Quote:Former Special Counsel Jack Smith has been the focus of a lot of ire as the shady details of his lawfare operation against Donald Trump have come to light.

As RedState's Teri Christoph covered on Monday, it has become abundantly clear that Smith was dispatched to target the Biden regime's "enemies list."

Newly declassified FBI records, released Monday by the White House Government Transparency Task Force, show that Smith and his team were tracking the phone activity of Susie Wiles – who was at the time a top Trump adviser and is now the White House chief of staff – including her contacts with at least 21 attorneys affiliated with Trump.

One particular memo from March 24, 2023, shows just how insidious the Smith investigation got – and just how far the investigation spread outside of its original scope. An FBI agent noted in that memo that an attorney associated with Trump had called Wiles and remained on the phone with her for only 41 seconds. The agent then documents two previous calls between Wiles and the attorney, including the exact times of the calls and their durations.

After Wiles sat for an FBI interview on April 7, Smith and his investigators went back through her phone activity specifically to identify what they described as "contacts of interest on the date of her FBI interview."

This is absolutely chilling. It makes Richard Nixon's Watergate look like a day at the water park.

Instead of legacy media screaming about Smith's surveillance, we get hysterics about the White House putting them on pool probation for endless hoaxes. Cry us a river.

Now, we get to the really weird part. Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) has moved to hold Smith accountable for his actions. Just one problem: Not a single federal judge in the district will sit for the case.

That's because they all apparently know Smith personally, which raises questions as to whether they can be "impartial" when it comes to trying the case.

Smith served as First Assistant U.S. Attorney and then Acting U.S. Attorney in the Middle District of Tennessee from 2015 until 2017. Some members of the current bench were serving there during that period, while others arrived after Smith left.

Her lawsuit argues that Biden Attorney General Merrick Garland's original appointment of Smith as special counsel was unconstitutional because Smith was not presidentially appointed and Senate-confirmed and because Congress never enacted a statute authorizing Garland to appoint him to exercise those powers.

She also alleges violations of the Speech or Debate Clause, her First Amendment right of association, and her Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. The complaint further accuses Smith and other government officials of conspiring to violate her civil rights because of her political affiliation and support for Trump.

"This lawsuit is solely about holding Mr. Smith accountable and ensuring that our nation's justice system can never again be weaponized against the American people," Blackburn said when announcing the case.

She is seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, the return or destruction of the records obtained during the investigation, and nominal damages.

Now, before any of those arguments can be resolved, the case needs a judge.

Chief U.S. District Judge William L. Campbell Jr. issued a remarkably short order Monday announcing that it is not going to be so easy to resolve.

"All District Judges of the Middle District of Tennessee have recused in this matter," Campbell wrote. "As such, a District Judge from outside the District will be designated by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. When the designation is made, the case will be reassigned."

That's the whole explanation. The one-page order doesn't say why every judge recused, doesn't identify a conflict, and doesn't suggest any misconduct. It simply announces that nobody on the district's bench will hear Blackburn's case against Smith.

That's what is so mysterious about it. And it's what is fueling a lot of speculation online about why these judges are backing away from the case like it's radioactive.

But at the end of the day, it is reasonable that judges would recuse themselves from cases involving someone they know so well. The problem is that it looks on its face like they are dodging a case involving one of their pals.

That's because we have judges like Jeb Boasberg in Washington, D.C., who pounce on every case involving a Republican politician. Such recusals only seem to go in one direction — benefiting Democrats.

It's all one big club, and nobody with any moral decency appears to be in it.

Link

More proof that our Federal Judiciary is corrupt far beyond our comprehension!

(10-06-2026 12:01 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  ...
More proof that our Federal Judiciary is corrupt far beyond our comprehension!

Recusal is normal. And half of the judges who recused are Trump appointees.



Federal law requires judges to step aside from cases under a range of circumstances intended to protect the impartiality of the courts.

Under 28 U.S.C. § 455, a federal judge must disqualify themselves whenever their “impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” The statute also identifies more specific grounds, including personal bias or knowledge of disputed facts, previous involvement in the matter as a lawyer or government official, certain financial interests, or specified relationships involving a party, lawyer or person with an interest in the case.

The federal judiciary’s Code of Conduct for United States Judges contains similar rules, requiring disqualification when a judge’s impartiality could reasonably be questioned.

Who Are the Judges?

The Middle District currently has four district judges. They are:

• William L. Campbell Jr., the court’s chief judge, nominated to the Middle District of Tennessee by President Donald Trump in July 2017 and confirmed by the Senate in January 2018. He has served as chief judge since 2024.

• Aleta A. Trauger, nominated by President Bill Clinton in September 1998 and confirmed the following month.

• Waverly D. Crenshaw Jr., nominated by President Barack Obama in February 2015 and confirmed in April 2016. He served as the district’s chief judge from 2017 until 2024.

• Eli J. Richardson, nominated by President Trump and confirmed by the Senate in October 2018.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/arti...12577.html

(10-06-2026 01:54 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-06-2026 12:01 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  ...
More proof that our Federal Judiciary is corrupt far beyond our comprehension!

Recusal is normal. And half of the judges who recused are Trump appointees.



Federal law requires judges to step aside from cases under a range of circumstances intended to protect the impartiality of the courts.

Under 28 U.S.C. § 455, a federal judge must disqualify themselves whenever their “impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” The statute also identifies more specific grounds, including personal bias or knowledge of disputed facts, previous involvement in the matter as a lawyer or government official, certain financial interests, or specified relationships involving a party, lawyer or person with an interest in the case.

The federal judiciary’s Code of Conduct for United States Judges contains similar rules, requiring disqualification when a judge’s impartiality could reasonably be questioned.

Who Are the Judges?

The Middle District currently has four district judges. They are:

• William L. Campbell Jr., the court’s chief judge, nominated to the Middle District of Tennessee by President Donald Trump in July 2017 and confirmed by the Senate in January 2018. He has served as chief judge since 2024.

• Aleta A. Trauger, nominated by President Bill Clinton in September 1998 and confirmed the following month.

• Waverly D. Crenshaw Jr., nominated by President Barack Obama in February 2015 and confirmed in April 2016. He served as the district’s chief judge from 2017 until 2024.

• Eli J. Richardson, nominated by President Trump and confirmed by the Senate in October 2018.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/arti...12577.html

Its likely because they have all worked with her at some point. So they are showing they have morals and ethics by recusing, something libturd justices cant seem to muster up.

As I have said for sometime now----this is MUCH worse than Watergate. Watergate was a failed attempt to spy on an opponent's presidential campaign--hatched by back benchers trying to curry favor and not approved by the principal Nixon Administration players. Nixon found out after the fact when these fools got arrested during the break in---Nixon's downfall was due to trying to cover up what these idiots tried to do. Thats completely different from what we have here. In this case we have a SUCCESSFUL attempt to spy on an opponent's presidential campaign through the misuse of government agencies that was entirely known, approved, and closely monitored by the actual White House itself. Those are all crimes Nixon never commited (or even considered committing)----and then the complete coverup of the Trump spy campaign that has followed is petty much just a complete repeat of every mistake Nixon made.

(10-06-2026 03:35 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  As I have said for sometime now----this is MUCH worse than Watergate. Watergate was a failed attempt to spy on an opponent's presidential campaign--hatched by back benchers trying to curry favor and not approved by the principal Nixon Administration players. Nixon found out after the fact when these fools got arrested during the break in---Nixon's downfall was due to trying to cover up what these idiots tried to do. Thats completely different from what we have here. In this case we have a SUCCESSFUL attempt to spy on an opponent's presidential campaign through the misuse of government agencies that was entirely known, approved, and closely monitored by the actual White House itself. Those are all crimes Nixon never commited (or even considered committing)----and then the complete coverup of the Trump spy campaign that has followed is petty much just a complete repeat of every mistake Nixon made.

Exactly.

Not only that, but Watergate was done by CREEP, not by government people. In this case, the FBI and at least one judge have conspired to spy on the other party. It was the FBI refusing to go along with the coverup that blew up Watergate.

Watergate pales in comparison. Realistically, Watergate paled in comparison to what LBJ did. LBJ spied on the 1964 Republican convention and on the Nixon campaign. That's part of the reason Nixon was blindsided by the backlash against the Watergate coverup.

(10-06-2026 02:23 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-06-2026 01:54 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(10-06-2026 12:01 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  ...
More proof that our Federal Judiciary is corrupt far beyond our comprehension!

Recusal is normal. And half of the judges who recused are Trump appointees.



Federal law requires judges to step aside from cases under a range of circumstances intended to protect the impartiality of the courts.

Under 28 U.S.C. § 455, a federal judge must disqualify themselves whenever their “impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” The statute also identifies more specific grounds, including personal bias or knowledge of disputed facts, previous involvement in the matter as a lawyer or government official, certain financial interests, or specified relationships involving a party, lawyer or person with an interest in the case.

The federal judiciary’s Code of Conduct for United States Judges contains similar rules, requiring disqualification when a judge’s impartiality could reasonably be questioned.

Who Are the Judges?

The Middle District currently has four district judges. They are:

• William L. Campbell Jr., the court’s chief judge, nominated to the Middle District of Tennessee by President Donald Trump in July 2017 and confirmed by the Senate in January 2018. He has served as chief judge since 2024.

• Aleta A. Trauger, nominated by President Bill Clinton in September 1998 and confirmed the following month.

• Waverly D. Crenshaw Jr., nominated by President Barack Obama in February 2015 and confirmed in April 2016. He served as the district’s chief judge from 2017 until 2024.

• Eli J. Richardson, nominated by President Trump and confirmed by the Senate in October 2018.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/arti...12577.html

What's your point? That 2 of the 4 were appointed by Trump? So what? Maybe they've worked with her enough that hearing this particular case would create a conflict of interest. What partiality do the other two have that disqualify them?

Do you not understand how petulant this and every other post you create makes you look? Grow up, son.

BOTH parties are running a long con on every single one of us. Your rank partisanship keeps you from seeing or acknowledging that.

At some point we are all going to have to figure out that neither party gives a rat's ass about you, me, or anyone else not inside their respective circles or unable to be a cash cow for them. BOTH parties are merely two sides of the same damn coin.

As far as I'm concerned, there are maybe three individuals out of the 535 elected officials in congress who aren't in it to make themselves comfortable.

It's people like you, a rank partisan who thinks the Democrats are so much better than the Republicans, who need to pause a moment and reflect on themselves.

Newsflash son, Carlin nailed it: "It's a big club, and you aint in it. You and I are not in the big club."