Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Exactly. At this point you don't even remember your unevidenced and unargued assertion you invented out of cultismWhat evidence of what lie?
Lie. Thre is no evidence of your lie in either of those posts.
Naturally. But you induced another post to correct your lies, which was your real point.
Also in post 62, I asked you if you could come up with any other reason why she would do this, and you failed to answer that also.Repeating your claim is neither evidence nor argument of that claim.
And argument ad populum is a fallacy. But you love those.
Oh he's legal. And in D.C. it's been litigated and appealed Previously, with the court ruling that the AG CAN appoint special prosecutors and special Councils without congress.Wow, I didn’t know anyone was actually still paying attention to the illegally appointed political prosecution…weird
I didn't say you did.I didn’t have to correct anything lol
Correct, I am not your assistant, and it is not my job to help you argue the lies you invent.Also in post 62, I asked you if you could come up with any other reason why she would do this, and you failed to answer that also.
Nope illegal. No court has over turned that ruling.Oh he's legal. And in D.C. it's been litigated and appealed Previously, with the court ruling that the AG CAN appoint special prosecutors and special Councils without congress.
Aileen Cannon ignored the federal precedent in DC when she wrongly dismissed her case....
It is on appeal...
Pretrial issues that are filed within the courts, are usually always available to read and are released to the public....? it would be an exception to the rule, if it were not...is my understanding.Where has anyone else had a judge release the details of a pending case before it goes to trial?
I didn't say you did.
English. Learn it.
False.Oh my gosh..post 71, lol, you most certainly did.
lol, because you are going off on an incoherent trail..I have no idea where you are going with this conversation…other than away from the questions I asked and the posts I referencedExactly. At this point you don't even remember your unevidenced and unargued assertion you invented out of cultism
This happens every time, woth you.
Oh well, probably best for the thread anyway.
Correct, I am not your assistant, and it is not my job to help you argue the lies you invent.
How are you not getting this?
State your own point, followed by your own arguments and evidence.
Put the big girl panties on, for once.
You made an assertion and have yet to argue it.lol, because you are going off on an incoherent trail..
Smith is prosecuting Trump for his personal actions as opposed to his official presidential actions. He has complete authority to do so. There is nothing unconstitutional about his charges or the prosecution of the case. If, as you claim, he didn't have legal authority to continue the case the courts not only wouldn't but couldn't schedule hearings and hear the case. Your conspiracy theory crap doesn't supersede the actions of the court.Well, there’s this:
and this:
Gaetz questions Jack Smith's authority to keep up Trump probes after judge calls him 'unlawfully appointed' | Fox News
Rep Matt Gaetz is one of former President Donald Trump's staunchest allies in the Housewww.foxnews.com
And this:
Federal judge dismisses Trump classified documents case over concerns with prosecutor's appointment
A federal judge in Florida has dismissed the classified documents case against former President Donald Trump, siding with defense lawyers who said the special counsel who filed the charges was illegally appointed by the Justice Department.apnews.com
Does the appointments clause not say that all appointment have to have advice and consent of the senate, or, Congress can appoint by passing law to make it happen for inferior officers. Were either of these done?
And this:
I know. Because your intellectually deviant behavior is your norm.Again, have no idea what you are taking about.
Chutkan is a biased hack.The federal judge overseeing Donald Trump’s election interference case denied the former president’s request to stop the release of further evidence before the election — but paused the ruling to allow the former president a week to “evaluate litigation options.”
'Without merit': Judge shuts down Trump's latest trial request
The federal judge overseeing Donald Trump’s election interference case denied the former president’s request to stop the release of further evidence before the election — but paused the ruling to allow the former president a week to “evaluate litigation options.” The decision Thursday afternoon...www.rawstory.com
The decision Thursday afternoon by U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan finds that making public Special Counsel Jack Smith’s latest redacted filing is “appropriate,” and that Trump’s “blanket objections to further unsealing are without merit.”
“As in his previous filing, he identifies no specific substantive objections to particular proposed redactions,” Chutkan wrote in the ruling.
Trump had attempted to keep any further evidence against him in his criminal case out of the view of voters until after the Nov. 5 election.
Smith is prosecuting Trump for his personal actions as opposed to his official presidential actions.
Wrong, obviously. That was literally the United point of the superseding indictment.False. The opposite is true. As usual.
Easy to say.
Harder to argue.
