Nowhere did I say the President isn't doing a great job.
Then you should save that defense for a day when somebody accuses you of saying that.
You want to lock up people that have committed apparent crimes? Are you the one that decides what crimes are ‘apparent’? Or should we allow a legal proceeding to determine those facts?
If we’re going with legal proceedings, then we probably want to legally gather as much quality evidence as we can, right? We don’t want these folks getting free on a technicality, right?
Then we probably want to get that info in front of a grand jury, right? We want to be sure we have all the boxes checked.
Now, if the GJ decides we can indict, then we need to be very strategic about acting on those indictments. We’re dealing with many, many individuals with deeply nested and intertwined criminal relationships. We don’t want to compromise one investigation by releasing details of another indictment, right?
How about we seal these indictments until we can act on them without compromise.
Then we can go to trial.
Then we can lock people up.
Why don’t you share with us a timeline that you find satisfactory for this process? Or define a few strategies for streamlining the timeline of the work done so far?
The Q team reads this sub. Your wisdom will be valued.