Jack Smith’s days outside of jail may be numbered.😎

[Modern Messiah]

View attachment 1113817

Your TDS is spilling over again.
I guess you have nothing more to say.
It's OK.
Better luck next time

 

[MagicMike]

The supreme Court never ruled on Jack Smith's appointment

You are correct. I stand corrected.
The closest it got to the SCOTUS was Aileen Cannon being overruled when she tried to call Smith's appointment unconstitutional.

Can the Attorney General Appoint a Special Counsel? - Podcast | Constitution Center

Podcast for Can the Attorney General Appoint a Special Counsel? from the National Constitution Center

constitutioncenter.org

 

[Modern Messiah]

He won't be, and you guys will long out of power for a long time.

Sure dude.
You stick with that

 

[Delldude]

You are correct. I stand corrected.
The closest it got to the SCOTUS was Aileen Cannon being overruled when she tried to call Smith's appointment unconstitutional.

Can the Attorney General Appoint a Special Counsel? - Podcast | Constitution Center

Podcast for Can the Attorney General Appoint a Special Counsel? from the National Constitution Center

constitutioncenter.org

Your article doesn't say anything to support that..................

 

[MagicMike]

No kidding? It never went to SCOTUS......

You are correct. Score yourself a win.
After Aileen Cannon was overruled in calling it unconstitutional it hasn't gone anywhere on appeal. So the official legal standing thus far is that Smith's appointment was constitutional. Typical MAGAt Delldud......even when you "win" you lose.

Can the Attorney General Appoint a Special Counsel? - Podcast | Constitution Center

Podcast for Can the Attorney General Appoint a Special Counsel? from the National Constitution Center

constitutioncenter.org

 

[MagicMike]

Your article doesn't say anything to support that..................

You haven't read the article.

 

[Delldude]

You are correct. Score yourself a win.
After Aileen Cannon was overruled in calling it unconstitutional it hasn't gone anywhere on appeal. So the official legal standing thus far is that Smith's appointment was constitutional. Typical MAGAt Delldud......even when you "win" you lose.

Can the Attorney General Appoint a Special Counsel? - Podcast | Constitution Center

Podcast for Can the Attorney General Appoint a Special Counsel? from the National Constitution Center

constitutioncenter.org

She was never overruled.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

My peers are The American People.
312>226

No, it is not.

 

[Delldude]

You haven't read the article.

I know you didn't.

 

[WorldWatcher]

The SOL hadn't expired.

#1 SOL for felony is much longer.

#2 SOL does not accumulate for time spent outside the state. You know while he was in Florida and DC?

This was all litigated and the claim that the SOL had expired was false.

WW

Go ahead and link us up with those facts.

https://www.nycourts.gov/courts/ad1/calendar/List_Word/2023/06_Jun/27/PDF/People%20of%20NY%20%20v%20%20Trump%20%20(2023-00717).pdf

WW

 

[whitehall]

A good guess is that Smith, along with others, thought they had a free ride as long as a doddering old fool was in the W.H.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

A good guess is that Smith, along with others, thought they had a free ride as long as a doddering old fool was in the W.H.

With Trump? No, not even him in dementia means they stay.

 

[WorldWatcher]

A good guess is that Smith, along with others, thought they had a free ride as long as a doddering old fool was in the W.H.

Considering Trump is in the White House...

..... ..... ..... ..... They're still covered.

WW

 

[Delldude]

After Aileen Cannon was overruled in calling it unconstitutional it hasn't gone anywhere on appeal. So the official legal standing thus far is that Smith's appointment was constitutional.

No son, that means her ruling stands unless overturned on appeal.

 

[MagicMike]

She was never overruled.

Special counsels have been around for decades. From the 1970s until the late ’90s there was the independent counsel statute, which provided for a much more independent special prosecutor than what Attorney General [Merrick] Garland authorized in this matter. The Supreme Court upheld the statute in Morrison v. Olson, but it expired in 1999. After its expiration, DOJ implemented its own regulations providing for the appointment of special counsels who possess functions similar to U.S. attorneys. In 2020, in an Appointments Clause case involving the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Supreme Court essentially reaffirmed Morrison v. Olson as a valid exception to a general rule about appointments.

One very surprising thing is how Cannon deals with the Supreme Court precedent in United States v. Nixon. There’s a sentence in that 9-0 opinion which resolves this issue entirely. The sentence says that Archibald Cox, who was one of the prosecutors of Nixon, was appropriately appointed pursuant to the statute. And you would have thought that would have ended this inquiry. Cannon does something I think I’ve never seen a district judge do before, which is that she looks into the history of the Nixon case, decides the issue wasn’t particularly briefed, and as a result determines that a sentence in a Supreme Court opinion that was decided 9-0 was, in fact, “dicta,” which means that it is not binding in subsequent cases as legal precedent. And as a result, she as a district judge was entitled to disregard it. I’ve never seen a district court conclude that a portion of a Supreme Court opinion is not binding; that was a first for me.

What the judge was thinking and what’s next in Trump documents case — Harvard Gazette

Obama-era White House counsel says key point in Nixon decision should have ended inquiry

news.harvard.edu

 

[Modern Messiah]

https://www.nycourts.gov/courts/ad1/calendar/List_Word/2023/06_Jun/27/PDF/People%20of%20NY%20%20v%20%20Trump%20%20(2023-00717).pdf

WW

I didn't see anything that proves your point.
Maybe you should try again

 

[Delldude]

Special counsels have been around for decades. From the 1970s until the late ’90s there was the independent counsel statute, which provided for a much more independent special prosecutor than what Attorney General [Merrick] Garland authorized in this matter. The Supreme Court upheld the statute in Morrison v. Olson, but it expired in 1999. After its expiration, DOJ implemented its own regulations providing for the appointment of special counsels who possess functions similar to U.S. attorneys. In 2020, in an Appointments Clause case involving the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Supreme Court essentially reaffirmed Morrison v. Olson as a valid exception to a general rule about appointments.

One very surprising thing is how Cannon deals with the Supreme Court precedent in United States v. Nixon. There’s a sentence in that 9-0 opinion which resolves this issue entirely. The sentence says that Archibald Cox, who was one of the prosecutors of Nixon, was appropriately appointed pursuant to the statute. And you would have thought that would have ended this inquiry. Cannon does something I think I’ve never seen a district judge do before, which is that she looks into the history of the Nixon case, decides the issue wasn’t particularly briefed, and as a result determines that a sentence in a Supreme Court opinion that was decided 9-0 was, in fact, “dicta,” which means that it is not binding in subsequent cases as legal precedent. And as a result, she as a district judge was entitled to disregard it. I’ve never seen a district court conclude that a portion of a Supreme Court opinion is not binding; that was a first for me.

What the judge was thinking and what’s next in Trump documents case — Harvard Gazette

Obama-era White House counsel says key point in Nixon decision should have ended inquiry

news.harvard.edu

That is not in any way binding in her actions unless brought before a court. Until or if that ever happens, her decision stands.

 

[MagicMike]

No son, that means her ruling stands unless overturned on appeal.

kind of the same with Trump's felony convictions right?

 

[Modern Messiah]

No, it is not.

 

[Delldude]

kind of the same with Trump's felony convictions right?

Lose your argument and change the topic....

Mikey does Mikey.

Which one is on appeal?