in a trial.
After more than two years, two separate cases and countless appeals (not to mention more than $50 million spent), Smith left without presenting a single witness, let alone charge, at trial. It is an example of how a general can have the largest army and unlimited resources and yet defeat himself with a series of miscalculations.
History probably won’t be kind to Smith, whose record bespeaks a “parade general” — a prosecutor who offered more pretense than progress in the prosecution of an American president.
Indeed, this report will be one of Smith’s last chances to display a case that notably never got close to an actual trial. One-sided and unfiltered, it will have all of the thrill of a Sousa march of a regiment in full dress. We know because we have seen much of this before. At every juncture, Smith has taken his case out on parade in the court of public opinion.
The Smith report will reportedly concern only the Washington case alleging crimes related to Jan. 6 and the 2020 election — a case that was always a bridge too far for Smith.
When first appointed, Smith had a straightforward and relatively easy case to make against Trump over his removal and retention of presidential materials. The case was not without controversy. Some of us questioned the selective nature of the prosecution given past violations by other presidents, particularly as shown by the violations of President Biden going back decades found by another special counsel.
However, the case originally focused on the conspiracy and false statements during the federal investigation into the documents at Mar-a-Lago. Those are well-established crimes that Smith could have brought to trial quickly with a solid shot for conviction.
But Smith’s undoing has always been his appetite. That was evident when he was unanimously reversed by the Supreme Court in his case against former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell (R).
In Florida, Smith was in signature form. He took a simple case and loaded it up with press-grabbing charges regarding the retention of classified material. In so doing, he slowed the case to a crawl. As a defense lawyer who has handled classified documents cases, I said at the outset that I did not believe he could get this case to a jury before the 2024 election, and that after that election, Smith might not have a case to present. Smith had outmaneuvered himself.
Then came the Washington filing, the subject of this forthcoming report. It was another vintage Smith moment. Smith played to the public in a case that pushed both the Constitution and statutory provisions beyond the breaking point. He simply could not resist, and he was only encouraged after the assignment of Judge Tanya Chutkan, a judge viewed by many as predisposed against Trump.
In a sentencing hearing of a Jan. 6 rioter in 2022, Chutkan had said that the rioters “were there in fealty, in loyalty, to one man — not to the Constitution.” She added then, “[i]t’s a blind loyalty to one person who, by the way, remains free to this day.” That “one person” was then brought to her for trial by Smith.
The D.C. case was doomed from the outset by both a prosecutor and judge who, in their zeal to bag Trump, yielded to every temptation. As time ticked away, Smith became almost apoplectic in demanding an expedited path to trial, including cutting short appeals. After refusing to recuse herself, Chutkan seemed to indulge Smith at every turn. But the Supreme Court failed to agree that speed should trump substance in such reviews.
With both cases slipping out of his grasp, Smith then threw a final Hail Mary. He asked Chutkan to let him file what was basically a 165-page summary of this report against Trump before the election. There was no apparent reason for the public release of the filing, except to influence the election — a motivation long barred by Justice Department rules.
Chutkan, of course, allowed it anyway, despite admitting that the request was “procedurally irregular.”
It did not work. Although the press and pundits eagerly repeated the allegations in the filing, the public had long ago reached its own conclusion and rendered its own verdict in November.
In my view, Smith’s D.C. case would never have been upheld, even if he had made it to a favorable jury in front of a motivated judge. As established by the court in Trump v. United States, Smith could not rely on much of his complaint due to violating constitutionally protected areas.
Smith responded to the immunity decision again in typical Smith fashion, largely keeping the same claims with minimal changes. His new indictment was to indictments what shrinkflation is to consumer products — the same package with less content. As in the McDonnell case, Smith was going for conviction at all costs, despite a high likelihood of the case eventually being overturned.
Then the public effectively put an end to both cases by electing Trump.
The Smith investigation should be a case study for future prosecutors in what not to do. An abundance of appetite and arrogance can prove as deadly as a paucity of evidence and authority.
Ironically, Smith will not be the only special counsel offering such a cautionary tale. The report of Special Counsel David Weiss into the Hunter Biden controversy will also be released soon. Weiss was widely denounced for allowing major crimes to lapse against Hunter Biden and offering an embarrassing sweetheart plea deal that collapsed in open court. Notably, Weiss succeeded by minimizing his charges (for the wrong reason). In that way, Weiss has one claim that Smith does not: He made it to court and secured a conviction. Indeed, he was about to prosecute a second case when President Biden pardoned his son.
Weiss’s report will likely only increase questions over his failure to pursue Hunter more aggressively. For Smith, the question is whether he was too aggressive, to the detriment of his own prosecution.
Prosecutions are not the sole measure of success for a special prosecutor. At times, the report itself can be of equal, if not greater, importance to the public.
This is not one of those cases.
The public will be given Smith’s detailed account of a case that was never brought and would likely never have held up. At more than $50 million, it is arguably the biggest flop since “The Adventures of Pluto Nash.“ The difference is that it did not take more than two years to watch Eddie Murphy’s film disaster, and the actor did not then write up a report on how good the movie really was.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
This is one of JT’s best summaries. -Love the good professor’s “shrinkflation” analogy.
Yet, the $50M is but a drop in the bucket when you consider the whole of Biden Administration’s fights to sabotage Trump.
Picture in your mind an organizational chart, in pinnacle form as it spreads and descends, with Biden at the top. In one of the descending blocks/squares, you see DOJ, -then the smaller block with Jack Smith and his little $50M price tag. But think of the entire DOJ expenditure on other Trump matters, e.g., the Mar-a-Lago Florida case, and other FBI ones, e.g. the Mueller “Russian Collusion” debacle. How much did THAT cost?
Then move laterally across the chart to other Departments and how much they have spent fighting Trump, particularly the DHS (SS and CBP and their efforts to created a Swiss Cheese border, and all those expensive efforts to assist illegal immigration). What has been the cost (and continuing cost) to America to handle the MILLIONS of illegal immigrants during Biden’s one term?
–or how about DHS’s now-dissolved “Governance Disinformation Board?” FBI’s controversial communications with social media giants? What did THAT cost us?
How about the Health Dept (DHHS) and their infowars over COVID vaccines?
How about Dept of Education’s $17 BILLION in student loan forgiveness (now before SCOTUS)?
How about Biden DOD’s 2023 $880 BILLION spending bill with controversial expansion of FBI “spying,” — while China’s “weather balloon” floated across America for days?
And we tsk, tsk over $50 million?
Suffice it to say: “000s” added to the end of a $ cost figure lose significance. The Biden administration has done everything in its power to leave Trump with an empty piggy bank.
Good summary Lin. And then there is the state-level money too, think in places like NY, Georgia, Colorado, and Maine . . . all taking our heard-earned money and using it to try to prevent Americans from voting for Trump. Americans still voted him back into the highest office, but our money that we worked for is gone, pissed into the wind by bad government actors, and we’re $36T in debt at the national level alone.
Which incidentally is another difference from the Eddie Murphy money that Professor T didn’t mention: that at least was private money voluntarily spent.
Lin,
Great comment! Well said!
Dear Mr. Turley, my burning question is why all of did a sudden did the head of the archives complain about Mr. Trump as he left office? Mr. Biden had classified documents for YEARS and no one noticed their missing from the archives. This whole case as well as the others was a huge attempt to keep Mr. Trump from running, that is all. GEB is right in mentioning all of the coordination between the White House, Justice, Special Council and Fani Wills’ boyfriend traveling up to Washington, D.C. They had no case and Mr. Trump has made fools of them all.
Jonathan rises above the judicial collective. Jonathan! Jonathan! Jonathan! JONATHAN!
Those in glass-houses throwing stones at Jack Smith, do you remember John Ashcroft?
Former Attorney General Ashcroft was severely reprimanded by a federal appeals court for grossly and illegally abusing the federal “Material Witness Statute”.
According to a panel of federal judges on one of the highest courts in the United States, Ashcroft was essentially using the MWS as a punitive weapon – not to protect witnesses but to punish and enslave – slavery – innocent Americans. Few if any were called as witnesses.
Ironically, Jack Smith (an expert in war crimes prosecutions) maybe should have instead looked into Ashcroft’s abuses of power since these abuses were justified using “wartime” emergencies. And American citizens were punished and harmed by Ashcroft’s unconstitutional and illegal practices – as determined by a federal appeals court!
In over 20 years, no prosecutor has adequately investigated Ashcroft’s unconstitutional and ungodly practices that violated Ashcroft’s own Oath of Office. None of Ashcroft’s victims have been made whole again in over 20 years.
Jack Smith does know that worldwide most war crime convictions happen 20-40 years after the war crimes take place. It’s 2025, now seems like a good time for an honest prosecutor to investigate possible war crimes!
Those in glass-houses throwing stones at Jack Smith, do you remember John Ashcroft?
That makes no sense unless you are personally addressing only John Ashcroft, in which case “those” is really one person.
If you are addressing anyone beyond John Ashcroft, then your comment is abject whataboutism, and as such, is nothing but an attempt at distraction.
Those in glass-houses throwing stones at Jack Smith, do you remember John Ashcroft?
Far better than any cowardly Anonymous Democrat police state fascist, attempting to pimp out Jack Smith as an honest prosecutor.
Let’s try remembering John Ashcroft’s ties to Special Counsels like Jack Smith and abuses of power by police state fascist Attorney Generals employing Special Counsels like Jack Smith, also police state fascists.
1. Attorney General John Ashcroft had the honesty to recuse himself, leaving a guy named Jim Comey in charge of the DoJ as Deputy Attorney General. Ever heard of that Jim Comey guy?
2. The reason John Ashcroft recused himself was because Democrats were claiming Vice President Dick Cheney had revealed the identity of a CIA intelligence analyst.
3. Bush, his SecState Colin Powell, the CIA Director, and AG John Ashcroft and his Deputy, Jim Comey, all knew that CIA employee’s identity was inadvertently revealed by Colin Powell’s minion, Dick Armitage.
4. Despite knowing the identity of who leaked her identity, Jim Comey appointed a Special Counsel to go hunting in hopes of taking out VP Dick Cheney. Sound familiar to what fired FBI Director Jim Comey did later to get a Special Counsel appointed to hunt Trump?
5. Unable to find a way to criminalize VP Cheney, Comey’s Special Counsel resorted to jailing journalists who refused to reveal their sources and raiding lawyers. Again; sound familiar?
6. Failing to take out Cheney (or Bush), Jim Comey and his Special Counsel took out Scooter Libby as a consolation prize with that ol’ FBI favorite: lying to the Special Counsel’s FBI. Again, sound familiar?
BUT WAIT!!!! That isn’t the story of John Ashcroft that you wanted to tell!
That John Ashcroft story tells how corrupt Jim Comey is, whether Deputy Attorney General or FBI Director.
And how equally corrupt and police state fascist every single Special Counsel is who he has created to send hunting Republican residents in the White House!
Old Airborne Dog
Chutkan and Smith performed brilliantly for the Democrats, just like the FBI did with their Russia Collusion hoax. Paid whores all Jonathan.
Gotta love what an entertaining r**ard Trump is, first claiming the US sends subsidies to Canada “to the tune of $100 billion” a year. Then I guess his verbal lie-diarrhea got worse and he starting squirting out that it’s $200 billion. We don’t give Canada a dime.
Trade deficits
Trade deficits aren’t subsidies, bozo. Any person with an IQ over 60 knows that the US consumes far more per person than any other country. You want to even trade deficits? Stop filling your American pie hole with the world’s products. And stop calling it a subsidy. What a bunch of morons Trump and his supporters are.
A deficit in trade is equivalent to subsidizing the market.
Did I mention Trump won in a landslide and is your President elect now. I think Biden is on giving his best to tell us what great shape we’re in, if you hurry you can catch it.
Conveniently, Turley doesn’t comment on the evidence. As Bill Barr said after reading the documents case, if the case makes to trial, “Trump’s toast.”
Even Gigi, if she learned enough internet law to get Trump to stand trial in front of Washington DC juries, would have Barr or any other sentient human being saying “Trump’s toast”.
That’s just how Washington DC juries work when it’s a Republican instead of a Democrat. Conveniently, of course.
The only thing missing is a shirt reading, “I spent over two years and $50 million dollars and all I got was this lousy t-shirt (and a redacted report).”
If somebody could provide a link as to where one can purchase a t-shirt re: January 6: The Most Deadliest Day , that would be the bomb!
From the $50 million wasted by Jack Smith, to the Mueller Russia Collusion farrago, to two impeachment show trials, to Alvin Bragg, Letitia James, and Fauni Willis, it is unconscionable how much of tax dollar lucre the Democrats of this country are wiiling to waste in their lawfare campaigns, feeding the bonfire of their vanities in their insatiable, overweening, self-righteous, arrogant, narcissistic, and fanatical urge to power. Machiavelli would be duly impressed.
You forgot the J6 committee. Not to mention all the Russia collusion congressional hearings.
Nobody expects a perfect system of government or a perfect system of Justice. Voters do expect our leaders to move to a more constitutional rule of law.
The 21st Century – on a constitutional basis – generally has been a huge wrong turn in the wrong direction.
George W. Bush exploited the so-called “War on Drugs” violations of constitutional law in the 1960’s/70’s to move farther away from a constitutional rule of law system.
Bush essentially destroyed Ronald Reagan’s Torture Treaty (binding federal law governing presidents). Bush destroyed the premise of FISA and the FISA Court – designed to limit and restrain executive authority.
Bush destroyed the Geneva Conventions – designed to protect American soldiers in future conflicts. For the first time in American history the International Red Cross [Christian founded organization] and Amnesty International denounced the human rights abuses of the United States.
Although Bush drastically took the USA in a lawless direction, even more extreme than World War Two abuses of American citizens detained in horse stables and camps for 4 years on the West Coast – every other administration since (Republican or Democrat) continued moving away from a constitutional rule of law model.
The 21st Century has generally been a wrong turn for America’s constitutional rule of law system. And it’s unsustainable. When are the reforms reversing the Bush’s foreign model of government going to happen? If not now, when?
OOOOooooohhhhh…. we’re moving from BBBUUUUTTTT…. MUH TRUMP!!!!! back to BBBBUUUUTTTT… MUH BUSH!!!! (who is also ‘virtually Hitler’ for Democrats, until he disliked Trump).
You would think the illegal Democrat “Trump-Russia Dossier” was never commissioned and paid for by Clinton/Obama/Biden/the DNC. And you wouldn’t think that Democrat Attorney Generals and FBI Directors weren’t ordered to go perjure themselves to FISA courts for wholesale attacks on the civil rights of thousands of American citizens.
Yes, it’s a good thing Bolshevik Barack and Bribery Biden didn’t have a single instance of sending Attorney Generals and FBI Directors to FISA courts to perjure themselves and utter false documents to those courts.
Also a good thing no single Democrat like Nancy Pelosi or Hillary Clinton voted to approve of enhanced interrogation practices – now called “torture” by them to cover their tracks, although some US troops are still waterboarded and subject to sleep deprivation i.e. ‘tortured’ as part of enhanced survival training.
AND MORE… when there’s a Republican in the White House, all of us are shocked to hear that Amnesy International who supports hajji, mass murdering Muslim terrorists considers the US to be human rights abusers.
Al-Queda, ISIS, the Taliban, Hamas, Hezbollah, Black September, the PLO???? Meh…
Smith was notoriously progressive or monotonic. He started with no case and ended with no case He started with no budget, received 50 million dollars, and ended with no budget. A strict ideologue who suffered a selfie-abortion.
Smith is so pathetic at his profession that he is now a victim. If he stays clear of himself, that may elevate him to glory.
Smith is so pathetic at his profession that he is now a victim.
Smith was completely successful in his profession as a Democrat DoJ police state fascist interfering in the previous election where a Democrat president/vice president faced a very dangerous prospective GOP nominee. In that previous election he took out popular Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell, doing exactly what he copied doing in this prosecution of Trump. He advised Louis Lerner she could shut down GOP election campaign groups working to get out the vote in battleground states – which she successfully did.
And then, after that – and SCOTUS unanimously throwing out Smith’s prosecution of McDonnell and the IRS paying tens of millions of taxpayer dollars in damages to those GOP groups – Smith was successfully brought back by Biden after doing his bidding in that previous election to be rewarded with the Special Counsel gig, and tens of millions of dollars to spend doing it.
The only difference between that previous election working for Obama/Biden, and this one working for Biden/Harris, is that Smith couldn’t get a conviction and sentence before the election.
A win and a loss – not bad with Democrat prestige, hero worship, and millions of taxpayer dollars to enjoy spending while doing so. Is he headed back to the cool society of working at The Hague, which was his reward after his work for Obama/Biden in his previous work of police state fascism in that election?
It helps when the public is focused on the individual acts of Jack Smith – not his history of what he has done, and how he has done it, with abuses of his position in the previous election.
Smith won’t mind in the slightest leaving the arena with the money he was paid and the enjoyment of being celebrated for two years of hunting Trump, whether or not many want to call him pathetic at his profession. Doesn’t hurt his feelings in the slightest – he has the Georges, Gigis, etc of the Soviet Democrats lauding him as a hero.
Old Airborne Dog
How Did AG Garland Get Away With Appointing Jack Smith After His Record Of Political Prosecutions And Interference In The 2012 Election?
That’s what this article should have been titled. Instead, Jack Smith is always written about as though there is no record of what he did using his office to tilt the 2012 election while working in the Obama/Biden Department Of Justice.
There has been an extensive – and successful – effort to never mention any of Jack Smith’s record as an Obama/Biden employee of abusing his office repeatedly in that election. Professor Turley has done the same in each of his columns regarding Jack Smith. He gets right into the points of law – but always avoids mentioning that what Jack Smith is doing now is a carbon copy repeat of what he did in his successful prosecution and elimination of Governor Bob McDonnell as the candidate to run against Obama/Biden for reelection.
Never a mention of how he changed settled law, added his own definitions to that law and the legal machinations he went through to prosecute and eliminate the Republican most dangerous to the reelection of Obama and Biden (repeated now to target Trump). And how in 2016 SCOTUS, in a rare unanimous decision, threw that prosecution and conviction out, calling prosecutors like Smith “a threat to our separation of powers”.
No mention that it was Jack Smith who advised Louis Lerner over at the IRS that she could shut down GOP groups working to get out the vote for the duration of the election campaign “for investigation”. Just GOP groups. Not one of which was fined or anything wrong with how they were operating. Instead, taxpayers paid those groups tens of millions in damages for denying their First Amendment rights (a subject near and dear to Professor Turley). While Obama smirked when safely back in the White House and said “Sorry ’bout that, I didn’t know that was going on”.
With no mention of what Jack Smith did and was caught doing in that previous Democrat reelection effort, the public is left to believe he was the best possible candidate to choose from among the THOUSANDS of eligible federal prosecutors. Candidates that Garland avoided choosing from to instead reach over to The Hague where Smith was hiding to bring him back as a civilian to fill the position.
Jack Smith’s record shows that he is the complete opposite of what a Special Counsel should be. A record as a prosecutor as one who is fair, impartial, unbiased and with with no ties to the DoJ who appoints them to ensure there is no question of political bias. Smith is none of that, and he has deep ties to Obama and his DoJ, while his wife is a devoted Democrat political machine hack.
The woman who is now Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco worked for Obama/Biden with Jack Smith in that previous prosecution of the most dangerous threat to the Obama/Biden reelection. What are the chances it is Monaco, not AG Garland, who made the decision to bring Jack Smith back to do to Trump what he successfully did to Governor Bob McDonnell in the previous election where a Democrat president’s reelection hopes were threatened?
If Democrats can get away with using willing police state fascists like Jack Smith twice… why shouldn’t they do it again the next time they have a willing police state fascist Attorney General like Merrick Garland willing to do their bidding?
If Democrat lawyers won’t be critical of their fellow Democrat lawyers engaging in blatant police state fascism with known police state fascists like Jack Smith, again, why shouldn’t Democrats continue doing that?
Old Airborne Dog
The issue as I understood it ŵas that organizations with 501(c)(4) status had to have a social welfare purpose. They couldn’t just be dark money conduits supporting candidates. And that there was a giant stack of applications of nonprofits with Tea Party or Patriots in their names, without evidence of a social welfare purpose
Compared to just a few obvious left-wing groups. Given the IRS’s staffing levels, delays in processing apps were inevitable.
michaeldix2f64102fb2, January 13, 2025 at 10:04 AM:
The issue as I understood it ŵas that organizations with 501(c)(4) status had to have a social welfare purpose.
That was the feeble excuse given. It is not even remotely close to what happened.
Unless there’s some other reason that, when subpoenaed to testify about what she did with Jack Smith shutting down only GOP groups, Louis Lerner of the IRS showed up to plead the protection of the Fifth Amendment and then run for the hills with her government pension in hand.
Unless, of course there’s some other reason that the re-elected Obama/Biden had their IRS willingly paying out tens of millions in civil damages to those GOP groups who sued them for deliberately targeting them to violate their First Amendment rights. Not a single similar DNC election campaign group was similarly targeted. What a coincidence… (not exactly what trial judges said when the IRS was sued).
Better find better excuses for what Jack Smith and Louis Lerner did during the 2012 reelection campaign.
Many of us here remember that very well. It was only 12 years ago, after all, and the courts excoriated Lerner, Smith, and the Obama Administration for what they deliberately did to put their foot on the scales to aid the Obama/Biden re-election effort.
Unfortunately, it was the taxpayer’s checkbook that the courts ordered be used to dry the plaintiffs’ tears – not the checkbooks belonging to Obama, Biden, Lerner, Smith and the DNC.
Old Airborne Dog
The special counsel is part of a broader phenomenon: the use of governmental institutions to weaken the Republican Party. Compliant bureaucrats, compliant judges, compliant bar associations, compliant journalists, compliant academics, and even compliant military people, are willing to assist in the personal destruction of people who are seen as threats to the Socialist State.
Their initial victim was Joe McCarthy, then Barry Goldwater, then Richard Nixon. Ronald Reagan was too popular to destroy, and the Bush’s posed no threat. Trump was and is a threat.
It is folly to think the Democrats will cease trying to destroy “dangerous” Republicans. The only response to this lingering threat is simple: drastically reduce the size and power of government itself. Democrats will retain the will to destroy, but not the power.
Let the history writers decide how to frame this sordid chapter. My summary would boil down to 11 sentences:
• The incumbent President, early in his re-election campaign railed against mail-in voting during a pandemic, against the advice of his campaign advisors telling him to compete for mail-in votes
• He erected a “prebuttal” in the form of “If I lose, it can only be because of massive cheating”.
• On election eve, he was initially leading and from this concluded that he should win, against the more informed advice coming from campaign advisors who said “too early to call”.
• As it became clear he had lost, he clung to his “belief” that he had won, and that massive post-election ballot-fraud operations were what had happened (wishful, paranoid thinking)
• After losing all court challenges trying to prove fraud absent any hard evidence, he furthered an infowarfare campaign
• He attempted to mickey the Electoral College count through 7 distinct tactics, all involving fraud, intimidation, and “inventive defiance” of the Constitution’s plain meaning
• He set up a “war room” at the Willard Hotel to plot how to further his plots and deal with Jan 6th.
• He gave his Jan 6th Ellipse speech setting the expectation that Pence would reverse the election outcome that afternoon, knowing that Pence had already adamantly refused. He deceitfully manipulated his followers.
• On Jan 6th, as he finally accepted the failure of the Pence option, he tweeted out to his legions at the Capitol that Mike Pence had “betrayed” the cause, igniting a violent riot waged to halt the Congressional proceeding and “hang Mike Pence”.
• After 3 hours of intense pressure on him to call off the riot, he caved and issued a video to that effect, but still valorizing the acts of defiance against the peaceful transfer of power.
• Speaker Nancy Pelosi refused the idea of bolstering the Capitol Police with DC cops and National Guard troops for Jan 6th, based on “not liking the optics” of them facing down a mob with crowd control measures.
When impeached for this plotting to remain in office beyond his term, he got off on a technicality — Repubs stood behind “He’s no longer President…I won’t vote to impeach a private citizen”.
Let the history writers decide how to frame this sordid chapter. My summary would boil down to 11 sentences:
Dear Anonymous Democrat police state fascist: While you’re re-witing to retcon this history to deflect from Jack Smith’s abuses – would like to have a go at doing a retcon re-write of the sordid Obama/Biden “Trump-Russia Dossier” history? The Obama/Biden abuses using Jack Smith as their police state fascist hitman predate both Trump and the dossier, BTW. That could use a whitewash as well!
Write an 11 sentence summary so it is no longer a sordid, blatant criminal Democrat cabal of election interference, employing Russian spies, colluding mainstream media, and serial felonies committed by Obama/Biden’s last two Attorney Generals and FBI Directors.
Do you need a few days to get those 11 sentences together explaining your party’s “Trump-Russia Dossier”? All the unindicted felons in the Obama/Biden White House and Clinton campaign?
This is why you cowardly police state fascist Democrats and neo-Nazis will never choose a username to post under.
That said, I do hope you don’t change a single thing in how you campaign on rage, insinuation and lies, hoping you appear to be credible and have some uniform set of values in the 2026 midterm election and the 2028 presidential election after that.
Don’t. Change. A. Thing.
Old Airborne Dog
Hilarious, Turls. You completely ommit the two biggest antagonistic factors to Smith’s work…, that of course being the extreme corruption of Judge Cannon in Florida, and, of course, at the SCOTUS.
Merrick Garland’s finger popping his own butt at DOJ and limiting the time Smith had to prosecute his cases also factored heavily. Truth is though, the fix was in up top and the SCOTUS was dedicated to making sure these cases never saw a trial.
For what it’s worth they wouldn’t have let a Harris electoral victory stand either…
So in this respect, ultimately what went wrong was the treachery of Mitch McConnell’s theft of SCOTUS seats and the D’s refusal to demand an expansion of the court when they had the power to do so.
D’s showed up to a knife fight brandishing a candy bar, so not only won’t they be able to protect their constituency, they won’t be able to protect the magats too stupid that they can’t even vote in their own interests.
We’re officially a nation completely controlled by Russian disinformation now and you further those ends, Turls.
We’re officially a nation completely controlled by Russian disinformation now and you further those ends, Turls.
Dear cowardly Anonymous Democrat: Official Russian disinformation like the illegal Clinton/Obama/Biden/DNC “Trump-Russia Dossier”?
Written by their employee, an illegally hired and illegally paid Putin spy, who the FBI was in the middle of investigating for espionage while he worked at a Democrat think tank/propaganda entity a few blocks from the White House? That kind of ‘Russian disinformation’ for political ends?
Official Russian disinformation like the Biden Bribery Laptop, which Anonymous and known Democrats have assured Americans does NOT belong to Biden’s son, and all the texts, emails and voicemails in it describing soliciting and receiving bribes is just more dangerous Russian disinformation?
Maybe we’re a country officially and completely controlled by ChiCom and Putin government sources who have bribed and now extort the Oval Office house plant formerly known as Vice President Biden.
If you can control yourself and not get distracted looking at the porno pictures of Gigi throughout the laptop, all the Putin and Chicom stuff starts on page 472
Hunter Biden Laptop Online; Biden Influence Peddling And Bribery
https://bidenreport.com/#p=472
Given the explicit nature of the text and pictures of the Biden Laptop, this online version of the laptop contents is for an adult readership only.
ISBN: 978-1-7371866-3-2
@2022 by ICU, LLC
Old Airborne Dog
Dear asslicking hound dog, or should I say Comrade…, thanks for reading, being idiotic, and of course, just being you. Probably best that you go out in public wearing head protection against the inevitable self imposed misfortune.
Party on!
Dear cowardly Anonymous Democrat police state fascist. You’re always mildly amusing when you come here to Speak Your Bolshevik Biden Boyz Truths.
You’re particularly artful today: did your Mom slip an extra one of her vibrators into your bath last night to use along with her hair dryer and the kitchen toaster as your bath toys?
BTW, why don’t you give your “Trump-Russia Dossier” one more try… some of your fellow feckless Bolshevik Biden Boyz still think there’s a chance you can win the 2024 election!
This is the reason you mewling Marxist reprobates only post Anonymously, rather than picking and posting with a username.
Old Airborne Dog
Why hasn’t Biden pardoned people like Martha Stewart – not the biggest law breaker at that time.
Or former CIA field agent John Kiriakou? Kiriakou was upholding his constitutional Oath of Office and following Ronald Reagan’s Torture Treaty (also federal law). At that time 200 FBI strongly opposed and literally walked away from Bush’s subversive practices. Kiriakou was too loyal, refusing to follow illegal orders.
Reminder: the constitutional Oath of Office which predates the Bill of Rights, is a check & balance against disloyal supervisors and leaders in government institutions. When a government supervisor orders illegal conduct, the Oath of Office is a strong check on that disloyal supervisor.
During World War Two, the United States created the “Nuremberg Legal Defense” to prosecute and execute Nazis following WW2. The premise was “just following orders” is not a legitimate defense. Government servants like CIA official Kiriakou was loyal to that legal precedent, loyal to Reagan’s Torture Treaty and loyal to federal law. People like Kiriakou deserve a pardon.
There are many others selectively prosecuted and convicted over the past 25 years. Why won’t Biden pardon them? Will Trump have the integrity to pardon them?
Turey states, “Prosecutions are not the sole measure of success for a special prosecutor. At times, the report itself can be of equal, if not greater, importance to the public.”
This is why Trump is doing everything he can to prevent the report, which is required by law, from being released after an investigation, regardless of its outcome. Turley recognizes that Smith’s report could potentially be damaging to Trump and his incoming Department of Justice appointees. Smith did not fail; rather, Trump, with the assistance of Judge Cannon—who has no jurisdiction over the case—has blocked the release of the report. She dismissed the case, which is now officially closed, meaning she has no authority to order the report’s release to be blocked.
It’s interesting that Turley does not acknowledge Cannon’s ruling as unlawful or mention that she dismissed the case. Instead, he focuses on attacking Smith to distract from that fact. He has become a full-blown Trump sycophant and enabler.
The surprising thing is that President Biden could simply order Garland to publish the report or request a copy for himself and release it. While it’s unlikely that will happen, the intense vitriol and anxiety surrounding the report’s release speaks volumes about the potentially damaging content within it. This is why Trump and his supportive judge are desperately trying to delay its release until Trump takes office, at which point he could destroy it once he regains power.
Garland should release the report and let the public decide what it means.
All of this is a lie. But then, George is a liar who comes here each and every day to smear Professor Turley.
Turley is fair game.
And George has no life.
Because Professor Turley is a hack. If he had to actually lead a case in court he’d be used to wipe the floor.
“Garland should release the report and let the public decide what it means.”
And the people will yawn.
And the people will yawn is correct. I will yawn as well. In fact its release will have no impact. Why should it? Most people with any interest in the report know it will be one-sided with a lot of lies. Those anti-Trump folk who read it and believe it are brain dead like George Svelaz. They already swallowed the leftist lies repeated on the blog by the blog’s parrots Gigi and Dennis.
The question that should be asked is why is this report repeated when Trump had an overly broad gag order placed on him. Why should only involved liars like Cohen and Smith be permitted to speak? I think the gag order is completely removed from Trump so that any release including news stories will be challenged, making Democrat supporters and the brain dead sound more stupid.
One way to deal with this might be to change how attorneys are licensed. State bars have proven to be useless at policing bad lawyers. When you can falsify evidence to a FISA court and you are reinstated to the bar even before your six month probation ends, there is a problem. State bars are mostly run by leftists. If you regulate lawyers at the national level, there might be more uniformity in regulating their behavior. Have a national bar exam, uniform disciplinary procedures, and a more transparent process for complaints. There is WAY too much mystery in how state bars operate and I have long suspected that DEI plays a big role the process. Those in government should be subject to the same rules as those in private practice. No prosecutorial immunity. If you are a prosecutor or a judge that abuses their discretion or campaigns on “getting” someone, that should result in a suspension. Then if you follow through with that threat, additional penalties should follow. The profession should not be used as a license to attack your enemies.
I would not be so benign in treating these people from Biden on down. Unless protected by Pardon the full weight of the properly constituted law of the land should fall on them. If there is no cost to what they have done then they will just do it again at the next opportunity. I would go after their treasure, estates and income and then the Party itself. There is precedent for a Political Party having a judgement against it, which I believe, happened to the Republicans in the prior century.
If the Obama White House and it’s minions, along with HRC can be proved to have caused the damage of the Russia Hoax (which seems quite possible) and the Biden White House Coordinated the Lawfare against President Elect Trump then you might have a case against the entire party, sort of like RICO or something to that effect. I’m not sure I would go for prison time except in certain cases but I would head for the cash and confiscation of property if the crime and punishment allows it. The best way to beat a rich man is to make him poor.
I’m not advocating the Roman Approach which was said to “make a desert and call it victory”. But a special American approach. No Party, Republican or Democrat should by a part of what we have seen these past 8-9 years. It has been divisive and damaging to the country as a whole and it needs to stop.
We need to get a handle on clarity and accountability on donations to parties, with sunshine on all of them and a search to constitutionally limit the massive amounts of money involved in campaigns and holding office. The sheer magnitude of the amounts spent corrupt everything. Term limits and restrictions on spending should be a priority and finding the best constitutional approach.
True, but it ain’t gonna happen. It’s like those Mafia Investigations, where here comes the FBI, and zillions of bucks, and cameras, and trials, and people going to prison. Meanwhile, in the background, the Mob keeps on doing what it always does, with new leadership, and replacement wise guys, Because there are people who buy the goods and services that the Mob provides.
In like manner, there are people who buy what the Democrat/Swamp Critter/RINO sells. So the battle will never end, until something happens, like our own Hitler or Stalin or Mao.
And I don’t think this is Systemic Pessimism on my part. I hope not, but I can not help but note that about 75 million Americans voted for Kamala Harris.
“the Mob keeps on doing what it always does, with new leadership, and replacement wise guys”
IMO you are essentially correct, and that is exactly why I am extremely skeptical of proposals of term limits as a “no-brainer” solution to our political problems. Ultimately, the only real solution is voters who pay attention, are capable of understanding what the pols are really up to, and vote accordingly. Now, how we might possibly get from the abysmal place we currently occupy to that situation is a real subject for debate.
GEB: I would not be so benign in treating these people from Biden on down.
It should be shocking that this criminal abuse of political office by Democrats to criminalize and destroy Americans, not just Trump, is being given a hopeful veneer of being merely poorly conducted work by supposedly inept Democrat prosecutors like Jack Smith. That Professor Turley and others don’t find that long running and continuing criminality on the part of Democrat prosecutors and Special Counsels shocking is shocking in itself.
For people like Professor Turley to treat this like He Who Shall Not Be Named from the Harry Potter series is why it so easily continues and will happen again.
This started LONG before Jack Smith was sent by Biden (and almost certainly his former partner under Obama, now Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco) to take out Trump in a carbon copy repeat performance of how he successfully took out Trump’s predecessor endangering a Democrat president’s reelection.
This is a continuation of Democrat police state fascism using the DoJ to send out their chosen Lavarentiy Beria’s out to destroy opponents. And the GOP has sat on the sidelines watching, too fearful to do anything about what they’re watching.
Another Deputy Attorney General, James Comey, rotating back and forth in and out of the FBI, named a Special Counsel to take out then Vice President Cheney for supposedly leaking the identity of a CIA analyst. Comey knew, as did President Bush and his SecState Colin Powell, that one of Powell’s bureaucrats was the person who inadvertently leaked that name. That bureaucrat had the honesty and human dignity to come forward to Powell and investigators to say he was the one responsible.
Nevertheless, despite that, both President Bush, SecState Powell and DAG Comey allowed that Special Counsel to intimidate journalists, jail them for refusing to reveal sources, etc… and Scooter Libby was the consolation prize scalp from the Bush Administration they got to wave in front of the public.
Bush and Powell were amoral cowards to allow an innocent man working for them to be destroyed because they did not want the annoyance of a critical press blaming them for this minor event.
It was Trump, not Bush, who finally pardoned Comey’s victim Scooter Libby – but like Governor Bob McDonnell later – Libby didn’t get his career, his reputation, or the years of his life after conviction back. Just as Senator Ted Stevens didn’t.
And then again before Trump, it was prosecutor’s from Jack Smith’s same department of ethics in the DOJ who targeted and took out Alaska’s Senator Ted Stevens, again for “corruption”. By happy sheer coincidence, a Democrat was named to replace Stevens – and that Senator then became the deciding vote to have a majority pass Obamacare. Obamacare that was adamantly opposed by Senator Stevens.
The conviction of Senator Stevens, like McDonnell’s afterward, was reversed by the courts who condemned the legal tactics and malfeasance used for that prosecution. Those DoJ prosecutors were referred for prosecution and at least disbarment by the outraged judge who threw that conviction out.
But not one of them stood trial nor was disbarred. Just as Jack Stevens wasn’t after his malicious prosecution of Governor Bob McDonnell in the Democrats previous presidential re-election campaign was unanimously thrown out by SCOTUS.
The bar associations protect, rather than discipline, their Democrat lawyer members who engage in this criminality to deprive Americans of their civil rights through criminal abuse of their offices.
The justice system does not prosecute them for the felonies they engage in to carry out these police state fascist prosecutions. Not a single one of Obama’s last two Attorney Generals, nor the three of his FBI Directors, who repeatedly stood before FISA courts to commit perjury and utter false documents to those courts has ever been indicted, prosecuted, and stood trial. They haven’t even been hauled back in front of those FISA courts to be given some sort of slap on the wrist for contempt of court. Judges who were once lawyers, just like they were.
And yes, our host Professor Turley is very, very benign in how he describes and how he deals with this ongoing systemic criminality carried out by chosen Democrat prosecutors within Democrat administration’s DoJs and Attorney Generals.
Professor Turley never fails to ensure his outrage at the affront to the Constitution by those J6 rioters’ three hours of lawlessness. But never once has he written a single sentence of the outrage to the Constitution that are the three decades of Democrat prosecutors and Special Counsels using the power of their office to deprive Americans of their civil rights in political prosecutions to further Democrat party political goals.
Kinda stinks, when you think of it.
Old Airborne Dog