Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
46 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

Do we get our money back?

They only wasted 4 or 5 million dollars this time. It's unfortunate that there isn't accountability when all this money gets wasted.

  • Bob 1
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, JimmyBT said:

Judge says special counsel was unlawfully appointed.  

Wait ... would that be a "felony" to unlawfully appoint with the intent to try someone for crime they didn't commit?  🤔

How many counts of unlawful appointment?

Edited by ionel

2BPE 11/17/24 SMC

Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, ionel said:

Wait ... would that be a "felony" to unlawfully appoint with the intent to try someone for crime they didn't commit?  🤔

How many counts of unlawful appointment?

I'll go with that. Sounds good to me.. Wouldn't that be Karma..

Edited by Paul158
missed a word.
Posted
42 minutes ago, ionel said:

Wait ... would that be a "felony" to unlawfully appoint with the intent to try someone for crime they didn't commit?  🤔

How many counts of unlawful appointment?

The prosecutor was unlawfully appointed.  Seems to be quite a bit of corruption in these cases targeting trump. Atlanta and the hire for sex and vacations scheme and now this.   What the Dems are attempting is as bad or worse than what Trumps crimes are. 

Posted

A judge that was appointed by the defendant throwing out the case and disregarding 30 years of settled law is certainly a choice. This opens up to hunters conviction getting thrown out due to that prosecutor being a special counsel as well

  • Fire 1
Posted
1 minute ago, braves121 said:

A judge that was appointed by the defendant throwing out the case and disregarding 30 years of settled law is certainly a choice. This opens up to hunters conviction getting thrown out due to that prosecutor being a special counsel as well

I’ll answer this like you have regarding Hunter.  I’m not voting against Hunter so I don’t care.  His daddy will pardon him anyway even though he’s says he won’t 

Posted
3 hours ago, Bigbrog said:

Please enlighten us how?

This will absolutely be appealed but won’t matter as it will be after the Orange man becomes President.  

  • Bob 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, JimmyBT said:

Depends on if that special council was properly vetted or not.  Was it?  Smith wasn’t.  

Her decision to dismiss the case had nothing to with vetting? She stated the appointment in itself was unconstitutional even though it has been settled law for 30 plus years.

Posted

There is a 2 tiered justice system for sure if any of us plebs on the board had classified documents laying out we would be rotting in prison but the person who appointed the judge presiding over his case has no repercussions this country is such a joke lmao

  • Fire 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, braves121 said:

Her decision to dismiss the case had nothing to with vetting? She stated the appointment in itself was unconstitutional even though it has been settled law for 30 plus years.

And why was it deemed unconstitutional? 

Posted
Just now, braves121 said:

There is a 2 tiered justice system for sure if any of us plebs on the board had classified documents laying out we would be rotting in prison but the person who appointed the judge presiding over his case has no repercussions this country is such a joke lmao

I’ll believe that when Biden goes to jail. 

Posted
Just now, JimmyBT said:

And why was it deemed unconstitutional? 

Do you not read the news or documents people put out to the media lmao?

Posted
3 minutes ago, JimmyBT said:

And why was it deemed unconstitutional? 

I’ll educate ya a little she ruled it unconstitutional because she says the AG can’t appoint special counsels even though that’s been happening for 30 years. Wow this means that even Robert hur and his report were unconstitutional 

Posted
3 minutes ago, braves121 said:

Do you not read the news or documents people put out to the media lmao?

Yep. I did. That’s why I’m asking you. 

Posted

Between getting overturned in halting the case, and being overturned in her ruling on the special master.........

I don't know anything at all about the legalities in appointing a special counsel (as does no one else chirping on the matter in here) but based on the history she has in this case at the appellate level on some big decisions, I wouldn't get too confident that this is over.

Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, braves121 said:

I’ll educate ya a little she ruled it unconstitutional because she says the AG can’t appoint special counsels even though that’s been happening for 30 years. Wow this means that even Robert hur and his report were unconstitutional 

I’ll educate you a little.  She ruled that the no statute grants an attorney general authority to appoint a federal officer with the kind of prosecutional power wielded by special council smith. Hence the no vetting.  

Edited by JimmyBT

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...