At this point, we’ve been lied to so much by the Biden administration, they might as well just save their breath when telling us President Biden didn’t know about a step as consequential as the appointment of a special counsel to investigate President Trump for (again) his role in the so-called “insurrection” and his possession of so-called “classified “documents at Mar-A-Lago. As we said just yesterday, even the WASHINGTON POST reports that according to their sources, Trump's possession of those documents was not nefarious, did not include “nuclear secrets,” and really just reflects a difference of opinion regarding who could have them.

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/kevindowneyjr/2022/11/16/shocker-wapo-sheepishly-admits-the-fbi-found-no-nuclear-secrets-or-anything-else-in-mar-a-lago-raid-n1646445

In an exclusive interview shortly after Attorney General Merrick Garland's announcement, Trump told FOX NEWS Digital that this is “the worst politicization of justice in our country.”

“For six years I have been going through this,” he said, “and I am not going to go through it any more. And I hope the Republicans have the courage to fight this.”

“I have been proven innocent for six years on everything,” he said, “from fake impeachments to [special counsel Robert] Mueller, who found no collusion, and now I have to do it more? It is not acceptable. It is so unfair. It is so political.”

Rep. Andy Biggs tweeted a response to this story that has since been made “unavailable” by Twitter (but was saved for our reading pleasure by J. D. Rucker at LIBERTY DAILY): “The corrupt DOJ appoints a special counsel to investigate President Trump the same week he announces a 2024 run. Has there ever been a more politicized and weaponized DOJ in American history.”

Considering this is just about the same thing we said in yesterday’s Evening Edition, I’d hope it would have been restored on Twitter by now. Elon Musk, where are you on this?

White House spokesperson Karine Jean-Pierre is always good for a laugh, and she provided a big knee-slapper on Friday when she said, “Look, I will say this, and I’ve said it many times before, we do not politicize the Department of Justice...” LOOK, I will say this, Karine, The DOJ is assigning a special counsel to investigate President Biden’s top political foe and likely opponent in 2024. It’s the task of the special counsel to determine whether or not to charge this opponent criminally. No, no, that’s not politicization in the slightest. (Of course, this sham is why they have to maintain, ludicrously, that Biden knew nothing about it, just as he knew nothing about the Mar-A-Lago raid, haha.)

Garland, in a startling twist of logic, actually cited Trump’s announcement to run and Biden’s “stated intention” to run as reasons FOR appointing a special counsel. He concluded that it was “in the public interest.” (Just a thought: perhaps this is why Biden still insists he's planning to run.)

So, did Garland think it was in the public interest to raid Trump’s home, Third World-style, over what is essentially a document dispute? Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley would tell him it wasn’t, and said in August that Garland “must resign or be impeached.” Hawley said, “The raid by Joe Biden’s FBI on the home of a former President who is also Biden’s chief political opponent is an unprecedented assault on democratic norms and the rule of law, Biden has taken our republic into dangerous waters.” Hawley also called at that time for the search warrant to be published, the firing of FBI Director Chris Wray, and the total overhaul of the FBI.

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/merrick-garland-to-name-special-counsel-in-trump-criminal-investigations-reports/

We promised more information about newly-appointed special counsel Jack Smith --- aside from his working in the Public Integrity Unit of the DOJ for five years under (yes) President Obama. As reported in THE EPOCH TIMES, his most recent assignment was at The Hague, where he was chief prosecutor for the special court responsible for investigating and adjudicating war crimes in Kosovo. Before that, he was vice president of litigation for HCA Healthcare, one of the largest healthcare providers in the U.S.

He’s a 1994 graduate of Harvard Law and reportedly a Democrat. A more detailed career bio is at the ET story. As I see it, Smith will have to earn the designation of “nonpartisan,” as our ‘Justice’ Department has already earned the title of Most Partisan DOJ in History.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/what-we-know-about-jack-smith-special-counsel-appointed-in-trump-probes_4872769.html?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=TheLibertyDaily

Legal professor Jonathan Turley appeared on Jesse Watters’ FOX NEWS show Friday evening and made an interesting point, that “Attorney General Garland, in making a case for a special counsel, made the case against himself for the failure to appoint a special counsel on Hunter Biden.” Exactly! He went on to explain...

“He said, ‘Look, we’ve got someone running for President; we really can’t investigate this as a member of the current President’s administration.’ Well, you also have an investigation of the current President’s family, an investigation where the President could be implicated, in a multimillion-dollar influence-peddling scheme, an investigation that has references to President Biden, using code names, like ‘the Big Guy’...to hide the fact that they were talking about Joe Biden. And he has steadfastly refused to appoint a special counsel, and it’s simply baffling.”

Gosh, it’s not baffling at all if you assume the totally partisan nature of the Biden DOJ. Garland used completely different standards for the two cases.

Speaking of the Hunter laptop story, the U.K. DAILY MAIL has a good update. Leave it to the British press (and the NEW YORK POST, of course) to cover this when most of the American press cops out. If anyone you know says, “That Hunter Biden story the Republicans talk about is no big deal,” send them this...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11441481/DailyMail-com-breaks-evidence-GOPs-case-against-Joe-Biden.html

As for Garland’s focus on January 6, Turley said, “I don’t get it. The January 6 committee did not significantly move the ball on establishing a crime by President Trump.” He found the Mar-A-Lago aspect more concerning for President Trump, because “the attorney general mentioned obstruction a couple of times.” The FBI, he said, “often starts with low-lying fruit.” The obstruction claims involve “other people, lawyers, staff, etc.,” and Turley thinks the special counsel will start with them, just as the Mueller team did.

There’s a two-syllable word for what this is, and I’ll refrain from using it, as I know we’re all thinking it, anyway.

Prof. Glenn Reynolds would agree. He’s got a great piece in the NEW YORK POST, saying that Merrick Garland has not only proven himself unfit for his current job as attorney general but also for the job he really wanted, that of Supreme Court justice. As bad as the ‘Justice’ Department is under his tenure, he at least HAS a tenure and will be replaced. If he’d been on the Court, this political hack might have served for life.

Areas of concern cited by Reynolds include Garland’s targeting of parents speaking out at school board meetings in response to the National School Boards Association (which had reportedly already spoken to the White House), calling this “political thuggery at its worst.”

Garland has adopted the current definition of “domestic terrorism,” which simply means “opposition to our policies.” Reynolds’ conclusion about AG Garland: “He should go.”

https://nypost.com/2021/10/28/merrick-garland-is-unfit-for-supreme-court-and-ag/

Finally, here’s a must-read piece that looks at the lawfare behind this special counsel appointment as expressed in the legal filings. Note that regarding January 6, the special counsel won’t just be looking at Trump but also at GOP members of Congress and anyone associated with Trump.

Also, do you recall my speculation that the deputy AG, former Obama attorney Lisa Monaco, is likely responsible for what the AG’s office is doing? As Sundance writes, “DAG Lisa Monaco has written, and AG Garland has appointed Jack Smith to target Donald Trump with the same special counsel process previously used by Robert Mueller and Andrew Weissmann.” In other words, Turley was right to bring up pursuit of obstruction of justice charges, because that was Weissmann's strategy.

“This is Robert Mueller 2.0,” Sundance writes, “using Special Counsel Jack Smith.” All the same investigators will transfer over. In other words, it’s just as Trump said yesterday, that the same sleazy people are involved again. And according to Sundance, they’re “structurally targeting” Republicans. By appointing a special counsel, they can go after the new Republican Congress without having that pesky separation of powers issue. “Primary goal: create enough of a legal mess as to obstruct any Republican legislative effort against the Biden White House.” Bonus: if they can “pick off any Republican House members under charges of ‘supporting an insurrection,’” the Democrats regain control of Congress.

There’s much more at the link. This is an ABSOLUTE MUST-READ if you want to comprehend what Biden’s underhanded ‘Justice’ Department is up to. It’s easy to see why they chose to do this immediately upon the GOP taking control of the House.

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2022/11/18/biden-doj-assigns-special-counsel-to-investigate-republicans-in-congress-and-president-trump-for-insurrection

----

ADDITIONAL NOTE on appointment of this special counsel

by Laura Ainsworth, staff writer/researcher

Bob Hoge at REDSTATE had an interesting take on Garland’s appointment of a special counsel to continue investigating President Trump. He thinks it might backfire, and says, “Voters, especially Trump’s base, could find renewed energy as they witness yet another overzealous prosecution of Orange Man Bad, and after watching so many failed efforts, they could (correctly) conclude that the Justice Department is simply an untrustworthy, politicized, partisan Democrat operation.”

https://redstate.com/bobhoge/2022/11/19/could-dojs-special-counsel-actually-fire-up-support-for-donald-trump-n661197

I think he might be onto something. Perhaps he was reading my mind, as this overt and, in my view, un-American persecution of Trump and his colleagues and supporters really gets my back up, and I know I have lots of company. Right after the August 8 raid on Mar-A-Lago, I insisted that our big "TRUMP 2020” flag hang from the eaves of our house once again. In the final weeks of the campaign leading into the midterm elections, it came down, because Trump wasn’t on the ballot and we didn’t want Election Day to be just about him. (Instead we set out yard signs for a couple of candidates for local races.) And we had no plans necessarily to put the flag back on display.

But now that Merrick Garland has done this, the Trump flag is going back up.

That’s not even to say Trump will be my final choice for the nomination in 2024, though he might very well turn out to be. It’s just that I want to show solidarity with Trump after what has been done to him by an administration that currently bears little resemblance to the America I used to know and pledge my allegiance to. In other words, I’ve concluded that the ‘Justice’ Department is simply an untrustworthy, politicized, partisan Democrat operation. Heck, I already knew that, but now they’ve given me a clearer idea of just how far they’re willing to take it.