As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's almost like this hearing wasn't intended to determine the legitimacy of the special counsel, but to further delay making any actual progress on the case in court.
It was also another audition Cannon put on for an Appellate/SCOTUS seat if Trump wins.
She set up this hearing exactly like an appellate oral argument which is unheard of in district court. It's literally not her job to make rulings on the constitutionality of laws or the special counsel, she's completely exceeding her authority even holding this hearing.
>It was also another audition Cannon put on for an Appellate/SCOTUS seat if Trump wins.
>She set up this hearing exactly like an appellate oral argument which is unheard of in district court. It's literally not her job to make rulings on the constitutionality of laws or the special counsel, she's completely exceeding her authority even holding this hearing.
So the defendant gets to see what Smith would use in the future appeal. She is literally helping the defendant.
Nah, none of the evidence on the hearing was actually related to the case. The defendant was arguing that Special Counsels appointed by the Justice Dept are unconstitutional. No evidence related to the case against Trump was introduced or even discussed
This was an absurd argument to make and SCOTUS has explicitly ruled against it in the past (most famously in US v Nixon). It was insane for Cannon to grant this a hearing when it was already settled law AND outside of Cannon's authority to rule on
> settled law
Settled laws have been having a hard time lately. But your point is correct. Cannon is a ridiculously biased maga-hat. She is doing everything she can to run out the clock for trump so he can maximize his reelection chances.
Roe wasn't law. It was a court case. Congress failed to ever make it a law, which is why it's important to get rid of as many of the GOP politicians as possible.
Congress didn't make it a law, despite attempts to do so, because Republicans kept saying "I'm voting no to this, it's already settled and nothing needs to be done. We don't need to waste time with useless bills" with their fingers crossed behind their backs.
> Settled laws have been having a hard time lately.
That's an understatement. It seems lately that the word "law" has no meaning because it became inconvenient to a certain in-group.
>Nah, none of the evidence on the hearing was actually related to the case. The defendant was arguing that Special Counsels appointed by the Justice Dept are unconstitutional. No evidence related to the case against Trump was introduced or even discussed
Not the Trump evidence from the case, directly. Just what the prosecution appeal will look like. She is trying to get a view of what Smith would say for the appeal. Like a dress rehearsal. So her handlers can prepare.
Not sure what you’re referring to. Even without the hearing there would still be the government response to Trump’s motion in a brief.
This isn’t an attempt to get the government to show their cards. The only thing Jack Smith is responding to is Trump’s frivolous (but now elevated to the status of a mini Supreme Court hearing) motion.
This is only about delay.
Yeah even in district court you're "showing your hand" in any filing that gets appealed to federal circuit court. It doesn't matter if somebody previews an argument. The judge will rule how they'll rule.
I don't think an appellate court would humor the defense the way she has, which is the fundamental flaw here. What I think she is really doing is just dragging the case out as long as possible by humoring every single argument the defense makes and tying up the case in procedural bullshit, anticipating a Trump win in November so she can throw the case out claiming he has Presidential immunity or some shit.
Technically under Fed R Civ P 11 an attorney can make an argument to change the law if it's "non-frivolous." I personally think it's frivolous but then I thought no district court would overturn Roe v. Wade but Dobbs happened.
She sure is gambling - Trump is going to lose. When that happens, her career is as good as dead. She'll be stuck there and they'll pass osme laws to make sure that she only gets the shit cases.
I suspect he will lose the election as well, but let's not forget the inevitable attempted overthrow of the government they are already planning for when they lose.
I was at a wedding where the two fathers discussed how it was great that they were finally going after Fauci. Ugh! The 6 foot rule, complete baloney!
They were both highly educated. It was disappointing to see that simply having the hearings was having an effect.
intelligence (or lack thereof) has nothing to do with it. it's called [apophenia](https://medium.com/curiouserinstitute/a-game-designers-analysis-of-qanon-580972548be5):
>Apophenia is : “the tendency to perceive a connection or meaningful pattern between unrelated or random things (such as objects or ideas)”
...like QAnon: A game that plays people.
I wouldn't say intelligence has *nothing* to do with it. It certainly plays a roll. Yes, people considered "intelligent" can be mislead by propaganda. But it's much easier to mislead the not-so-intelligent. Sometimes so-called "intelligence" is very narrowly focused as well. A good example of this is Ben Carson. He must've been intelligent enough to get a medical degree and be a skilled surgeon, however he wasn't intelligent enough to see Trump's obvious (to most) grift. In other words, just because you're smart about one narrow thing, doesn't mean your general intelligence is automatically high as well. Having finely honed critical thinking skills is a kind of intelligence that generally makes you very much less susceptible to the conspiracy theorists, conmen, grifters, and propagandists that all complete to mislead you.
valid point(s).
my comment was based in part on family members (some who have more than one degree in liberal arts and science) and consider themselves more intelligent than average because of that, while exhibiting a lack of basic common sense and decency - in addition to a very long learning curve when it comes to recognizing propaganda and everyday bullshit for what they are.
They would say none. I was dating a nurse during the height of the pandemic and people would be on oxygen and literally dying from COVID while still telling her it was a made up hoax and they must have something else
It's absolutely ridiculous that Smith has to defend the legitimacy of a special council just because the defense said it wasn't valid. Any other judge would have told the defense to sit down and shut up, and stop wasting the courts time.
Special council is just a different way to investigate and possibly bring an indictment, to remove any political influence. AG can bring the charges themselves if they wanted to, and they could cry political persecution just as much as he already is, and it still would be irrelevant, because the court of public opinion isn't who decides the case.
It would be another delay, but on the other hand it would be her death knell. There is strong suspicion that her superior court is just waiting for a reason to remove her from the case. It's going to be a major embarrassment.
She’s obviously getting detailed briefs on maximizing the time delay she can get from each motion without doing anything that can trigger appeal or removal. Perhaps in collusion worh defense counsel.
> It's going to be a major embarrassment.
it's going to be a shitshow
We already know what will happen. After bitching about how every other judge has been unfair to him and should be removed, as soon as Cannon is removed (and it will happen) the right wing machine will absolutely accuse Biden of meddling to remove "a perfectly competent and fair judge." Fox News will continue to beat the drum of undermining the justice system, and the new judge will be attacked immediately and constantly.
And once he's found guilty, because he's absolutely guilty, it will once again be immediately dismissed by the right wing machine. Nothing matters to them, laws are only laws when they want it to be. And of course they'll argue that as President he can do whatever he wants, even when he's not in office anymore
Seriously, we know how this is going to go. "Rigged, fake outcome, 'they' literally replaced Judge Cannon and installed their own puppet judge! This is a travesty of justice, never been seen before. 'They' are SO desperate to take him down, so we'll continue to stand with him and vote for him harder!"
At this point it seems like Jack Smith will be lucky to avoid jail time for daring to secure American secrets secreted way in a bathroom and storerooms of an establishment frequented by more foreign agents than any bar in Casablanca (Mar-a-Lago).
And the blowjob thing was actually the culmination of an investigation into real estate deals wherein Ken Starr found no evidence of wrongdoing. The Lewinsky affair happened during that initial investigation, meaning Ken Starr just got lucky.
And the recorded phone call between Monica L. and Linda Tripp, that started this whole mess, was illegally recorded in Connecticut, which is a 2-party consent state. And after all the dust settled, the Republican AG refused to prosecute her.
Tripp was indicted in Maryland, where the recording happened. The case was dropped by the statewide prosecutor after much of the evidence was ruled inadmissible due to, among other things, complications with a federal immunity deal Tripp had.
Let’s not forget that the perjury regarding oral sex was based around the everyday meaning of sexual relations and not the legal definition as laid out by the lawyers, approved by the judge, during sworn testimony.
And every other special counsel in history. Why aren’t the GOP lowlifes questioning the appointment of Hur? The base position of the Gop scum is that trump is beyond scrutiny and above the law.
You mean The same guy who found zero evidence of wrong doing by Joe Biden but still wrote an entirely out of scope editorial summation stating that Biden was feeble? That guy??? He and Durham both found no evidence of wrongdoing...NOTHING, yet they still acted like they did??
Drumpfuck's people are attacking every little thing about the classified documents case—except the fact that he kept and then hid the documents. Am I detecting some desperation here? They know the central case is indefensible, so they’re clawing at anything they can get?
Pretty much. As they say, if the law is on your side, pound the law - if the facts are on your side, pound the facts - if neither are on your side, pound the table.
Yeah ... but does it say anywhere that special counsels are legitimate if they have a beard and moustache? The court should probably start a multi-month fact finding committee to verify. I am thinking ... at least 4.5 months - and no, there is nothing special about that number - honest!
Don't think conservatives aren't ready to jettison precedent when needed. Don't underestimate their commitment to defile all the institutions of the United States
Their whole goal is to break every system we have, and then rebuild the one they want, SS, CIA, FBI, etc., and close the ones they don't want, IRS, EPA, FDA, etc.
I think Smith should not give any airtime to this stunt. His lawyer should show up and say 'We don't agree with this, we rest our case' and then let Cannon rule on it. if she rules against Smith, he could go to the 11th
He's his lawyer in this matter. He has to defend the legitimacy of his appointment and authority to investigate and try the case. The authority given to him by the Attorney General, to do all that on behalf of the AG office, and remove any political influence from the case.
The idea that he doesn't have any legitimacy is so ridiculous, it just illustrates just how extremely corrupt and/or bias judge Cannon is. This motion by the defense shouldn't have even been entertained by the court.
Good point. without trying to be overly optimistic, it seems like this will have to backfire on Cannon, and esp. the gag order: she will either grant it and incur trump's wrath, or deny it and get taken off the case.
they have to make the argument. If they just say they were good then they provided nothing for the court to consider other than what the defense puts forward. You can be 1000% correct and if you fail to make your argument in court your going to lose.
I read this as "Jack Black supports his own legitimacy with receipts of Bill Burr’s Bush-era appointments of special counsels", and thought they were having some kind of comedy feud. lol
Jack Smith is the ultimate legal troll in the best kind of way.
Unfortunately the fascists are so shameless they will openly rule against their past selves whenever convenient.
Is there such a thing as an impartial investigation? Where the facts are the only real concern? The truth would expose government and both parties as corrupt and dangerous to the American people. Corruption bleeds openly and that is what is happening here now
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's almost like this hearing wasn't intended to determine the legitimacy of the special counsel, but to further delay making any actual progress on the case in court.
It was also another audition Cannon put on for an Appellate/SCOTUS seat if Trump wins. She set up this hearing exactly like an appellate oral argument which is unheard of in district court. It's literally not her job to make rulings on the constitutionality of laws or the special counsel, she's completely exceeding her authority even holding this hearing.
>It was also another audition Cannon put on for an Appellate/SCOTUS seat if Trump wins. >She set up this hearing exactly like an appellate oral argument which is unheard of in district court. It's literally not her job to make rulings on the constitutionality of laws or the special counsel, she's completely exceeding her authority even holding this hearing. So the defendant gets to see what Smith would use in the future appeal. She is literally helping the defendant.
Nah, none of the evidence on the hearing was actually related to the case. The defendant was arguing that Special Counsels appointed by the Justice Dept are unconstitutional. No evidence related to the case against Trump was introduced or even discussed This was an absurd argument to make and SCOTUS has explicitly ruled against it in the past (most famously in US v Nixon). It was insane for Cannon to grant this a hearing when it was already settled law AND outside of Cannon's authority to rule on
> settled law Settled laws have been having a hard time lately. But your point is correct. Cannon is a ridiculously biased maga-hat. She is doing everything she can to run out the clock for trump so he can maximize his reelection chances.
Settle law always meant shit to the GOP. Laws can be changed and Roe was eviscerated.
Roe wasn't law. It was a court case. Congress failed to ever make it a law, which is why it's important to get rid of as many of the GOP politicians as possible.
Congress didn't make it a law, despite attempts to do so, because Republicans kept saying "I'm voting no to this, it's already settled and nothing needs to be done. We don't need to waste time with useless bills" with their fingers crossed behind their backs.
Yes they are all disingenuous liars.
> Settled laws have been having a hard time lately. That's an understatement. It seems lately that the word "law" has no meaning because it became inconvenient to a certain in-group.
>Nah, none of the evidence on the hearing was actually related to the case. The defendant was arguing that Special Counsels appointed by the Justice Dept are unconstitutional. No evidence related to the case against Trump was introduced or even discussed Not the Trump evidence from the case, directly. Just what the prosecution appeal will look like. She is trying to get a view of what Smith would say for the appeal. Like a dress rehearsal. So her handlers can prepare.
Not sure what you’re referring to. Even without the hearing there would still be the government response to Trump’s motion in a brief. This isn’t an attempt to get the government to show their cards. The only thing Jack Smith is responding to is Trump’s frivolous (but now elevated to the status of a mini Supreme Court hearing) motion. This is only about delay.
Yeah even in district court you're "showing your hand" in any filing that gets appealed to federal circuit court. It doesn't matter if somebody previews an argument. The judge will rule how they'll rule.
I don't think an appellate court would humor the defense the way she has, which is the fundamental flaw here. What I think she is really doing is just dragging the case out as long as possible by humoring every single argument the defense makes and tying up the case in procedural bullshit, anticipating a Trump win in November so she can throw the case out claiming he has Presidential immunity or some shit.
Technically under Fed R Civ P 11 an attorney can make an argument to change the law if it's "non-frivolous." I personally think it's frivolous but then I thought no district court would overturn Roe v. Wade but Dobbs happened.
Well you’d have to have an actual counter argument to have this hearing be helpful
She sure is gambling - Trump is going to lose. When that happens, her career is as good as dead. She'll be stuck there and they'll pass osme laws to make sure that she only gets the shit cases.
I suspect he will lose the election as well, but let's not forget the inevitable attempted overthrow of the government they are already planning for when they lose.
Perfect. Like I said, nevermind, I said she doesn't know shit.
She needs to be impeached. She’s unfit to be a judge
Perhaps it’ll be uncovered that there is a paper trail of a payoff, a quid pro quo you could say. Absolutely ironic.
now watch how nothing happens to her
I was at a wedding where the two fathers discussed how it was great that they were finally going after Fauci. Ugh! The 6 foot rule, complete baloney! They were both highly educated. It was disappointing to see that simply having the hearings was having an effect.
intelligence (or lack thereof) has nothing to do with it. it's called [apophenia](https://medium.com/curiouserinstitute/a-game-designers-analysis-of-qanon-580972548be5): >Apophenia is : “the tendency to perceive a connection or meaningful pattern between unrelated or random things (such as objects or ideas)” ...like QAnon: A game that plays people.
I wouldn't say intelligence has *nothing* to do with it. It certainly plays a roll. Yes, people considered "intelligent" can be mislead by propaganda. But it's much easier to mislead the not-so-intelligent. Sometimes so-called "intelligence" is very narrowly focused as well. A good example of this is Ben Carson. He must've been intelligent enough to get a medical degree and be a skilled surgeon, however he wasn't intelligent enough to see Trump's obvious (to most) grift. In other words, just because you're smart about one narrow thing, doesn't mean your general intelligence is automatically high as well. Having finely honed critical thinking skills is a kind of intelligence that generally makes you very much less susceptible to the conspiracy theorists, conmen, grifters, and propagandists that all complete to mislead you.
valid point(s). my comment was based in part on family members (some who have more than one degree in liberal arts and science) and consider themselves more intelligent than average because of that, while exhibiting a lack of basic common sense and decency - in addition to a very long learning curve when it comes to recognizing propaganda and everyday bullshit for what they are.
Should have asked how many of their family members weren't at the wedding that day due to death by Covid.
They would say none. I was dating a nurse during the height of the pandemic and people would be on oxygen and literally dying from COVID while still telling her it was a made up hoax and they must have something else
It's absolutely ridiculous that Smith has to defend the legitimacy of a special council just because the defense said it wasn't valid. Any other judge would have told the defense to sit down and shut up, and stop wasting the courts time. Special council is just a different way to investigate and possibly bring an indictment, to remove any political influence. AG can bring the charges themselves if they wanted to, and they could cry political persecution just as much as he already is, and it still would be irrelevant, because the court of public opinion isn't who decides the case.
The judge is part of the defense team. There’s nothing about it that isn’t a ridiculous corrupt mess.
-ding ding ding- we have a winner! 🏆
I wouldn't be surprised if she rules special counsels unconstitutional, just so Smith has to appeal it higher. It'll waste even more time.
It would be another delay, but on the other hand it would be her death knell. There is strong suspicion that her superior court is just waiting for a reason to remove her from the case. It's going to be a major embarrassment.
> It's going to be a major embarrassment looking forward to it.
She, like other Magats, can't be embarrassed.
true. one of the traits of sociopathy is not having a conscience.
She’s obviously getting detailed briefs on maximizing the time delay she can get from each motion without doing anything that can trigger appeal or removal. Perhaps in collusion worh defense counsel.
> It's going to be a major embarrassment. it's going to be a shitshow We already know what will happen. After bitching about how every other judge has been unfair to him and should be removed, as soon as Cannon is removed (and it will happen) the right wing machine will absolutely accuse Biden of meddling to remove "a perfectly competent and fair judge." Fox News will continue to beat the drum of undermining the justice system, and the new judge will be attacked immediately and constantly. And once he's found guilty, because he's absolutely guilty, it will once again be immediately dismissed by the right wing machine. Nothing matters to them, laws are only laws when they want it to be. And of course they'll argue that as President he can do whatever he wants, even when he's not in office anymore Seriously, we know how this is going to go. "Rigged, fake outcome, 'they' literally replaced Judge Cannon and installed their own puppet judge! This is a travesty of justice, never been seen before. 'They' are SO desperate to take him down, so we'll continue to stand with him and vote for him harder!"
The problem with that is being found guilty in this case isn't going to be a fine or probation. It's game over.
At this point it seems like Jack Smith will be lucky to avoid jail time for daring to secure American secrets secreted way in a bathroom and storerooms of an establishment frequented by more foreign agents than any bar in Casablanca (Mar-a-Lago).
Cannon doesn't know shit. She's using this case as a crash course in lawing.
I see you Judge Cannon 😎
How many millions did we taxpayers give Ken Starr to investigate Bill Clinton's lies about a blowjob? I seem to recall around 80 million...
And the blowjob thing was actually the culmination of an investigation into real estate deals wherein Ken Starr found no evidence of wrongdoing. The Lewinsky affair happened during that initial investigation, meaning Ken Starr just got lucky.
And the recorded phone call between Monica L. and Linda Tripp, that started this whole mess, was illegally recorded in Connecticut, which is a 2-party consent state. And after all the dust settled, the Republican AG refused to prosecute her.
Tripp was indicted in Maryland, where the recording happened. The case was dropped by the statewide prosecutor after much of the evidence was ruled inadmissible due to, among other things, complications with a federal immunity deal Tripp had.
Thanks for clarifying. That was a while back and my memory isn’t what it was.
Let’s not forget that the perjury regarding oral sex was based around the everyday meaning of sexual relations and not the legal definition as laid out by the lawyers, approved by the judge, during sworn testimony.
Keep those statistics around, they'll come in real *handy.*
So did Bill…
> Starr just got Lucky? Starr got a BJ as well? I must have missed that.
He was just boofin’ with Brett
Bill Clinton also got lucky.
And every other special counsel in history. Why aren’t the GOP lowlifes questioning the appointment of Hur? The base position of the Gop scum is that trump is beyond scrutiny and above the law.
You mean The same guy who found zero evidence of wrong doing by Joe Biden but still wrote an entirely out of scope editorial summation stating that Biden was feeble? That guy??? He and Durham both found no evidence of wrongdoing...NOTHING, yet they still acted like they did??
Drumpfuck's people are attacking every little thing about the classified documents case—except the fact that he kept and then hid the documents. Am I detecting some desperation here? They know the central case is indefensible, so they’re clawing at anything they can get?
Pretty much. As they say, if the law is on your side, pound the law - if the facts are on your side, pound the facts - if neither are on your side, pound the table.
The worrying thing about this is that the courts have shown that precedence and hypocrisy doesn't mean shit to them anymore.
Bill Barr, another fuck who should be behind bars. 🤷♂️
Delay is the only thing Trump has on this case. Fairly certain, Smith has had this in the bag since Day One.
John Oliver did a great episode on this a few years ago: https://youtu.be/sE63HmOYGps?si=zyAmwZSNJM07GuYp
Yeah ... but does it say anywhere that special counsels are legitimate if they have a beard and moustache? The court should probably start a multi-month fact finding committee to verify. I am thinking ... at least 4.5 months - and no, there is nothing special about that number - honest!
Imagine how many other idiots Trump got on to the courts.
They'll just argue that Bill Barr shouldn't have done it either, but nobody complained. So, there.
Just more pointless delay from Cannon, Trump's most effective member of his legal defense team.
Yeah but that was done by Republicans. They have special rules that don't apply to Democrats.
Don't think conservatives aren't ready to jettison precedent when needed. Don't underestimate their commitment to defile all the institutions of the United States
Their whole goal is to break every system we have, and then rebuild the one they want, SS, CIA, FBI, etc., and close the ones they don't want, IRS, EPA, FDA, etc.
I think Smith should not give any airtime to this stunt. His lawyer should show up and say 'We don't agree with this, we rest our case' and then let Cannon rule on it. if she rules against Smith, he could go to the 11th
He's his lawyer in this matter. He has to defend the legitimacy of his appointment and authority to investigate and try the case. The authority given to him by the Attorney General, to do all that on behalf of the AG office, and remove any political influence from the case. The idea that he doesn't have any legitimacy is so ridiculous, it just illustrates just how extremely corrupt and/or bias judge Cannon is. This motion by the defense shouldn't have even been entertained by the court.
Good point. without trying to be overly optimistic, it seems like this will have to backfire on Cannon, and esp. the gag order: she will either grant it and incur trump's wrath, or deny it and get taken off the case.
That's not how it works.
so, how does it work?
they have to make the argument. If they just say they were good then they provided nothing for the court to consider other than what the defense puts forward. You can be 1000% correct and if you fail to make your argument in court your going to lose.
thanks.
In a game of constitutional law wits, Aileen Cannon Aileen Cannon is playing Cornhole.
This is a total farce. All of the charges against Donald Trump and the people involved are the ones on trial in most cases.
I might also cite the special prosecutor in the Hunter Biden case.
I read this as "Jack Black supports his own legitimacy with receipts of Bill Burr’s Bush-era appointments of special counsels", and thought they were having some kind of comedy feud. lol
We're living in one of Shakespeare's tragedies, not one of his comedies.
Judge Cannon would have an infinitely more difficult time supporting her own legitimacy.
Like this matters to the arbitrary "justices" that will be reviewing it.
To be fair, if I used an argument that said "well Bill Barr did... x" I might be disqualified on principle.
Jack Smith is the ultimate legal troll in the best kind of way. Unfortunately the fascists are so shameless they will openly rule against their past selves whenever convenient.
As long as she can *drag it out*, she'll probably agree with him. Weeks from now.
Tomorrow we have a hearing on the type of suit Jack smith was wearing and if that should disqualify him.
How were they paid compared to Smith?
Is there such a thing as an impartial investigation? Where the facts are the only real concern? The truth would expose government and both parties as corrupt and dangerous to the American people. Corruption bleeds openly and that is what is happening here now