JimmyBT Posted yesterday at 02:00 PM Share Posted yesterday at 02:00 PM (edited) Judge says special counsel was unlawfully appointed. Edited yesterday at 02:01 PM by JimmyBT 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Husker_Du Posted yesterday at 02:07 PM Share Posted yesterday at 02:07 PM looloololololololol TBD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThreePointTakedown Posted yesterday at 02:10 PM Share Posted yesterday at 02:10 PM This is going to age like milk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigbrog Posted yesterday at 02:15 PM Share Posted yesterday at 02:15 PM 4 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said: This is going to age like milk Please enlighten us how? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
headshuck Posted yesterday at 02:15 PM Share Posted yesterday at 02:15 PM Whew, now Biden is safe from similar charges. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyBT Posted yesterday at 02:24 PM Author Share Posted yesterday at 02:24 PM That’s what happens when you put a crook like Smith on the council. Stunk from the get go. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Offthemat Posted yesterday at 03:53 PM Share Posted yesterday at 03:53 PM Do we get our money back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul158 Posted yesterday at 04:43 PM Share Posted yesterday at 04:43 PM 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. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ionel Posted yesterday at 04:48 PM Share Posted yesterday at 04:48 PM (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 yesterday at 04:49 PM by ionel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul158 Posted yesterday at 04:53 PM Share Posted yesterday at 04:53 PM (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 yesterday at 04:54 PM by Paul158 missed a word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyBT Posted yesterday at 05:33 PM Author Share Posted yesterday at 05:33 PM 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
braves121 Posted yesterday at 05:35 PM Share Posted yesterday at 05:35 PM 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyBT Posted yesterday at 05:37 PM Author Share Posted yesterday at 05:37 PM Depends on if that special council was properly vetted or not. Was it? Smith wasn’t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyBT Posted yesterday at 05:38 PM Author Share Posted yesterday at 05:38 PM 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyBT Posted yesterday at 05:40 PM Author Share Posted yesterday at 05:40 PM 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. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
braves121 Posted yesterday at 05:40 PM Share Posted yesterday at 05:40 PM 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
braves121 Posted yesterday at 05:44 PM Share Posted yesterday at 05:44 PM 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyBT Posted yesterday at 05:44 PM Author Share Posted yesterday at 05:44 PM 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyBT Posted yesterday at 05:45 PM Author Share Posted yesterday at 05:45 PM 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
braves121 Posted yesterday at 05:45 PM Share Posted yesterday at 05:45 PM 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
braves121 Posted yesterday at 05:46 PM Share Posted yesterday at 05:46 PM Just now, JimmyBT said: I’ll believe that when Biden goes to jail. What crime has Biden committed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
braves121 Posted yesterday at 05:49 PM Share Posted yesterday at 05:49 PM 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyBT Posted yesterday at 05:49 PM Author Share Posted yesterday at 05:49 PM 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WrestlingRasta Posted yesterday at 05:52 PM Share Posted yesterday at 05:52 PM 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyBT Posted yesterday at 05:54 PM Author Share Posted yesterday at 05:54 PM (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 yesterday at 05:54 PM by JimmyBT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronnie Ramirez Walnut, California Class of 2025 Committed to Oklahoma State Projected Weight: 125, 133
Landon Robideau St. Michael-Albertville, Minnesota Class of 2025 Committed to Oklahoma State Projected Weight: 149, 157
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now