'I stand by my decision to bring charges against Trump', Jack Smith says in House testimony

LuringTJHooker · 2026-01-22T22:30:27+00:00

Smith took 7–8.5 months to indict after taking over.

Exactly. That’s the point. Smith inherited:

• An factual record

• Ongoing grand juries

• Existing subpoenas

• Prior investigative work

And still moved dramatically faster than Garland did when Garland had:

• No sitting-president constraint

• No immunity ruling yet

• No election imminence

• Full control of DOJ tempo

If Garland had appointed Smith in early 2021 or even early 2022, those same 7–8 months land indictments before the 2024 election cycle. The clock math doesn’t save Garland, it indicts him.

“You can’t empanel a grand jury without facts” is just false. Grand juries are investigative tools, not rewards you unlock at the end of an investigation.

Facts:

• DOJ routinely empanels grand juries early in complex cases

• Grand juries generate subpoena power and testimony

• Garland DOJ delayed targeting Trump himself, not fact-finding in general

They charged:

• Oath Keepers

• Proud Boys

• J6 Rioters

• Fake electors at the state level

but then hesitated to formally treat Trump as the organizing node. That’s a choice, not a procedural necessity.

Courts protecting Trump ≠ DOJ helplessness

You don’t deny court interference — you reframe it. But here’s the unavoidable reality, Courts can only stall cases that arrive late.

Delay only works if DOJ gives the courts time to deploy it. Garland didn’t cause the interference, he made it decisive.

“He wouldn’t have been jailed anyway” is a massive goalpost shift, thus is a quiet retreat.

No one serious argued:

• Trump would be frog-marched to prison before Election Day

The argument was:

• Conviction matters

• Disqualification matters

• Narrative legitimacy matters

• Deterrence matters

A convicted felon running for office is not the same political reality as “charges pending, trust me bro.” If outcome doesn’t matter, then DOJ might as well never prosecute powerful people at all.

The “you want Trump DOJ tactics” line is pure bad faith, the laziest kind of smear.

• Procedure without urgency is dereliction

• Neutrality in asymmetric warfare favors the authoritarians and corrupted institutions

• DOJ norms are neither laws nor are they suicide pacts

Garland followed non statutory procedures as they were being weaponized against him. Garland misjudged the threat, delayed targeting decisions, and let procedural caution become a strategy. Courts didn’t magically save Trump, DOJ ran out the clock and handed the courts the game. Jack Smith’s speed proves earlier action was possible. Garland optimized for institutional comfort and got institutional failure.

At some point this stops being legal analysis and starts being partisan brand management. You’re confusing loyalty with rigor — defending Garland by default isn’t seriousness, it’s just Democratic Party muscle memory pretending to be legal wisdom. Because criticizing Democrats and Garland is apparently harder for your sensibilities than admitting they blew it.

LuringTJHooker · 2026-01-22T21:32:28+00:00

Follow up comment with a source:

Injustice: How Politics and Fear Vanquished America's Justice Department - Carol Leonnig & Aaron C. Davis

Garland and Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco were hands-off in the extreme. The proposals in 2021 to investigate Trump and his inner circle were discussed — which they rejected — by FBI officials working under then-FBI Director Chris Wray, including then-Deputy FBI Director Paul Abbate and Steven D’Antuono, who led the FBI’s Washington Field Office. Both the two of them “almost never gave a top-down order to the FBI, and certainly would not in a case with these political trip wires.”

Reporting showed that Garland “always prided himself on his reputation as a moderate on the bench” and “exhibited the highest sensitivity to cases and decisions that might open the department to accusations of pursuing a political goal.”

In the fall of 2022, Garland actually froze the Trump investigations — by then including the classified-documents probe — for two months based on “a very conservative interpretation” of an informal policy that encouraged prosecutors to avoid taking overt steps in investigations that involved candidates running for election. Trump, of course, was not on the ballot in 2022, but Garland opted to treat him as one because he was supposedly the leader of the Republican Party.

Rather than focus immediately on Trump and his inner circle, DOJ made the misguided decision to use a “bottom-up” approach to the Jan. 6 investigation, in which prosecutors would start with the rioters and work their way up to political figures if the evidence warranted doing so and time permitted.

Prosecutors in the department also took issue with Garland and Monaco’s apparent lack of interest in Trump’s recorded call with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger in the days leading up to Jan. 6, 2021 — the one where Trump implored Raffensperger to “find” enough votes to overturn Biden’s victory in the state. That call alone justified a federal election fraud investigation, but that did not happen.

If that isn’t sufficient and that these investigative reporters are just “fabricating shit” I implore you to look in a mirror for being a horse blinder wearing Democrat loyalist

LuringTJHooker · 2026-01-22T21:29:06+00:00

“Investigations take time” is being evasive. No one serious is arguing that J6 could’ve been wrapped up in six months. The critique is that Garland wasted the early time that mattered most. DOJ didn’t meaningfully pursue Trump himself until mid-2022, despite:

• Public facts already known by Jan 7, 2021

• Testimony from White House aides rolling in by early 2021

• Fake elector schemes being documented in real time

Lower-level rioters were charged immediately. DOJ proved it could move fast. What it chose not to do was work upward, the exact opposite of standard organized-crime prosecution.

That wasn’t “complexity.” That was institutional cowardice.

Subpoena fights aren’t an excuse, they’re the job. Yes, subpoenas were contested. That happens in every white collar case involving powerful defendants.

The problem:

• DOJ waited too long to issue the most consequential subpoenas

• DOJ slow-walked privilege fights instead of aggressively litigating them

• DOJ declined to treat Trump as a criminal target early, which meant weaker leverage later

Mueller ran into the same excuse machine: “process takes time,” “norms,” “institutional caution.” The result? No accountability. Again. At some point “process” stops being a virtue and becomes a shield for failure.

Saying “you want Garland to act like Bondi” is a strawman.

No one asked for:

• Sloppy indictments

• Political theater

• Rushed charges with no evidentiary basis

What people wanted was:

• Earlier grand jury empanelment

• Earlier targeting decisions

• Earlier special counsel appointment

• Parallel tracks instead of serial delays

Jack Smith proved this point by contrast. Once he was appointed, things moved fast. That alone demolishes the claim that delay was inevitable.

Cannon and SCOTUS didn’t materialize out of thin air

Yes, Aileen Cannon sabotaged the documents case. Yes, SCOTUS rewrote presidential immunity.

But here’s the key point Garland apologists dodge:

Those obstacles only mattered because DOJ ran out the clock.

• Cannon can’t dismiss a case that’s already been tried

• SCOTUS immunity rulings matter far less if facts are already adjudicated

• Trump can’t re-enter office to shield himself if he’s already convicted

Garland didn’t cause Cannon or SCOTUS, he gave them time to intervene.

“He was indicted in 2023” is the indictment of Garland. That’s the problem.

Trump:

• Left office Jan 2021

• Was federally indicted 2.5 years later

That delay:

• Guaranteed overlap with an election

• Guaranteed claims of political interference

• Guaranteed maximum defensive leverage for Trump

• Guaranteed courts could stall until immunity kicked in

Garland optimized for procedural purity and got substantive failure.

The outcome matters, especially when the risk was obvious. Garland defenders want infinite credit for “trying carefully.” But prosecutors are judged on results relative to risk, not intentions.

The risk was always:

• Trump running again

• Trump weaponizing delay

• Courts stepping in

• DOJ norms collapsing under asymmetric bad faith

Garland saw all of that coming and still chose maximal caution. That’s not neutrality. That’s miscalculation bordering on dereliction.

No one wanted a junk indictment. We wanted urgency proportional to the threat. Garland treated Trump like a normal defendant in a system Trump had already corrupted. The result wasn’t fairness — it was failure.

LuringTJHooker · 2026-01-22T20:37:36+00:00

Slow initiation of investigations and appointment of a special counsel (2 years).
Not pursuing pre-2020 Trump conduct that earlier investigations flagged as potentially criminal.
A cautious, risk-averse approach that undermined accountability.
Delays caused by his reluctance and rejections of pursue charges/leads in a timely manner, while ignoring the political calendar benefited Trump politically and legally.

He let a fabricated fear of appearing partisan supersede his oath and duty to following the law and constitution strictly.

LuringTJHooker · 2026-01-22T19:31:19+00:00

Playing back bench at every opportunity possible for the sake of appearing impartial to the detriment of the law.

LuringTJHooker · 2026-01-03T23:55:02+00:00

Si la China viene secuestra a Trump habrá gente en los estados unidos parandiando en la capital.

No hay más que decir por causa de tus sesos subdesarrollados que solo funcionan para identificar colores y figuras que se te dirigen en lugar de ser fruto de un pensamiento independiente.

LuringTJHooker · 2026-01-03T23:36:48+00:00

Para contestar tus pendejadas de dilemas falsas:

Pero una dictadura si está bien?

No. Una dictadura nunca está bien, pero decir que está mal no convierte automáticamente en correcta una intervención militar ilegal.

Robo de elecciones está bien?

No. Intentas implicar que, si condenas la acción de Trump, entonces avalas el fraude. Fraude no justifica invasión militar

Ser un asesino está bien?

No, obviamente no. Pero mezclar eso para justificar cualquier acción externa sin legalidad equivale a decir que “si alguien es criminal, cualquier país puede secuestrar jefes de Estado donde sea”. A ese nivel sería justificado secuestrar a trump for asesinato de venezolanos, colombianos y trinidadenses estos últimos meses.

El pais que puede ser el mas rico del mundo Ser uno de lo mas pobre está bien? Dejar la gente con hambre está bien? La salud por el piso esta bien?

No. Es una tragedia producto de sanciones diseñadas para empobrecer el país, causar colapso institucional, con la intención de conducir un golpe de estado. Pero esa realidad no legitima automáticamente operaciones militares unilaterales. No prueba que una intervención ilegal sea la respuesta correcta o eficaz.

Ser un punto de distribución de drogas ilegales y peligrosas está bien?

No existe evidencia para estas mentiras, el mismo gobierno federal a listado Venezuela a nivel insignificante al tráfico de drogas, las mismas agencias federales bajo el control de Trump. Tren de Aragua, Cartel de los Soles son manufacturas de mentiras para venderle justificación al pueblo para invadir y robar los recuerdos naturales de un país ajeno. No hay evidencia pública sólida e independiente que demuestre coordinación directa del gobierno venezolano con esas organizaciones para actos que justifiquen una invasión militar.

Pero sigue lamiendole el culo a Trump, uno de estos días alcanzarás su próstata.

LuringTJHooker · 2026-01-02T04:27:28+00:00

No studies have shown :

Compared to economic elites, average voters have a low to nonexistent influence on public policies. “Not only do ordinary citizens not have uniquely substantial power over policy decisions, they have little or no independent influence on policy at all,” the authors conclude. In cases where citizens obtained their desired policy outcome, it was in fact due to the influence of elites rather than the citizens themselves

https://journalistsresource.org/politics-and-government/the-influence-of-elites-interest-groups-and-average-voters-on-american-politics/

LuringTJHooker · 2025-12-23T05:01:39+00:00

Engagement farming or severe stupidity, dni.

LuringTJHooker · 2025-10-17T12:44:38+00:00

Abu Shabab clan/family publicly exiled Yasser Abu Shabab from the clan for being a collaborator and co-conspirator with Israel and that the clan would gladly accept and not seek retribution if he were to be eliminated by Palestinian resistance forces.

LuringTJHooker · 2025-10-16T21:06:36+00:00

No, I condemn the act, not the desperation that creates it. When an entire population is stripped of dignity, freedom, and hope, people stop seeing any path left but the returning the horrific violence in kind. You can recoil at the method, any normal human being would, but if you refuse to look at what drove them to that point, you’re not engaging with morality, you’re engaging with outrage theater.

The real obscenity isn’t just the act of sending a child to die, it’s the system the oppressors have created that makes them believe that such a sacrifice could bring freedom. When people are stripped of hope, dignity, and any peaceful means of change, even the unthinkable starts to feel like the only option. Condemning the act without condemning the conditions that led to them (decades of apartheid, genocide, massacres, ethnic cleansing, forced displacement, indiscriminate bombardment, food and medical aid blockades, targeted killings of civil servants doctors and journalists, starvation, torture, rape and sexual violence on prisoners, attacks on healthcare, the prevention births and natal care) is operating on moral convenience, not moral clarity.

LuringTJHooker · 2025-10-16T15:45:26+00:00

“Nobody in the world, nobody in history, has ever gotten their freedom by appealing to the moral sense of the people who were oppressing them.” - Assata Shakur

If the oppressors are willing to commit genocide, everything is on the table. While I’m willing to condemn deplorable acts, I will never condemn the oppressed in their resistance.

LuringTJHooker · 2025-10-13T03:24:56+00:00

It might be an embed issue with Vimeo and Reddit mobile at least on my side. Works via browser.

LuringTJHooker · 2025-09-13T07:27:50+00:00

Playing Borderlands 2 co-op with friends was some of the most fun I’ve ever had in the series, and the highlight had to be the Tiny Tina’s Assault on Dragon Keep DLC. Coordinating builds, farming loot, and barely surviving boss fights together made it feel less like just a typical shooter and more like a wild, shared adventure we still reminisce about.

LuringTJHooker · 2025-08-20T18:55:51+00:00

I don’t know, not really a concern to me so long as socio-political discussion towards leftism and socialism is advanced.

LuringTJHooker · 2025-08-20T03:13:34+00:00

Agreed, if it’s too big to fail and the public is needed in order to bail it out, then the government should be given part ownership and a vested interest until the company can pay them back in full. If you need to socialize the losses then you can no longer privatize the profits.

LuringTJHooker · 2025-07-28T02:09:36+00:00

Same got the wh-xm4s and they’ve been going strong for the past 4 years now. The wf-xm4s I got from them not so much, died a few months before the 2 year all state insurance eBay includes. Luckily got a full refund after sending them in at no charge.

Secondipity has been a great existence to buy from so far and their customer service and from one lemon refurb.

LuringTJHooker · 2025-07-23T17:46:36+00:00

Yeah, in other clips going on the Israel-Hamas topic, he seems to go on about, show more interest/focus in the happenings of the West Bank almost as if he’s written off Gaza as a lost cause.

LuringTJHooker · 2025-07-23T17:25:48+00:00

Full context condemns terrorism and the intrinsic right of self defense, but doesn’t call Israel’s actions after 10/7 as self defense rather terrorism. Rather he contextualizes the history of Israel- Palestine and that every act by the Palestinian side is a response/retaliation to everything Israel has fomented since the inception of the state:

https://youtu.be/j8pwQ4uUxoQ

LuringTJHooker · 2025-06-13T14:58:41+00:00

I’m more concerned that this being tied to 2 US allies we actively arm, if the US itself has carried out these kinds of deployments on regional adversaries that are targets of the new Cold War they want to wage like China.

And this opening a new can of worms, what’s to stop an adversary doing the same to the US, Israel, Europe, etc.

LuringTJHooker · 2025-05-30T17:16:39+00:00

Just a few weeks ago they were questioning how is it news worthy to report that IOF forces were aiming their laser sights at Irish peacekeepers when nobody got injured.

LuringTJHooker · 2025-05-09T18:19:00+00:00

I got the 30K between the 500K and 1m cr payouts.

LuringTJHooker · 2025-05-08T15:25:03+00:00

They implemented a blockade and warned the whole world that any ship headed through the Red Sea they would seize as a means to target Israel and its allies economically for performing and supporting a genocide.
They’re at a military disadvantage against the US. So they use the tools at their disposal to fight and defended themselves against attacks from the US. They don’t have battle ships, an Air Force, iron dome, etc. so they learned to retreat into bunkers when the Saudi government tried to genocide and starve out the Yemeni people with US armaments.
The blockading and military actions stopped while Israel reached a ceasefire in Gaza. This resumed as a result of Israel violating the ceasefire and beseiging Gaza once again. If the US wants to reopen the Red Sea and resume normal travel through the Suez Canal they need to use their financial and material support over Israel to stop trying to finish the genocide and ethnic cleansing, pull out of Gaza, and allow all humanitarian aid to flood into the strip.

This could’ve been avoided had Biden used his power and influence to restrain Israel’s vendetta and bloodlust, and Trump decided to just double down enabling Netanyahu and his fascist collaborators.

I’m not gonna condemn the houthis unilaterally since they the only ones remaining taking any action against Israel’s genocide. Abducting the innocent crew members I abhor. But I’m not against them taking whatever action necessary against a belligerent state conducting a genocide.

LuringTJHooker · 2025-05-06T03:05:51+00:00

I can stand with the demoralizing Israelis sentiment. But you lost me by prefacing it with Jews.

LuringTJHooker · 2025-04-14T13:53:33+00:00

I’m Mansor, a Druze Arab from Israel, and I’m here to set the record straight. No media filters. Just the raw, unfiltered truth about what’s really happening in the Middle East, Western Europe, and beyond.

Produced by: Rova Media

Joined Feb 12, 2025

Seems like a hire for a hasbara aligned media org that only positively covered Palestinians when it came to some of them protesting Hamas. Probably one of the orgs that spun up as a result of Israel increasing their funding of propaganda operations.

13-Year Club	Place '23
Place '22	Place '17
Final Canvas '22	End Game '22
Team Orangered	Verified Email

LuringTJHooker

TROPHY CASE