'Without Merit' Judge Shuts Down Trump's Latest Trial Requent.

Smith is prosecuting Trump for his personal actions as opposed to his official presidential actions. He has complete authority to do so. There is nothing unconstitutional about his charges or the prosecution of the case. If, as you claim, he didn't have legal authority to continue the case the courts not only wouldn't but couldn't schedule hearings and hear the case. Your conspiracy theory crap doesn't supersede the actions of the court.

The claim is that merrick garland didn’t have the authority to appoint smith as a federal prosecutor because he never went through the advice and consent process. It doesn’t matter if this was a presidential or personal issue for Trump, what matters is, was smith legally appointed as a federal prosecutor as a special counsel to do this case.

This is a federal case.
 
Wrong, obviously. That was literally the United point of the superseding indictment.

To wit: Showing Trump's illegal actions were not performed in any official capacity.

The superseding indictment is irrelevant, is smith acting as a federal special prosecutor and as special counsel in the case against Trump? Yes, he is, but he was not legally appointed. That’s where this is going n
 
The previous DC ruling forces Judge Chutkin to keep Jack Smith because the DC Circuit ruled the AG can appoint special prosecutors under the law/Constitution....so Chutkin has precedent that she has to follow.

The Cannon (wrong) decision is still on appeal....and likely will be over turned and she will once again be reprimanded for it by the higher court imo.
There’s only 2 ways a special counsel can be appointed. By the president through advice and consent of the senate, or by Congress, through law.

Neither of those seemed to have happened.
 
He has been.
That's gonna take some splainin. How can he access the court without authority to access the court? Even if a crazy judge made up his own rules to allow it (that is as stupid as it sounds) the legitimate authorities would step in and stop it.
 
Nah. I just need fair judges who grasp the law and apply it.
Like, the 100% of other judges that ruled in contradiction to Cannons ruling?

No?

Odd. So how do you decide which is which, while knowing much less about the law than any of them?
 
The superseding indictment is irrelevant, is smith acting as a federal special prosecutor and as special counsel in the case against Trump? Yes, he is, but he was not legally appointed. That’s where this is going n
He was not legally authorized to prosecute trump for actions taken as president. That's why the Supremes refused to hear his case. He has perfect authority to prosecute him for actions taken as an individual.
 
So you do not assert that what she is doing is wrong, against the rules, and maybe even illegal.

Huh, I must have just been imagining things.

Apologies.
No, I do assert that what she is doing is wrong, and against the rules…illegal? I can’t say, i don’t know if it borders on legality or bad practice.

You can see the posts between bulldog and myself for information on why in think it’s wrong. Because I don’t think she is allowed, or at lease ethically able to release evidence of a case to the public before the trial

I do, however, think all of this was her trying to influence voters, because, as I asked you previously, and you refused to answer, but I can’t think of any other reason for her to make this release, other than she wanted to get this information out before the election, and I feel that is wrong, and if found to be election interference, could border on illegal.
 
That's gonna take some splainin. How can he access the court without authority to access the court? Even if a crazy judge made up his own rules to allow it (that is as stupid as it sounds) the legitimate authorities would step in and stop it.
You’re very slow.

It has belatedly been noted by a judge that his appointment was invalid.

In fact, it’s even worse than that. I’d explain why to you, but you’d never understand any of it.

For now it suffices to say that when an action is undertaken by an alleged official who doesn’t have actual authority, it is known as “void” ab initio. This, every action he took is already invalid. That includes going to a grand jury to seek any indictment. He got a few. But none of them are valid.

Watch. Learn. If you can.
 
The claim is that merrick garland didn’t have the authority to appoint smith as a federal prosecutor because he never went through the advice and consent process. It doesn’t matter if this was a presidential or personal issue for Trump, what matters is, was smith legally appointed as a federal prosecutor as a special counsel to do this case.

This is a federal case.
Of course it is a federal case. Federal cases are prosecuted every day. Do you think every federal prosecutor has to go through the advice and consent process? Of course they don't.
 
No, I do assert that what she is doing is wrong, and against the rules…illegal? I can’t say, i don’t know if it borders on legality or bad practice.
Okay.

Easier to say than it is to argue as true, with examples or code of law.

As Trump's legal team just found out.



No, I do assert that what she is doing is wrong, and against the rules…illegal? I can’t say, i don’t know if it borders on legality or bad practice.

You can see the posts between bulldog and myself for information on why in think it’s wrong. Because I don’t think she is allowed, or at lease ethically able to release evidence of a case to the public before the trial

I do, however, think all of this was her trying to influence voters, because, as I asked you previously, and you refused to answer, but I can’t think of any other reason for her to make this release, other than she wanted to get this information out before the election, and I feel that is wrong, and if found to be election interference, could border on illegal.
 
He was not legally authorized to prosecute trump for actions taken as president. That's why the Supremes refused to hear his case. He has perfect authority to prosecute him for actions taken as an individual.
You truly don’t understand the SCOTUS decision.

Your display of ongoing ignorance is quite funny.
 
Like, the 100% of other judges that ruled in contradiction to Cannons ruling?

No?

Odd. So how do you decide which is which, while knowing much less about the law than any of them?
You’re very shallow.

Like the depth of your comprehension of how the law works.

😂
 
The actual evidence wasn't released...what he says he has as evidence is being discussed to support his view of why this case does not fall under presidential duties under the constitution.... and is personal, candidacy stuff.

And then Trump's team will argue against Smith's claims and say the whole case should be dismissed, it was all presidential duties.

Then the judge will decide, based on the Supreme court immunity ruling, whether the criminal actions alleged are personal and can go to trial or can not, because they fell under presidential duties.

This stuff going on in the courts NOW is due to the SC immunity ruling.

Most of this stuff was already in the original indictment...it is not new.


“Bombshell evidence”. Many articles are reporting the same thing. They are also saying there new allegations. It’s not just any evidence being released, it’s the allegations also, that can influence public opinion. We’ve seen that left wing media will take allegations and present them as truth. I mean, look at the bob Woodward allegations, that nobody can prove yet media ran with it as if it were true.
 
The actual evidence wasn't released...what he says he has as evidence is being discussed to support his view of why this case does not fall under presidential duties under the constitution.... and is personal, candidacy stuff.

And then Trump's team will argue against Smith's claims and say the whole case should be dismissed, it was all presidential duties.

Then the judge will decide, based on the Supreme court immunity ruling, whether the criminal actions alleged are personal and can go to trial or can not, because they fell under presidential duties.

This stuff going on in the courts NOW is due to the SC immunity ruling.

Most of this stuff was already in the original indictment...it is not new.

Also, it doesn’t matter what will happen in the future, im talking about the effect it’s going to have now and I suspect that was the reason behind all of this.
 
You’re very slow.

It has belatedly been noted by a judge that his appointment was invalid.

In fact, it’s even worse than that. I’d explain why to you, but you’d never understand any of it.

For now it suffices to say that when an action is undertaken by an alleged official who doesn’t have actual authority, it is known as “void” ab initio. This, every action he took is already invalid. That includes going to a grand jury to seek any indictment. He got a few. But none of them are valid.

Watch. Learn. If you can.
So he's allowed to continue making void accusations and having void rulings? You know that's crazy, right?
 
I’m not up against anyone.
Hmm, yeah, ya kind of are. As is the Honorable Aileen Cannon. Her opinion, and your parroting of it, are up against 100% of the precedent, right now, in an appeals court.

I wonder if, should they rule against her, they will mention the Hunter Biden case? That would be great. I would love to be there, when someone reads that part to Trump.
 

Forum List

Back
Top