Does this mean Hunter is absolved of his crimes?

[berg80]

Now that Aileen has ruled (does anyone think she didn't get a lot of help writing the ruling from future trump appointees) that Jack Smith was not legally appointed, it applies to David Weiss too, right?

So Hunter walks, right? Do they vacate the prior guilty verdict? Can he sue to recoup his legal expenses? Should the video footage and transcripts from the Watergate hearings be burned?

 

[rampart]

Now that Aileen has ruled (does anyone think she didn't get a lot of help writing the ruling from future trump appointees) that Jack Smith was not legally appointed, it applies to David Weiss too, right?

So Hunter walks, right? Do they vacate the prior guilty verdict? Can he sue to recoup his legal expenses? Should the video footage and transcripts from the Watergate hearings be burned?

her ruling was very specific and applies only to trump et al

i am running out of fictional parallels. this is penguin as mayor of gotham city making crime legal,

 

[Polishprince]

The ruling was only in concern to Jack Smith, who was not properly and constitutionally appointed and confirmed and his actions against President Trump.

Has nothing to do with Hunter Biden's case or anything else.

BTW, nothing to stop Sleepy Joe from LEGALLY appointing Jack Smith (or anyone else) and having them go through the confirmation process and do a LEGAL investigation.

 

[1srelluc]

Nope.....Weiss was a government employee at the time of his appointment, no need for senate confirmation.....His appointment did skirt the regulations but not the Appointments Clause law.

The Appointments Clause law does not afford the attorney general the power to appoint, without Senate confirmation, a private citizen, which Jack Smith was at the time of his appointment as he worked for the Kosovo Specialist Chambers in the Hague.

Looks like Justice Thomas was correct....Again.

You lose.....Again.

 

[berg80]

her ruling was very specific and applies only to trump et al

Reminds me of when the SC gave Shrub the election in 2000 but said their ruling was unique to that particular case.

 

[Redfish]

Now that Aileen has ruled (does anyone think she didn't get a lot of help writing the ruling from future trump appointees) that Jack Smith was not legally appointed, it applies to David Weiss too, right?

So Hunter walks, right? Do they vacate the prior guilty verdict? Can he sue to recoup his legal expenses? Should the video footage and transcripts from the Watergate hearings be burned?

doesn't matter, joe will pardon him as he leaves the whitehouse in January

 

[Redfish]

Reminds me of when the SC gave Shrub the election in 2000 but said their ruling was unique to that particular case.

the SC did not reject Gore, the voters did.

 

[1srelluc]

VERIFYING claims about AG Garland and special counsel regulations in Hunter Biden probe

Attorney General Garland's appointment of U.S. attorney David Weiss as special counsel conflicts with federal regulations, but it's not illegal.

www.verifythis.com

 

[Godboy]

Now that Aileen has ruled (does anyone think she didn't get a lot of help writing the ruling from future trump appointees) that Jack Smith was not legally appointed, it applies to David Weiss too, right?

So Hunter walks, right? Do they vacate the prior guilty verdict? Can he sue to recoup his legal expenses? Should the video footage and transcripts from the Watergate hearings be burned?

Why do you think this ruling applies to Weiss?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

the SC did not reject Gore, the voters did.

Thank God

 

[HikerGuy83]

Reminds me of when the SC gave Shrub the election in 2000 but said their ruling was unique to that particular case.

You need to get a life.

 

[toobfreak]

So Hunter walks, right?

Keep dreaming.

 

[berg80]

doesn't matter, joe will pardon him as he leaves the whitehouse in January

Trump would if it was his kid, Biden won't.

 

[berg80]

Keep dreaming.

Why isn't the appointment of Weiss not allowed as Cannon thinks Smith's is?

 

[berg80]

You need to get a life.

You need to get some knowledge.

 

[Orangecat]

Trump would if it was his kid, Biden won't.

Does it give you some weird satisfaction to speculate on things you can’t prove one way or the other?

 

[berg80]

Why do you think this ruling applies to Weiss?

He's an appointed Special Counsel.

 

[berg80]

Does it give you some weird satisfaction to speculate on things you can’t prove one way or the other?

C'mon man. Trump pardoned all his lackeys. You don't think he'd pardon Donnie J?

OTOH, his DoJ would never have been allowed to prosecute Donnie in the first place.