Nobody will every be prosecuted.
It will all be “oh, it’s in the past, we can’t go after anyone, let’s just forgive everyone for everything for the good of the country.” (see Ford’s pardon of Nixon)
Sued? By who?
The prosecutions and executions will commence immediately! Okay, maybe not immediately. But definitely in two weeks. TWO WEEKS!
The quote was about being entangled in a criminal investigation. I should have kept that term rather than shifting to prosecution. I don’t know if anyone will be prosecuted,but I think there will continue to be investigation. At the very least, lying to the FBI is a crime.
I suspect Hunter Biden won’t sue, but I think he could. I’m not sure who else has a viable claim of action, but people can be sued based on claims that later are determined not to be viable.
I hope you’re right.
It’s time that baseless political smear campaigns are called out for what they are, and those responsible are made to face consequences.
I just hope that the Justice Department goes back to being independent, and not a tool of the administration. That is very much the norm, and it was one of the biggest red flags of the current administration. US DOJ should be making these calls independently. It should not be up to the administration to decide.
Certainly, Biden can make his AG choice in part based on their thoughts about the general approach, but he should not be getting anywhere near the decisions involving that case. Both because of the need for independence of the agency, and also because it involves his son.
I’d love to see Rudy get sued by Hunter Biden, but it’s not like Rudy has any money. He’s certainly not going to get paid by Trump.
There is a point in suing Giuliani.
The source is a Canadian website, so that’s probably in Canadian dollars, which would still be over $30 million USD.
I am also pretty sure Giuliani has gotten paid already, since he’s been doing work for Trump for quite a while now. He probably has to fight to get a paycheck in a reasonable amount of time, but he can easily dump a lot of Trump oppo material the day after Trump leaves office if he doesn’t get paid.
You mean Eric Holder’s justice department? Or Eric Holder, who described his job of Attorney General as being ‘Barack Obama’s Wingman’, and who was cited for contempt of Congress for refusing to respond to legal subpoenas? The guy who had 17 Democrats join Republicans in calling for a criminal contempt resolution?
That independent justice department?
Yes, that is exactly what he meant. Why, when he wrote that, even before I read it, I was thinking ‘Eric Holder’. You got us.
Did he say “Eric Holder’s justice department”? Did he send you a Private Message clarifying that when he referred to the upcoming Justice Department he of course meant a previous justice department that had Eric Holder in it? 
Can I ask a quick question? Do you believe that because a Democrat does something, it suddenly makes that thing right to for any Republican?
Do you support an independent DOJ or not? Should the DOJ just be the President’s prosecutors, doing whatever he says to do?
You used to know when to put the shovel down and walk away from the hole. What happened?
As an aside, do you think Holder denying noted cow-enemy Darrel Issa’s subpoena for internal deliberative documents is anything remotely like what Barr has done?
It is almost tempting to be diverted into a discussion of the differences between the 2009-Jan. 2016 justice department and the 2016-now one. But to answer your question: No.
The basic implication behind whataboutism is hypocrisy. “You didn’t say anything in this obviously equivalent situation; therefore, you don’t really give a damn about X, and you’re just blabbering about it to score political points.”
Of course, that also works in reverse as well. Those with a long history of excusing or handwaving away gross corruption really ought not to aspire to the moral high ground.
I’m aware of the implications. It’s generally a worthless throw-away post meant to score cheap political points rather than accomplish anything.
eschrodinger quote was: " I just hope that the Justice Department goes back to being independent, and not a tool of the administration." This is a statement that Sam apparently agrees with, but rather than actually expressing that agreement and move the discussion forward, he throws in a useless potshot. I’m frustrated that that kind of response, where someone attempts to score political points and attacks the poster rather than the post, has become not just the norm, but overwhelmingly the norm, for “political debate” in this country. Rather than find points of common agreement and calling out your own “side’s” bad acts (for the record, I was, and remain, in support of the contempt resolution for Eric Holder), we get idiotic tu quoques.
It was also meant to hijack this discussion into one about something that the other side did – whether it was bad, or as bad, etc. – which stops the discussion from being about this topic. If Sam Stone wants to have that discussion they can start a thread about it. I don’t think it should be discussed here.
Just popping in again to make sure there’s no more of this Be-bop-a-lu-la-linsky monkey business going on.
The investigation has been going on since 2018. If everything was legal and appropriate, than Hunter has nothing to worry about.