red viking Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Paul158 said: Last sentence. It doesn't apply if you are old and feeble. It doesn't apply if you are a nice likeable guy and have a poor memory. Will Hunter Biden's case get thrown out now? I believe that was a special counsel too. Nah. That corrupt judge was careful to make sure her particular reasoning (not being confirmed by the Senate) didn't apply to Biden's special counsel. Edited July 17 by red viking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul158 Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 3 minutes ago, red viking said: Will Hunter Biden's case get thrown out now? I believe that was a special counsel too. Was the special council properly selected according to the law? If not it would get dismissed. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ionel Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 22 minutes ago, red viking said: I don't see much evidence for that personally, but I wouldn't put it past the GOP, in general, to do whatever it takes to win. But you are missing the beauty of convicting folks on a public forum. You don't personally have to see or believe the evidence, we only need one poster for that and think we already found him. Its so much more efficient than following the law. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThreePointTakedown Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 On 7/15/2024 at 1:46 PM, braves121 said: What crime has Biden committed? You know they won't/can't answer that question. Without looking like a jewish-space-laser nutjob. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigbrog Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 6 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said: You know they won't/can't answer that question. Without looking like a jewish-space-laser nutjob. The irony of you claiming someone won't answer a question...LOL 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThreePointTakedown Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 14 minutes ago, Bigbrog said: The irony of you claiming someone won't answer a question...LOL Put up or shut up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigbrog Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 12 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said: Put up or shut up. Looking in the mirror when posting again hey?!?! Name one thing the VP has done that you like?? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThreePointTakedown Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 2 minutes ago, Bigbrog said: Looking in the mirror when posting again hey?!?! Name one thing the VP has done that you like?? Asking more questions doesn't prove your previous point. Until you provide evidence that I did not answer all your previous questions and because you are so dishonest I will refuse to answer your questions until you meet my standard. Any refusal, deflection, or obfuscation will be considered your confession of being a liar and a coward. Best of luck, cliche. But I'm happy to ask more that I know you can't answer: Do you understand the responsibilities of the VP and what are they? Who is third in line(that's 4th to people who don't understand simple things) in presidential succession? 1 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Offthemat Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 1 hour ago, red viking said: DOJ has been operating under the same guidelines and laws for 25 years now re: special counsels. How interesting that a Trump-appointed judge now says it is illegal on the day of Trump's nomination. Great timing. This was a slam dunk case and Trump's only hope was to get it thrown out on a technicality. The merits of the case were slam-dunk and everybody in this country should be disappointed in how this has gone. Anybody responsible for a crime should be held accountable. Nothing to see here....move along. The Special Counsel appointment hasn’t been brought before the Supreme Court so the arguments for and against it haven’t been decided. When district and appeals courts have different opinions on laws they usually get decided at the Supreme Court. Judge Cannon decided that two problems were at issue with Smith’s appointment. First, he had never been confirmed as a Principal Officer, as all the other Special Counsels had, and second; Congress had not appropriated the money to pay for his office. Judge Cannon has significant support for her decision, from law professors, to two former U.S. Attorneys General, to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Thomas wrote in the Immunities decision that before the court worried that the President had immunity, it needed to verify Smith’s authority. She did, and now it’s up to Smith to prove he’s authorized to bring the case. To better understand this case you may want to familiarize yourself with the Constitution and the definition of Principal and Inferior Officers. And the Appropriations Clause. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mspart Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 On 7/15/2024 at 10:44 AM, 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 You might look at Biden and Hillary. Are they rotting in prison. There is a two tiered justice system. And it has nothing to do with who appointed who. mspart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christian Slack Wasatch via Snow College, Utah Class of 2024 Committed to Utah Valley Projected Weight: 197
Kasey Curtis North Sanpete via Snow College, Utah Class of 2024 Committed to Utah Valley Projected Weight: 133
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