Jan 6 report is out.

[mspart]

Hence the general mistrust of the DOJ among voters today.  The DOJ/FBI have lied over and over again to the courts and the people.   There is no trust anymore in the DOJ.   Is Jack Smith any different?   Maybe he's a straight shooter, but he got convictions that were later overturned and used extrordinary means to secure those convictions.  

Jonathan Turley called this out and predicted Smith's next move with incredible accuracy as noted in my post above. 

mspart

[WrestlingRasta]

For every legal “expert” that says one thing to one side, there’s another who says another thing to another side.  Funny how we pick and choose when these media and lawyer types can and cannot be trusted. 
 

blah blah blah.  Stop being lazy and satisfied with what the comfortable media pundit has to say when they are telling you what you want to think.  Read the damn reports and court documents for yourselves. You may think it makes you look like an expert, or….’educated’….but it doesn’t.  Make up your own mind instead of always parroting someone else’s. 
 

“I don’t have time to read it” I’m sure is a common response.  Yet, we have time to be on here all the time arguing about stuff we don’t want to take the time to come to our own opinions about, easier to  just sit on someone’s else’s ideas and argue them all day.   Adorable. 

[Offthemat]

23 minutes ago, mspart said:

Hence the general mistrust of the DOJ among voters today.  The DOJ/FBI have lied over and over again to the courts and the people.   There is no trust anymore in the DOJ.   Is Jack Smith any different?   Maybe he's a straight shooter, but he got convictions that were later overturned and used extrordinary means to secure those convictions.  

Jonathan Turley called this out and predicted Smith's next move with incredible accuracy as noted in my post above. 

mspart

I can assure you, Jack Smith is not a straight shooter.  Turley is, to a fault.  It would be my preference to read opinions of lawyers who have taken cases before the Supreme Court and won, not one who has been rejected unanimously.  

[mspart]

As a non lawyer, I don't speak lawyer.   I do depend on those that do to explain things to me.   If you find fault with Turley's reasoning, that's fine, but he gives his reasoning unlike others that don't.  

I have already given my opinion based on Smith's use of the term insurrection in the document when the DOJ has not tried anyone on that charge.  It seems incongruent to claim an event was an insurrection and not prosecute any cases on that basis.   It stretches credulity. 

mspart

[Offthemat]

I’m not a lawyer either, but I read a lot on it and listen to podcasts where lawyers discuss both current and historic cases.  The one line that I keep in the back of my mind, forget who it is attributed to, is you might not get justice, but you will get a decision.  Byron York reports that the Smith report admits that he wasn’t sure he could get a conviction on insurrection, even in an adversarial DC court, so he didn’t charge anyone with it.