Judge Cannon just dismissed Smith's classified documents case against Trump

[WorldWatcher]

WOW, thanks for such a detailed summary. I don't know if Meese's opinion explains the Law or not.

5. Can the appeals courts say that Jack Smith doesn't have "standing" to appeal, if Cannon is right?

Yes. Which could then trigger an appeal to the SCOTUS.

4. If you are right, the appeals court will rule for Smith, but then it goes to the USSC, where its 50/50 which way it goes. No matter, if Trump wins in November can he or his AG dismiss the case? I would think so.

As President Trump can't directly dismiss the case. Now he can order his AG to dismiss the case. If the AG agrees the AG will withdraw the case. If the AG doesn't agree, then Trump can fire the AG, rinse repeat until he finds a lacky that will.

But it's very likely that such an action will lead to Trump's 3rd impeachment for abuse of power in dismissing a case he is the defendant in.

3. As Turley said in his video, both sides have good arguments. He did not subscribe to the Meese opinion that Taylor Swift has more legal authority because Smith was not approved by the Senate.

I'm sorry, I don't turn to others for what to think. Turley prime amongst them.

If memory serves, after a new president takes office all the US Attorneys resign and get replaced by the new president.

The President asks them to resign, and most do out of curtesy and so that the President doesn't have to fire them.

But not always all, for example President Biden retained US Attorney Hur and I think Weiss from the previous administration so they could continue their work.

2. Cannon may be replaced if the appeals court think she is being blatantly partisan. No matter, she got the case past the election. Similar to Biden getting a pass on mishandling classified documents because he's too old and senile to stand trial.

"No matter, she got that case past the election", I rest my case as to her actions being not based on the law, but based on ensuring Trump's trial didn't occur before the election.

1. Cannon stood strong. I give her credit. The partisan democrat judges, Merchan & Engeron, will also get overturned even though they arguably did their jobs of hanging felonies and massive fines on Trump before the election.

When you conduct criminal activities, expect to be held accountable for criminal activities.

We'll see how Chutkin handles the J6 case now that Smith's authority has been challenged. Any prediction?

If a motion is filed with Judge Chutkin to dismiss based on SC Smith's appointment, I would expect her to provide a well detailed response with history and precedent from the slew of challenges over the last 50 years and multiple administrations showing that the AG has the power delegated by Congress to hire special attorney's.

WW

 

[kyzr]

Yes. Which could then trigger an appeal to the SCOTUS.

As President Trump can't directly dismiss the case. Now he can order his AG to dismiss the case. If the AG agrees the AG will withdraw the case. If the AG doesn't agree, then Trump can fire the AG, rinse repeat until he finds a lackey that will. But it's very likely that such an action will lead to Trump's 3rd impeachment for abuse of power in dismissing a case he is the defendant in.

I'm sorry, I don't turn to others for what to think. Turley prime amongst them.

The President asks them to resign, and most do out of courtesy and so that the President doesn't have to fire them. But not always all, for example President Biden retained US Attorney Hur and I think Weiss from the previous administration so they could continue their work.

"No matter, she got that case past the election", I rest my case as to her actions being not based on the law, but based on ensuring Trump's trial didn't occur before the election.

When you conduct criminal activities, expect to be held accountable for criminal activities.

If a motion is filed with Judge Chutkin to dismiss based on SC Smith's appointment, I would expect her to provide a well detailed response with history and precedent from the slew of challenges over the last 50 years and multiple administrations showing that the AG has the power delegated by Congress to hire special attorney's.

WW

1. Assuming Smith has standing, there looks like more delayed rulings from Cannon to get the trial postponed until after the election.

2. A GOP House would never impeach Trump. In 2026 a democrat House might, but the Senate would never convict. So the case goes away, like Biden's.

3. If you are a Law Professor I can see how you could think that your opinion supersedes Turley's. As a non-lawyer I respect Turley's, more than Tribe's or leftist talking heads.

4. OK, Trump reshuffles the DOJ, hopefully for the better to be less partisan.

5. IMHO Cannon sees the "Lawfare" being waged against Trump as "election interference" or just unacceptable Lawfare, and wants to balance Lady Justice's scales. According to Turley Cannon has a reasonable argument that Smith has no legal authority. One argument I can put up is: if senate approval is not required for Smith, why are any approved by the senate?

6. Criminal activities? Like paying for a legal NDA to cover up a non-crime? Those 34 felonies will be overturned. Joe Biden did the same classified document crime, but he was not held accountable, so turnabout is fair play.

7. Turley said that the documents case is the most dangerous for Trump. So I'll just hope that even if Chutkin manages a conviction on Trump for something that it would be overturned on appeal. If Republicans take control in 2025 I'm writing my guys to say that they need to drop DC as a legal district, with 100% democrats that district is too biased to dispense justice. States should be required for all Grand Juries.

 

[WorldWatcher]

1. Assuming Smith has standing, there looks like more delayed rulings from Cannon to get the trial postponed until after the election.

She already delayed any possibility of a trial until after the election. Mission accomplished.

2. A GOP House would never impeach Trump. In 2026 a democrat House might, but the Senate would never convict.

Agreed.

So the case goes away, like Biden's.

Impeachment does not "go away". If the House impeaches, that is impeachment, whether the Senate convicts or not is a different issued.

Trump is the only President in history to have 2 impeachments, that does not change. What would change is if he notches up another one.

3. If you are a Law Professor I can see how you could think that your opinion supersedes Turley's. As a non-lawyer I respect Turley's, more than Tribe's or leftist talking heads.

You are free to respect Turley's.

4. OK, Trump reshuffles the DOJ, hopefully for the better to be less partisan.

That's Kook Aid talk. Notice the discussion isn't about whether Trump refused to return classified it's about whether the case can be stopped on a fictitious technicality.

That is very telling.

5. IMHO Cannon sees the "Lawfare" being waged against Trump as "election interference" or just unacceptable Lawfare, and wants to balance Lady Justice's scales. According to Turley Cannon has a reasonable argument that Smith has no legal authority.

Her job is * * NOT * * to inject her personal biases and opinions. He job is to rule in accordance with the law as written and apply that law and court precedent. Claims of "lawfare" or "election interference" are not the subject of the case.

One argument I can put up is: if senate approval is not required for Smith, why are any approved by the senate?

As an inferior officer under the United States Constitution Article II, Section 2 Senate confirmation isn't required for inferiors officers when Congress has established law. Congress did establish law, specifically 28USC515 and 28USC533 which empowers the AG to hire special attorney's to investigate and prosecute crimes.

6. Criminal activities? Like paying for a legal NDA to cover up a non-crime? Those 34 felonies will be overturned.

Cannon has nothing to do with Trump felonious falsification of business records. That was a State crime in NY and has nothing to do with his failure to surrender classified documents when ordered to do so by a Federal Court.+

Joe Biden did the same classified document crime, but he was not held accountable, so turnabout is fair play.

No, actually he didn't. Biden (and Pence) had classified documents true, however once discovered they promptly surrender them.

Trump is NOT charged with "having" classified documents, he's charged with failing to surrendered them when ordered to do so by members of the United States Government and when ordered to do so by a Federal Court. (And of course the obstruction charges in willfully hiding the documents he kept to prevent his lawyers for turning them over.)

7. Turley said that the documents case is the most dangerous for Trump. So I'll just hope that even if Chutkin manages a conviction on Trump for something that it would be overturned on appeal. If Republicans take control in 2025 I'm writing my guys to say that they need to drop DC as a legal district, with 100% democrats that district is too biased to dispense justice. States should be required for all Grand Juries.

I don't care what Turley said. I read the court documents myself. You believing Turley and then repeating it here (to me) is just a waste of bandwidth. I get it, you like Turley because he says things in the media you already agree with and want to hear, that's not how the law works.

WW

 

[Delldude]

I don't care what Turley said. I read the court documents myself. You believing Turley and then repeating it here (to me) is just a waste of bandwidth. I get it, you like Turley because he says things in the media you already agree with and want to hear, that's not how the law works.

That's not the same Turley who voted for Hillary is it?

 

[WorldWatcher]

That's not the same Turley who voted for Hillary is it?

I have no idea.

Is it the same Trump that supported Bill and Hillary?

Is it the same Trump that hung out with Jeffery Epstein?

WW

 

[Delldude]

I have no idea.

Yep, so did Dershowitz......imagine that.

Is it the same Trump that supported Bill and Hillary?

Yes it is........that was before His awakening.

Is it the same Trump that hung out with Jeffery Epstein?

Don't know about hung out, posed for pix, flew on his plane a few times, never went to his island.

 

[Billo_Really]

That's not what a Federal Court said...hence why it was dismissed.

It wasn't dismissed because of Biden.

 

[struth]

It wasn't dismissed because of Biden.

sure it was, because it was his illegal prosecution against his political rival.

 

[Billo_Really]

Then that is what the LAW demands. I hope the ruling will be 9-0.

We have a hyper-partisan Supreme Court. The law doesn't mean anything anymore.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

We have a hyper-partisan Supreme Court. The law doesn't mean anything anymore.

It does, if it isn't THEIRS.

"I'll report my gifts.......when I feel like it". (WHEN I get exposed)

 

[struth]

We have a hyper-partisan Supreme Court. The law doesn't mean anything anymore.

you have to be a real fascsit to believe courts are partisan.

Congrats on letting us know, who you are.

 

[Billo_Really]

sure it was, because it was his illegal prosecution against his political rival.

Bullshit!

 

[struth]

Bullshit!

why can't you accept the Court's rulings? Why do you hate our institutions?

 

[Billo_Really]

you have to be a real fascsit to believe courts are partisan.

Congrats on letting us know, who you are.

Oh c'mon! They are not just partisan, they are hyper-partisan! And that's not fascist, that's reality.

Fascist is my way or the highway ideology.

 

[struth]

Oh c'mon! They are not just partisan, they are hyper-partisan! And that's not fascist, that's reality.

Fascist is my way or the highway ideology.

being a fascist is partisan, it's literally, your party.

 

[Billo_Really]

why can't you accept the Court's rulings? Why do you hate our institutions?

God, you are not making any sense. I have no other choice but to accept the courts' ruling. But your comment about how I feel about our institutions is over the top and I demand an apology!

 

[struth]

God, you are not making any sense. I have no other choice but to accept the courts' ruling. But your comment about how I feel about our institutions is over the top and I demand an apology!

then you agree that Xiden's push to over throw the Court is wrong?

 

[Billo_Really]

then you agree that Xiden's push to over throw the Court is wrong?

No, I do not agree to that!

 

[struth]

No, I do not agree to that!

So then you hate our instructions, gotcha

 

[Billo_Really]

So then you hate our instructions, gotcha

I hate your instructions?