Jack Smith's cases in jeopardy because he was NOT legally appointed. (Poll)

[candycorn]

Judge Cannon is no hack judge like Engeron or Merchan. The democrat's "Lawfare" just hit the wall.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/04/politics/cannon-trump-special-counsel-hearing/index.html

Judge Aileen Cannon rips up court schedule in Mar-a-Lago case in ways that benefit Trump​

Cannon is planning on holding a sprawling hearing on Trump’s request to declare Jack Smith’s appointment as special counsel invalid, signaling she could be more willing than any other trial judge to veto the special prosecutor’s authority.
The planned hearing also adds a new, unusual twist in the federal criminal case against the former president: Cannon on Tuesday said that a variety of political partisans and constitutional scholars not otherwise involved with the case can join in the oral arguments later this month.
It’s an extraordinary elevation of arguments in a criminal case – filed a year ago this week – that likely won’t see trial until next year, if at all.

Two former Republican-appointed US attorneys general, Edwin Meese and Michael Mukasey, are part of the groups of so-called “friends of the court” that side with Trump and whom Cannon will hear from. The three groups will be allowed to argue, in addition to Justice Department and defendants’ lawyers, for 30 minutes each, according to the court record.
Meese and Mukasey have special insight to share with the judge, they say, given their former roles leading the Justice Department.

The hearing is scheduled for June 21st. I have no clue how it will shake out, but here's hoping that Lawfare loses bigly.


JUST IN: FANI WILLIS' CASE AGAINST TRUMP HALTED BY GEORGIA COURT OF APPEALS.
SO NO MORE TRIALS BEFORE NOVEMBER

You’re desperate.

I love it

 

[kyzr]

You’re desperate.
I love it

If my candidate was senile Joe I'd be in panic mode. How can the dems drop Joe? Can the dems drop Joe?
My, my, my a slow motion train wreck that's 5-months long...enjoy!!

 

[Clipper]

Judge Cannon is no hack judge like Engeron or Merchan. The democrat's "Lawfare" just hit the wall.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/04/politics/cannon-trump-special-counsel-hearing/index.html

Judge Aileen Cannon rips up court schedule in Mar-a-Lago case in ways that benefit Trump​

Cannon is planning on holding a sprawling hearing on Trump’s request to declare Jack Smith’s appointment as special counsel invalid, signaling she could be more willing than any other trial judge to veto the special prosecutor’s authority.
The planned hearing also adds a new, unusual twist in the federal criminal case against the former president: Cannon on Tuesday said that a variety of political partisans and constitutional scholars not otherwise involved with the case can join in the oral arguments later this month.
It’s an extraordinary elevation of arguments in a criminal case – filed a year ago this week – that likely won’t see trial until next year, if at all.

Two former Republican-appointed US attorneys general, Edwin Meese and Michael Mukasey, are part of the groups of so-called “friends of the court” that side with Trump and whom Cannon will hear from. The three groups will be allowed to argue, in addition to Justice Department and defendants’ lawyers, for 30 minutes each, according to the court record.
Meese and Mukasey have special insight to share with the judge, they say, given their former roles leading the Justice Department.

The hearing is scheduled for June 21st. I have no clue how it will shake out, but here's hoping that Lawfare loses bigly.


JUST IN: FANI WILLIS' CASE AGAINST TRUMP HALTED BY GEORGIA COURT OF APPEALS.
SO NO MORE TRIALS BEFORE NOVEMBER

That arguement has alread been shot down by the SCOTUS, dope. Cannon is an incompetent hack delaying the trial for convicted felon & future jailbird Trump.

Btw, was the Special Councel in Hunter Biden's case illegally appointed & funded? Or is that different in the empty head of you rubes?

 

[forkup]

I'll admit it looks bad for Trump. AG Barr said he's toast. I don't know how the declassifying process works regarding the president, that's why we have a court system. So let's say its 70-30 that Trump didn't declassify the documents properly, but as president he may have some relief either from presidential immunity or the Presidential Records Act when moving out of the WH.
That said, he didn't necessarily steal them like Biden obviously had to do.

So Trump probably didn't declassify the documents properly for other people to view, but its not clear if his "crime" is as bad as Biden's regarding his possessing them.

Ok you're hedging. We have a conversation caught on tape, by Trump, after he left office, where he explicitly said he didn't declassify the documents that he was showing. I'm not asking you to give a tortuous argument as to how that claim could still be made. I didn't ask for an analysis of how the 2 cases compare. The only thing is asked, is a simple concession that Trump did not in fact, declassify those documents. At the very least not knowingly. The reason I'm so adamant about this, is because if you truly want to compare those cases, you need to actually agree on what the basic facts are. This requires agreeing on things even when those things are harmful. So please answer that question.

In the hope YOU will. I will make a concession of my own. Just so you know I'm not asking in any way to make this conversation a one-way street. Mind you. If you don't, this will also be my only further reply here.

All reports indicate that Biden had classified documents in his possession and knew about at least some of them.

 

[Marener]

1. Fitton was pissed that his FOIA didn't work.
The judge said what the president takes from the WH is his personal property. As I said, bad advice from Fitton.

2. I'm not sure what your last sentence is saying. I believe that voters do have enough info right now to make an informed decision as to which candidate is capable of being president, and which candidate is too old, senile, and getting worse every day. The red-herring that classified documents factors into the decision for president is grasping at straws. Look at the two men. Watch the debates, if they even happen.

1. Fitton’s hurt feelings are not relevant. You have inaccurately described the court case which is fundamentally different than the issue we are dealing with Trump.

2. That’s your opinion, but your mind has already been made up. The voters deserve to know whether the person they’re putting in charge of the justice system brazenly obstructs justice. These are extremely relevant facts that speaks directly to the capability of being president.

 

[kyzr]

That arguement has alread been shot down by the SCOTUS, dope. Cannon is an incompetent hack delaying the trial for convicted felon & future jailbird Trump.

Btw, was the Special Councel in Hunter Biden's case illegally appointed & funded? Or is that different in the empty head of you rubes?

3-misspelled words and you call me "dope"??
Your content sucks as well.
Link SCOTUS decision
What Hunter Biden case? The one where the DOJ let the tax crimes expire?

 

[kyzr]

Ok you're hedging. We have a conversation caught on tape, by Trump, after he left office, where he explicitly said he didn't declassify the documents that he was showing. I'm not asking you to give a tortuous argument as to how that claim could still be made. I didn't ask for an analysis of how the 2 cases compare. The only thing is asked, is a simple concession that Trump did not in fact, declassify those documents. At the very least not knowingly. The reason I'm so adamant about this, is because if you truly want to compare those cases, you need to actually agree on what the basic facts are. This requires agreeing on things even when those things are harmful. So please answer that question.

In the hope YOU will. I will make a concession of my own. Just so you know I'm not asking in any way to make this conversation a one-way street. Mind you. If you don't, this will also be my only further reply here.

All reports indicate that Biden had classified documents in his possession and knew about at least some of them.

So you can admit Biden broke the law, but he's too senile to stand trial, so no consequences.

If Trump admits he had classified documents he goes to prison. So did he declassify them? I don't think so, but he may have thought so, which goes to "intent", like Comey gave Hillary a pass on. I'll concede that Trump did not apparently follow the formal declassification process, BUT that process is murky when a president declassifies something. So its still a hedge only because there are so many unknown unknowns. As I said before, AG Barr said Trump is toast.

 

[kyzr]

1. Fitton’s hurt feelings are not relevant. You have inaccurately described the court case which is fundamentally different than the issue we are dealing with Trump.

2. That’s your opinion, but your mind has already been made up. The voters deserve to know whether the person they’re putting in charge of the justice system brazenly obstructs justice. These are extremely relevant facts that speaks directly to the capability of being president.

Biden has a grocery list of crimes to list too.
Open Borders, selling influence, forgiving student loans, stealing classified documents, etc.

 

[forkup]

So you can admit Biden broke the law, but he's too senile to stand trial, so no consequences.

If Trump admits he had classified documents he goes to prison. So did he declassify them? I don't think so, but he may have thought so, which goes to "intent", like Comey gave Hillary a pass on. I'll concede that Trump did not apparently follow the formal declassification process, BUT that process is murky when a president declassifies something. So its still a hedge only because there are so many unknown unknowns. As I said before, AG Barr said Trump is toast.

And we are done. And it is telling how utterly dishonest you are. There's a simple fact set. Just like in the Biden case. In Trump's case we have an audiotape. In Biden's case the Hur report (which I'm willing to accept at face value.) Instead of simply going from there. You just can't accept IRONCLAD prove, even when you can't deny it.

We could have talked about intent in subsequent posts, since that works both ways, but if you can't concede such a simple thing even when that concession doesn't have to be any admission of guilt it's simply pointless to have an actual argument.

 

[Marener]

Biden has a grocery list of crimes to list too.
Open Borders, selling influence, forgiving student loans, stealing classified documents, etc.

Then fire up the impeachment process. Until then you’re just casting spurious allegations with no process.

This is not anywhere near comparable to the indictments against Trump, where we are deprived of any process.

 

[kyzr]

Then fire up the impeachment process. Until then you’re just casting spurious allegations with no process.
This is not anywhere near comparable to the indictments against Trump, where we are deprived of any process.

Open Borders, obviously violates current law. Let 100,000 Chinese and 50,000 Russians into the US. National Security nightmare
selling influence, the Biden Crime Family banked about $20,000,000 and didn't pay taxes on it
forgiving student loans, against the USSC
stealing classified documents, would be indicted but is too mentally incompetent to stand trial.

There are more, but you see the "process", the DOJ protects the Biden Crime Family

We'll see after the appeals how many convictions Trump has compared to the indictment count.

 

[Marener]

Open Borders, obviously violates current law. Let 100,000 Chinese and 50,000 Russians into the US. National Security nightmare
selling influence, the Biden Crime Family banked about $20,000,000 and didn't pay taxes on it
forgiving student loans, against the USSC
stealing classified documents, would be indicted but is too mentally incompetent to stand trial.

There are more, but you see the "process", the DOJ protects the Biden Crime Family

We'll see after the appeals how many convictions Trump has compared to the indictment count.

No president will ever stand trial during their presidency. The DoJ cannot and will not indict any sitting president. That’s what impeachments are for. Do you see any impeachments? I don’t. Sorry you don’t get what you want, but that’s not our problem.

Meanwhile, voters are denied the knowledge that we would get from Trump‘s trials, which is essential information to the election.

 

[kyzr]

And we are done. And it is telling how utterly dishonest you are. There's a simple fact set. Just like in the Biden case. In Trump's case we have an audiotape. In Biden's case the Hur report (which I'm willing to accept at face value.) Instead of simply going from there. You just can't accept IRONCLAD prove, even when you can't deny it.

We could have talked about intent in subsequent posts, since that works both ways, but if you can't concede such a simple thing even when that concession doesn't have to be any admission of guilt it's simply pointless to have an actual argument.

We'll see how Trump handles that audiotape when Biden hits him with it during the debates.
I have no clue if that audiotape is admissible or not. Let the lawyers and the judge figure it out.

 

[kyzr]

No president will ever stand trial during their presidency. The DoJ cannot and will not indict any sitting president. That’s what impeachments are for. Do you see any impeachments? I don’t. Sorry you don’t get what you want, but that’s not our problem.
Meanwhile, voters are denied the knowledge that we would get from Trump‘s trials, which is essential information to the election.

Actually the USSC can weigh in when a president does something illegal, like forgive student loans.

Supreme Court strikes down Biden student-loan forgiveness program - SCOTUSblog

This article was updated on June 30 at 4:00 p.m. By a vote of 6-3, the justices ruled that the Biden administration overstepped its authority last year when it announced that it would cancel up to $400 billion in student loans. The Biden administration had said that as many as 43 million Americans

www.scotusblog.com

Trump has rights just like any other citizen. If/when the trial happens the voters will see the results.

 

[Marener]

Actually the USSC can weigh in when a president does something illegal, like forgive student loans.

Supreme Court strikes down Biden student-loan forgiveness program - SCOTUSblog

This article was updated on June 30 at 4:00 p.m. By a vote of 6-3, the justices ruled that the Biden administration overstepped its authority last year when it announced that it would cancel up to $400 billion in student loans. The Biden administration had said that as many as 43 million Americans

www.scotusblog.com

Trump has rights just like any other citizen. If/when the trial happens the voters will see the results.

The voters have rights and his artificial and pointless delays are depriving us of essential information for the election.

 

[Nostra]

The voters have rights and his artificial and pointless delays are depriving us of essential information for the election.

Trump doesn't lose his Constitutional rights because you are butthurt, Simp.

 

[SeaMajor7]

The voters have rights and his artificial and pointless delays are depriving us of essential information for the election.

Too bad, you communist piece of SHIT!!!

 

[Marener]

Trump doesn't lose his Constitutional rights because you are butthurt, Simp.

Eileen Cannon delayed the trial by months with her inappropriate attempt to appoint a special master to help her boss.

 

[BackAgain]

Eileen Cannon delayed the trial by months with her inappropriate attempt to appoint a special master to help her boss.

Her action was perfectly appropriate.

The fact that it was overruled by a higher court doesn’t change that fact. They were wrong.

 

[SeaMajor7]

Eileen Cannon delayed the trial by months with her inappropriate attempt to appoint a special master to help her boss.

It's the trial that's inappropriate, commie.