Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,719 posts)
Thu Jan 12, 2023, 08:02 PM Jan 2023

Do you approve or disapprove of the Special Council in the Biden classified documents investigation?


72 votes, 4 passes | Time left: Unlimited
Approve
61 (85%)
Disapprove
11 (15%)
Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll
54 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Do you approve or disapprove of the Special Council in the Biden classified documents investigation? (Original Post) DemocratSinceBirth Jan 2023 OP
It should officially compare and contrast President Biden's situation to TFG's shit show. MLAA Jan 2023 #1
It was necessary underpants Jan 2023 #2
Appointment of A Special Counsel was MerryHolidays Jan 2023 #8
I couldn't agree more! SheltieLover Jan 2023 #26
Approve. Elessar Zappa Jan 2023 #3
It's a waste of my tax dollars Farmer-Rick Jan 2023 #4
Please enlighten us on how these documents were planted since, as you say, it is so obvious? I am kelly1mm Jan 2023 #19
Oh come on Farmer-Rick Jan 2023 #24
1) who did it if it is so obvious? 2) how did they get past the Secret Service surveillance? 3) If kelly1mm Jan 2023 #25
See, I have my own theory EndlessWire Jan 2023 #41
Hmmmm Dorian Gray Jan 2023 #42
I would think you would support the investigation showing this SYFROYH Jan 2023 #47
This message was self-deleted by its author SYFROYH Jan 2023 #48
Keeps everything legal. Joinfortmill Jan 2023 #5
Do it in the open... Moostache Jan 2023 #6
I too approve. ProudMNDemocrat Jan 2023 #7
I don't like it one bit. maxsolomon Jan 2023 #9
I do as long as it's transparent and unbiased. liberalmuse Jan 2023 #10
At present, the GOP is an ongoing attempt to coup. PufPuf23 Jan 2023 #31
I have no problem with the special counsel put on the case, what I have a problem with is that it JohnSJ Jan 2023 #11
It only took Garland two days to appoint Trump's SC Fiendish Thingy Jan 2023 #27
It should have been triggered before that JohnSJ Jan 2023 #33
Why? Fiendish Thingy Jan 2023 #36
Because I don't agree with your premise. I think Garland did it because the January 6th JohnSJ Jan 2023 #37
I thought we had to get rid of EndlessWire Jan 2023 #43
Agreed! SheltieLover Jan 2023 #28
Politics. From his perspective he thinks it demonstrates how "fair" he is JohnSJ Jan 2023 #34
There is no appeasing them. SheltieLover Jan 2023 #38
I agree JohnSJ Jan 2023 #40
I disapprove of the DOJ the last 2 years. Actually the last 6 years but dem4decades Jan 2023 #12
Seems like like a legitimate and credible individual ColinC Jan 2023 #13
It's necessary, not just to the appearance, but the practice of fairness. Maru Kitteh Jan 2023 #14
It might be a good idea to quickly clear any wrong doing 48656c6c6f20 Jan 2023 #15
The next Special Council appointed, should be investigating National Archives... MerryBlooms Jan 2023 #16
I agree. EndlessWire Jan 2023 #44
The only way it fits the guidelines for using a special counsel, gab13by13 Jan 2023 #17
Far from appeasing Jordan, I'm sure it will frustrate the hell out of him Fiendish Thingy Jan 2023 #30
Excellent analysis JohnSJ Jan 2023 #35
Yeah, we have trouble here. EndlessWire Jan 2023 #45
Approve of the idea, but don't approve of who he chose to be SC mvd Jan 2023 #18
I agree. n/t EndlessWire Jan 2023 #46
I do not approve of Garland. BlueIdaho Jan 2023 #20
same here iemanja Jan 2023 #22
Same here Poiuyt Jan 2023 #29
It was not neccessary iemanja Jan 2023 #21
Approve, it does not embarrass me, as a Democrat, at all. Dum Aloo Jan 2023 #23
WILL there be a reckoning though? Skittles Jan 2023 #39
I agree, and I think the "reckoning" in this case may end up just being Dum Aloo Jan 2023 #49
ALAS Skittles Jan 2023 #51
Without resorting to violence, Dum Aloo Jan 2023 #53
the majority of voters did NOT vote for Donald Fucking Trump Skittles Jan 2023 #54
Looks like a case of "head them off at the pass". usonian Jan 2023 #32
Ken Starr is still dead right? Johonny Jan 2023 #50
Everything in our office was stamped TOP SECRET NSA codeword. friend of a friend Jan 2023 #52

MerryHolidays

(7,715 posts)
8. Appointment of A Special Counsel was
Thu Jan 12, 2023, 08:13 PM
Jan 2023

But not THIS Special Counsel, who was a Trump-appointed US Attorney and a clerk for Rehnquist.

By contrast, Jack Smith is a registered independent.

Let's not forget zealots like Ken Starr. I appreciate the Independent Counsel law is different than the Special Counsel provision, but someone less partisan, at least based on credentials, would have been FAR more appropriate.

kelly1mm

(4,739 posts)
19. Please enlighten us on how these documents were planted since, as you say, it is so obvious? I am
Thu Jan 12, 2023, 09:32 PM
Jan 2023

assuming these documents were 'obviously' planted post the FBI looking into President Trumps documents and thus while President Biden was President with constant Secret Service surveillance at his homes. So how did they do it and how is it 'so obvious'?

If, as you say it is 'so obviously a plant', won't a special council quickly find the culprits and be able to bring them to justice? Is that not a good thing?

Farmer-Rick

(10,240 posts)
24. Oh come on
Thu Jan 12, 2023, 09:51 PM
Jan 2023

You can't allow yourself to be so easily manipulated. I would have thought you weren't so gullible. Think about all the coincidences it took to get these documents to be "found"...... just like Trump, 2 sets, and why weren't the National Archives aware of the missing documents?

But the purpose of the magical find of stashed secrets is to put doubt in the minds of normal people to wonder if what Trump did by stealing the hundreds? Of documents wasn't so bad. See, all presidents do it.so any investigation won't matter. It's the lie they will remember.

kelly1mm

(4,739 posts)
25. 1) who did it if it is so obvious? 2) how did they get past the Secret Service surveillance? 3) If
Thu Jan 12, 2023, 09:59 PM
Jan 2023

it is so obvious, as you claim, the Special Council will 'obviously' find out who planted the evidence and bring them to justice, right?

Or are you claiming there is some 'deep state' that is acting to undermine the President? I think I have heard that before somewhere ....... just can't seem to remember where since I am so gullible .....

EndlessWire

(6,574 posts)
41. See, I have my own theory
Fri Jan 13, 2023, 05:53 AM
Jan 2023

You know how Trump had all those empty folder jackets, and how everyone is wondering where those documents went? Well, I think we found them!! That's right, they're gonna show up all over town in the offices of Trump's enemies!

Dorian Gray

(13,535 posts)
42. Hmmmm
Fri Jan 13, 2023, 05:58 AM
Jan 2023

1) There is zero proof they were planted.
2) The Biden team informed the government that they had them when THEY found them.

Do I think the Biden team is stealing documents? Heck no. But I don't know enough about the situation to actually declare anything here other than the Biden team found documents that they should not have and they informed the right people they have them and returned them.

SYFROYH

(34,186 posts)
47. I would think you would support the investigation showing this
Fri Jan 13, 2023, 06:44 AM
Jan 2023

If you really believe they were planted.

Response to Farmer-Rick (Reply #24)

Moostache

(9,897 posts)
6. Do it in the open...
Thu Jan 12, 2023, 08:11 PM
Jan 2023
AND...if anything was untoward, illegal, nefarious or criminal - Joe must go...period.

BUT....on the flipside, Trump is to be held to the EXACT same standards, and his behavior that is already KNOWN must carry the full weight of the law on his worthless fat fucking ass.

If Trump walks, there is nothing Joe can do (short of a video taped confession to selling secrets to Russia or China) that should even raise a single blip on the media's radar...they ought to be embarrassed of themselves for the commotion they are contributing to with this documents issue NOW.

ProudMNDemocrat

(16,898 posts)
7. I too approve.
Thu Jan 12, 2023, 08:12 PM
Jan 2023

Speculating here, nothing criminal on Biden's part. Perhaps more of sloppiness on aides.

The fact that Biden is fully cooperating without all the denials and bluster, is a stark contrast to TDFG.

maxsolomon

(33,470 posts)
9. I don't like it one bit.
Thu Jan 12, 2023, 08:15 PM
Jan 2023

It's politics - Garland trying to perform neutrality.

Just like Jack Smith and President Asshole, I expect nothing will come of any of it.

PufPuf23

(8,856 posts)
31. At present, the GOP is an ongoing attempt to coup.
Thu Jan 12, 2023, 10:22 PM
Jan 2023

Nice of MSNBC to show so many pictures of Biden's Corvette, stored with some of the documents.

Admit I am still surprised at the antics.

JohnSJ

(92,523 posts)
11. I have no problem with the special counsel put on the case, what I have a problem with is that it
Thu Jan 12, 2023, 08:18 PM
Jan 2023

took the AG until November 18th 2022, to appoint a special counsel to investigate trump on the January 6th insurrection, and stolen classified documents, the later which trump publicly admitted doing

Fiendish Thingy

(15,711 posts)
27. It only took Garland two days to appoint Trump's SC
Thu Jan 12, 2023, 10:16 PM
Jan 2023

Two days after Trump declared his candidacy, which was the event that triggered the necessity of a special counsel.

Fiendish Thingy

(15,711 posts)
36. Why?
Fri Jan 13, 2023, 12:31 AM
Jan 2023

It was triggered by Trump declaring his candidacy- otherwise, no special prosecutor would have been appointed.

You seem to think a special prosecutor means “faster, more aggressive prosecution”, when it actually means “a prosecutor in an administrative bubble, to avoid ethical/political compromises”.

JohnSJ

(92,523 posts)
37. Because I don't agree with your premise. I think Garland did it because the January 6th
Fri Jan 13, 2023, 02:17 AM
Jan 2023

insurrection came very close to destroying democracy in the US, and the AG believed a special prosecutor would remove the appearance of a “political witch hunt”, because the majority of republicans, according to the polls believe Biden did not win the 2020 election.

That is why I also believe the special prosecutor should have bee done much earlier, because the evidence is overwhelming and requires it.

EndlessWire

(6,574 posts)
43. I thought we had to get rid of
Fri Jan 13, 2023, 06:00 AM
Jan 2023

the Special Master first? No offense to Dearie (rather liked the guy) but that whole mess took some time to clear up.

I think that the experience we had with that has shown that a SC is necessary for safety. I don't think the speed of light here is really an issue.

dem4decades

(11,322 posts)
12. I disapprove of the DOJ the last 2 years. Actually the last 6 years but
Thu Jan 12, 2023, 08:29 PM
Jan 2023

I had hopes that the last two wouldn't have been so disappointing.

If I hadn't thought this DOJ would have been better I wouldn't be so disappointed.

ColinC

(8,351 posts)
13. Seems like like a legitimate and credible individual
Thu Jan 12, 2023, 08:34 PM
Jan 2023

I will always wonder how Janet Reno ever thought Ken Starr would be a good fit as special counsel.

 

48656c6c6f20

(7,638 posts)
15. It might be a good idea to quickly clear any wrong doing
Thu Jan 12, 2023, 08:40 PM
Jan 2023

But it burns my ass the fuckers always expedite investigating democrats and republicans always game the system and nothing happens. And how I'm an inpatient fuck because I see the injustice but these lawyers that are part of the problem think they know better. Fuck em.

MerryBlooms

(11,776 posts)
16. The next Special Council appointed, should be investigating National Archives...
Thu Jan 12, 2023, 08:41 PM
Jan 2023

Why are our nation's documents, and top secret documents, not being tracked properly? Also, every document suddenly being 'discovered ', origin and investigation of why it wasn't returned. Find out who's dropping the ball on the non returned documents. This is unacceptable. If these documents are sensitive, someone delivered them, and someone should have made sure they were returned. There is a proper chain of protocols, that are Not being followed! Let's get some investigation into that mess. What a shitshow.

EndlessWire

(6,574 posts)
44. I agree.
Fri Jan 13, 2023, 06:05 AM
Jan 2023

And, if they insist on using old fashioned paper folders for these documents, they should invent something that matches the docs to the folders, for good measure.

Say, did Biden write on his documents? Did he make crib notes on them? Inquiring minds want to know...

gab13by13

(21,508 posts)
17. The only way it fits the guidelines for using a special counsel,
Thu Jan 12, 2023, 08:43 PM
Jan 2023

is if the US Marshall told Garland he found evidence of possible crimes committed by President Biden, then I agree.

If there was no evidence of crimes then appointing a sc was done because Garland is appeasing Gym Jordan who is planning to investigate DOJ and the FBI.

Fiendish Thingy

(15,711 posts)
30. Far from appeasing Jordan, I'm sure it will frustrate the hell out of him
Thu Jan 12, 2023, 10:21 PM
Jan 2023

Because, if he tries to hold Benghazi style hearings about Biden’s documents, he better get used to hearing witnesses reply with “I’m not going to comment on an ongoing investigation” over and over again.

Jordan will have be satisfied with Hunter’s laptop.

P.S. clearly, Obama era classified documents belong in the archives; since they weren’t where they belonged, that’s probable cause that somebody committed a crime, justifying the special counsel.

EndlessWire

(6,574 posts)
45. Yeah, we have trouble here.
Fri Jan 13, 2023, 06:07 AM
Jan 2023

Garland is supposed to have consulted some learned fellow before he made the decision. I see this as a preemptive strike.

mvd

(65,186 posts)
18. Approve of the idea, but don't approve of who he chose to be SC
Thu Jan 12, 2023, 08:49 PM
Jan 2023

Can anyone Trump appointed be fair? It worries me.

BlueIdaho

(13,582 posts)
20. I do not approve of Garland.
Thu Jan 12, 2023, 09:34 PM
Jan 2023

I’ve given up on that guy. To those who say “What if Trump is indicted tomorrow?” I say - it’s too fucking late. He should resign.

iemanja

(53,135 posts)
21. It was not neccessary
Thu Jan 12, 2023, 09:38 PM
Jan 2023

It's some bullshit is what it is. It took two years of Trump's stonewalling for Garland to appoint a Special Counsel for him, but he appoints one for Biden in a flash. He isn't even trying to look like he's being equivalent. Garland is terrible at his job.

Dum Aloo

(222 posts)
23. Approve, it does not embarrass me, as a Democrat, at all.
Thu Jan 12, 2023, 09:44 PM
Jan 2023

There is a huge difference between honorable President Biden and dishonorable loser t***p, and the American people will see it. Get it on the record.

Right wing media can spin it every which way, but in the end there will be a reckoning.

“Intent” will be the watch word.

Dum Aloo

(222 posts)
49. I agree, and I think the "reckoning" in this case may end up just being
Fri Jan 13, 2023, 02:21 PM
Jan 2023

in the hearts and minds of the People.

Skittles

(153,310 posts)
51. ALAS
Fri Jan 13, 2023, 05:45 PM
Jan 2023

what "WE THE PEOPLE" think or want or need doesn't seem to be a high priority with repukes and the press

usonian

(9,981 posts)
32. Looks like a case of "head them off at the pass".
Thu Jan 12, 2023, 11:01 PM
Jan 2023

Get there faster than Gym, and in addition, "can't comment on an ongoing investigation".
Don't forget, Hunter Biden is being investigated by DOJ.

And a counterweight to the "witch hunt" claim.
Makes sense to certain minds.

Not mine.

Were the documents planted? Ask the movers from Q-Haul.

(sarcasm) I HOPE!

 

friend of a friend

(367 posts)
52. Everything in our office was stamped TOP SECRET NSA codeword.
Fri Jan 13, 2023, 09:12 PM
Jan 2023

If someone brought in a menu from the NCO club someone would stamp it. The only way a paper left the office was in a burn bag or sent out with the courier.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Do you approve or disappr...