BREAKING NEWS: Trump document case dropped

[Concerned American]

That was Cannon's plan all along. She ensured that the case would never get to trial & she didn't write that 92 page decision in a couple days. Her law clerks have been writing it all along. The icing on the cake that she gave Trump was releasing her decision on the first day of the convention.

She's a disgrace to the Federal Judiciary & her ass will be handed back to her once & for all by the Appeals Court. She deservrs it- in spades.

Maybe it was a trade--they let Baldwin off on a technicality. Trump was the trade off. LMAO Trump was innocent and you know it.

 

[Clipper]

Maybe it was a trade--they let Baldwin off on a technicality. Trump was the trade off. LMAO Trump was innocent and you know it.

He's not guilty or not guilty unless a jury days so. Which that hack judge prevented from happening by her lawless ruling.

 

[Oddball]

That was Cannon's plan all along. She ensured that the case would never get to trial & she didn't write that 92 page decision in a couple days. Her law clerks have been writing it all along. The icing on the cake that she gave Trump was releasing her decision on the first day of the convention.

She's a disgrace to the Federal Judiciary & her ass will be handed back to her once & for all by the Appeals Court. She deservrs it- in spades.

 

[struth]

That was Cannon's plan all along. She ensured that the case would never get to trial & she didn't write that 92 page decision in a couple days. Her law clerks have been writing it all along. The icing on the cake that she gave Trump was releasing her decision on the first day of the convention.

She's a disgrace to the Federal Judiciary & her ass will be handed back to her once & for all by the Appeals Court. She deservrs it- in spades.

It’s hardly her fault xiden illegally appointed the prosecutor

 

[Clipper]

It’s hardly her fault xiden illegally appointed the prosecutor

No, he didn't. Either way, Merrick Garland appointed Smith, not Biden.

 

[struth]

No, he didn't. And Merrick Garland appointed Smith.

Illegal prosecution.

Case dismissed

 

[Concerned American]

He's not guilty or not guilty unless a jury days so. Which that hack judge prevented from happening by her lawless ruling.

That's exactly how I feel about the Biden doc case and the Baldwin manslaughter case. Fair is fair. Get ready, same things going to happen in GA and NY.

 

[talksalot]

Sure you can, since Biden didn't try to keep them when asked for them. Keeping them was the crime, not accidentally taking them.

(Of course, unlike Biden, Trump took them very deliberately, to sell to the enemies of the USA for big bucks. And you clearly approve.)

You can't actually be that ignorant of the basics, here can you?

Rhetorical question. Of course you can. Your cult mushrooms you, keeping you in the dark and feeding you bullshit. If the cult doesn't feed it to you, you have no hope of knowing it.

Biden didn't "accidentally" take documents and he didn't offer to give them back. An investigation found them in his possession in several unsecured locations and confiscated them because he NEVER had any legal right to them as a senator or VP. Biden kept them to reference for his book he's trying to write and shared top secret information with his ghost writer.

Your accusations against Trump are total BS. Like all Democrats you just make up sh!t with absolutely no facts and spew it like the vomit it is.

 

[skye]

 

[Oddball]

 

[Curried Goats]

About the only difference I can think of between David and Jack is that David is already a current U.S. attorney who was given the additional role of special prosecutor. He was already doing an investigation on Hunter before the appointment was made. I don't think Jack Smith is a current U.S. attorney when Merrick made him a special prosecutor. Does that make a difference? I don't know. I'll let better legal minds than me make that decision.

You know what, kudos to you for at least for admitting you don't know.

 

[sealybobo]

If he doesn't get elected, he isn't going have the party behind him. He'll be just another old con man unable to pull the strings to say out of jail.

If he wins, god help us. And it's looking now like he's going to win. That's what everyone thinks. Fortunately tomorrow is another news cycle and we can get this one back. Democrats have to remind people all that we have accomplished in 3 years. Without attacking Trump. The economy is great, inflating falling, it started before Joe took office, unemployment low, he was going to work out a deal with the House the Trump said stop.

Biden has been able to reach across the isle and get bipartisan shit done.

Are we going to lose the Senate now? I am still expecting a blue wave. I can't believe Trump being so polarizing and hated that a Republican would try to shoot him and that's somehow a good thing?

 

[Ringo]

Lost behind all of this is the fact that a judge threw out and dismissed the case against Trump accusing him of mishandling classified documents.
What's interesting to me is that the reason was not the gerrymandering and forgery that the FBI went after Trump's house, but that the prosecutor was improperly appointed.
Judges don't go against the FBI. This is scary because this criminal agency feels safe. They get away with everything, just as they probably got away with participating in the attempted assassination of Trump (alleged by me), just as they got away with the January 6 provocation, just as they got away with the false signatures on the letter accusing Trump of ties to Russia, just as they got away with Biden's laptop hidden under a cloth for two years. The FBI stands at the center of the DNC-run deep state.
This permissiveness of the intelligence agencies is not compatible with law and order. Trump poses an existential threat to them. They will not give up trying to kill him.

 

[kyzr]

Illegal prosecution.

Case dismissed

Here is a good discussion by legal experts

Jonathan Turley on dismissal of Trump's classified docs case: This is a seismic decision | Fox News Video

Fox News contributors Andy McCarthy and Jonathan Turley joined 'America's Newsroom' to discuss their take on a Florida judge dismissing Trump's classified documents case.

www.foxnews.com

 

[Clipper]

Was the Special Counsel legally appointed in the Hunter Biden case? Or only in Trump's case because that incompetent hack, Trump's asseating judge says so?

Cannon will never get the stink of Trump:s ass off her face.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Please, in the future, when politicians of any party rip us off, please don't complain. You voted for it. Stupid bastard.

I have no complaints with our SCOTUS. They seem to be ruling right down the middle. What does this thread about Trump's document case have to do with politicians ripping us off? Are you capable of staying on topic or you'd rather run down rabbit holes hoping people follow you?

 

[Flopper]

Lost behind all of this is the fact that a judge threw out and dismissed the case against Trump accusing him of mishandling classified documents.
What's interesting to me is that the reason was not the gerrymandering and forgery that the FBI went after Trump's house, but that the prosecutor was improperly appointed.
Judges don't go against the FBI. This is scary because this criminal agency feels safe. They get away with everything, just as they probably got away with participating in the attempted assassination of Trump (alleged by me), just as they got away with the January 6 provocation, just as they got away with the false signatures on the letter accusing Trump of ties to Russia, just as they got away with Biden's laptop hidden under a cloth for two years. The FBI stands at the center of the DNC-run deep state.
This permissiveness of the intelligence agencies is not compatible with law and order. Trump poses an existential threat to them. They will not give up trying to kill him.

Thomas expressed his opinion that appointments of a Special Counsel required the authorization of the Senate, .Article II, Section 2, Clause 2. Cannon saw her way out of a case with strong political overtones by following Thomas's opinion and declaring that Smith's appointment was unconstitutional and dismissing the case.

Was the appointment unconstitutional? Possibly, but Cannon should not have dismissed the case. She should have followed precedence and asked the AG, to remedy the situation.

The procedure for approving special counsels has been in effect for over 50 years. This same procedure was used to appoint Special Counsel in the Watergate investigation and Clinton and numerous other high goverment officials. The procedure has also been approved by the high court.

Imagine what would happen if ever appointment of a Special Counsel required the written approval of the president and approval by the Senate. A president may find the appointment to be too politically toxic. If the opposition controlled the Senate, approved would likely be impossible. Whether the procedure is technically constitution or not, it needs to say in place.

We may never know what Cannon's motives were. Maybe she really believed the appointment was unconstitutional and dismissing the case was the property action. Or maybe she just wanted to rid herself of the case. Or maybe someone in high places mentioned to her that there would likely be two Supreme Justice seats opening up during the next administration.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Thomas expressed his opinion that appointments of a Special Counsel required the authorization of the Senate, .Article II, Section 2, Clause 2. Cannon saw her way out of a case with strong political overtones by following Thomas's opinion and declaring that Smith's appointment was unconstitutional and dismissing the case.

Was the appointment unconstitutional? Possibly, but Cannon should not have dismissed the case. She should have followed precedence and asked the AG, to remedy the situation.

The procedure for approving special counsels has been in effect for over 50 years. This same procedure was used to appoint Special Counsel in the Watergate investigation and Clinton and numerous other high goverment officials. The procedure has also been approved by the high court.

Imagine what would happen if ever appointment of a Special Counsel required the written approval of the president and approval by the Senate. A president may find the appoint to be too politically toxic. If the opposition controlled the Senate, approved would likely be impossible. Whether the procedure is technically constitution or not, it needs to say in place.

We may never know what Cannon's motives were. Maybe she really believed the appointment was unconstitutional and dismissing the case was the property action. Or maybe she just wanted to rid herself of the case. Or maybe someone in high places mentioned to her that there would likely be two Supreme Justice seats opening up during the next administration.

Only two practical options exist:

1) we apparently have a judge that was willing to proceed with a trial on an unconstutional foundation, until Trump's lawyers brought this to her attention. If her decision is valid.

2) we have a judge making wildly anomalous decisions that show bias to one party

Which makes her, AT BEST, incompetent and not appropriate for handling such an important trial.

 

[Concerned American]

Lost behind all of this is the fact that a judge threw out and dismissed the case against Trump accusing him of mishandling classified documents.
What's interesting to me is that the reason was not the gerrymandering and forgery that the FBI went after Trump's house, but that the prosecutor was improperly appointed.
Judges don't go against the FBI. This is scary because this criminal agency feels safe. They get away with everything, just as they probably got away with participating in the attempted assassination of Trump (alleged by me), just as they got away with the January 6 provocation, just as they got away with the false signatures on the letter accusing Trump of ties to Russia, just as they got away with Biden's laptop hidden under a cloth for two years. The FBI stands at the center of the DNC-run deep state.
This permissiveness of the intelligence agencies is not compatible with law and order. Trump poses an existential threat to them. They will not give up trying to kill him.

Before you comment on US domestic issues, educate yourself. Trump has never been accused of gerrymandering. There is no crime of gerrymandering. Learn words before using them. Second, this case had nothing to do with J6. The rest of the post is total nonsense. Just STFU.

 

[Clipper]

GFY. Cry harder that your side has had a bad last month.

Out on parole where Trump should be, amirite?