Good. It’s comical how hard Reuters tries to politicize this. As Americans, don’t we want answers to these questions? In neither case were any perpetrators brought to justice.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The FBI will launch new probes into the 2023 discovery of cocaine at the White House during President Joe Biden’s term and the 2022 leak of the Supreme Court’s draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, a top official announced on Monday.
Dan Bongino, a rightwing podcaster-turned-FBI deputy director, made the announcement on X, saying that he had requested weekly briefings on the cases’ progress.
Both incidents have been popular talking points on America’s right.
There are reasons why Obama 3.0 issued all those auto-penned pardons. Their major players will stonewall any legal process, weather any political fallout, and wait out Trump 2.0 knowing full well the Republican bench is empty beyond DJT. They’re evil, but they’re not stupid.
More wasted resources. The Dobbs leak isn’t even a crime most likely. Just a precedent that was broken.
And the cocaine in the WH wasn’t even enough for a felony. I don’t care whose it was. Hunters or some intern, there are way more pressing issues. My guess is that coke is pretty common in DC. It was LESS than a gram.
This is purely revenge stuff to give the conservative talking heads something to feed on.
I love when one side screams about something (like weaponizing branches of govt) then turns around and does it themselves when they are in power. The cycle just continues.
I agree JV. I doubt there are many multi-millionaire homes in the world that harbor no drugs or other illegal items.
There shouldn’t be any real secret involved in a soon to be released SCOTUS judgment either so what are we investigating?.
However, Dad’s comment is equally valid.
I am saddened by your reaction to weaponizing Government JV. I hate it when either side does it, but I hate it much more that judges are so politically polarized that they follow those ‘orders’ from Party leaders. Judges should be the ones ignoring all politicization and giving objective judgments based on the Constitution.
Based purely on your reactions here on B&S you agreed with weaponization when it was against Trump specifically, but now mock the idea when it is being used against the Trump attackers and I have not heard of any sort of condemnation of judges trying to sabotage the Executive branch at every opportunity with no grounds other than liberal opinion from you or any other liberal. Everyone should hate it no matter who uses it. Just my opinion. At least you are admitting it was used by both sides, though.
My statement didn’t actually admit anything. But, I am on record that the NY convictions were an extreme stretch. There were better things to go after him for and that just poisoned the well for the rest. Bragg was an idiot and trying to make a name for himself nationally.
I can’t tell if you realized my weaponizing statement was sarcasm or not. It was.
I disagree that the cocaine in the White House isn’t a big deal. If you can get a baggie of cocaine into the building, you can get a bag of anthrax into the building. We need to know how it got there.
Owen, are you saying strip searches for every person entering every day??!? Every visitor? Every employee?
When Eric Trump visits should he be stripped down and cavity searched? Sneaking in a small amount of powder would not be difficult.
I would agree if it were a weapon. But a small amount of coke. Doesn’t matter.
>I can’t tell if you realized my weaponizing statement was sarcasm or not. It was.
To me it meant that you were okay with the system, nothing to see because both sides do it (now anyway). No desire for change, just acceptance of a lesser, more controlled life. That is the standard lib view. It is fine and legal if Dems increase spending in every way, but not okay for Reps to reduce it. Okay for tariffs on us, but not okay for everyone else to pay more as well. And if you do think it is not okay for these things, congratulations! I would never have guessed that from any earlier commentary.
I remember some of those earlier conversations about the Trump trials and while I do remember you saying that it was a stretch you were not opposed to it and you certainly defended the prosecution and judges as just doing their job and that it was absolutely not weaponization of the judicial branch.
The last line in my first comment was a compliment. Other libs that will talk about it still disagree that the Trump trials were for grudges and to prevent Trump from getting on some liberal state ballots.
>I disagree that the cocaine in the White House isn’t a big deal.
I still agree with JV. The coke very likely came from a regular visitor or denizen of the white house. Any one of those people could indeed have brought in Anthrax, but any sort of check that would find a gram of coke on a son of the Prez for instance, would be unacceptable violations of the POTUS family and high level visitors in any sitting President of sound mind’s eyes.
Any person normally has control in his own home and the POTUS is no exception. If Trump wants security for his house during his term that would catch a gram of coke it his right, and that is fine. Each POTUS can determine his own security levels for the white house and that should be able to change with each person. Biden was not of sound mind, but it was still his (or his puppeteers) call. The only question here should concern whether the coke itself being there was enough to launch a criminal investigation into who brought it in and whether that person should be prosecuted for possession of a gram of cocaine. And that answer should be no based on the facts I have seen.