[TheStickman]

“What in that article contradicts anything I’ve said?”

So you couldn’t be bothered to actually read the article? Poor thing. You claimed Jared & Ivanka only recently hired Gorelick. The article proves your assertion to be false. Also, in the article it’s explained Gorelick also helped Tillerson in the confirmation process. I suppose in your world that makes Tillerson suspect as well.

“Do you even know what their political views are on any given issue?”

Not only do I know, I continue to not care about their personal politics. They support President Trump & helped him defeat Hillary & Co.

“I don’t know why you’d count me among the “never-Trump people.”

Because you write & argue like a never-trumper & you have asserted things that are not true.

[Alberta's Child]

1. The first media reports about Jared Kushner retaining Jamie Gorelick to represent him came out in January 2017. There were plenty of heated discussions here on FreeRepublic over it back then. I know this because I was involved in many of them. The article you linked seems to suggest that Kushner actually called Gorelick (which does NOT mean she was retained to represent him at the time) around November 2016. I have no idea how that supports your statement that Gorelick had been representing Jared and Ivanka Trump throughout the 2016 presidential campaign.

2. If Gorelick helped Tillerson in the confirmation process, then yes -- it makes him "suspect," too. I don't trust any Washington insiders -- and a lot of people here on FreeRepublic voted for Donald Trump because THEY don't, either.

3. The consensus among most people here on FR is that Jamie Gorelick should have been prosecuted for dereliction of duty for her role in the pre-9/11 bungling in the U.S. law enforcement and intelligence communities. She was appointed to the 9/11 commission that was charged with investigating U.S. preparedness against terrorist attacks even though she herself had been responsible for much of that preparedness herself. A person involved in an investigation of their own work is engaged in a conflict of interest by definition. I don't know how you would trust ANYONE in a new administration you support who would even allow their names to appear in the same sentence as this creature.

3. I survived the purges here on FreeRepublic that went on during the George W. Bush idol-worship of the mid-2000s, so I know how to be objective even if it means offending people by pointing out the giant red warning flags in Washington on any given issue or news item.