Reply to Garland appoints/elevates Wiess to Special Counsel Role

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Garland appoints/elevates Wiess to Special Counsel Role"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]This is almost comical watching people fall over themselves to say that someone that Trump appointed and who was *asked for by name* by the GOP to be appointed social counsel is all of a sudden a lackey of the Biden administration and is now unqualified to do the job. Maybe, just maybe this guy knows a little more about the situation than you do.

Garland did exactly what the right has been clamoring for.  So sit down. [/quote]
Yea, I'm confused why the Rs are upset about Weiss being appointed **[b]WHEN THEY SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR HIM TO BE APPOINTED[/b]**.   I try not to get into the Rs heads too much these days, but this one is a real head scratcher.

Can a R explain why now Weiss is unfit when he was appointed by Trump and Rs wanted him?[/quote]

1.  They didn't. 
2.  A special prosecutor should have been appointed YEARS ago because of the conflict of interest.  We have Biden's DOJ investigating a member of Biden's family in which Biden himself could be implicated.  If this doesn't scream conflict of interest, I don't know what does. 
3.  It should have been someone from OUTSIDE the government BECAUSE of the conflict of interest. 
4.  Weiss has demonstrated through his actions... letting the statute of limitations lapse, agreeing to a sweetheart deal, not allowing investigators do a complete investigation.... that he should not continue in this role.  [/quote]
Are you saying that Trump’s DOJ didn’t investigate any of the Bidens? Why not?[/quote]

I am saying that Weiss has spent 5 years obstructing and slow walking this case.  He did NOT properly investigate this case, as the whistleblower testimony indicates.  Whether he was handcuffed by Biden's DOJ or part of a coverup remains to be seen.  
You cannot possibly look at the plea deal that was proposed by Weiss and claim he did an effective job.  It was a joke.  He thought he would pull something over on the court.  Fortunately, he got a decent judge who asked the right questions.  [/quote]

The whistleblowers specifically have stated that they have no knowledge of illegality. How is this hard to understand?[/quote]

This is the OPPOSITE of what they said.  They said the HB should have been charged with FELONIES, not misdemeanors.  
And, they weren't allowed to investigate any connections to Joe.  They made that abundantly clear.  [/quote]

They are also investigators and not prosecutors And the prosecutors determined to not have the evidence necessary to levy charges.

End of story.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics