Judge Dismisses Trump Documents Case.

[MHS Rebel]

The Dims just can't get a break lately.

 

[MG1968]

The Dims just can't get a break lately.

Partisan witch hunts are passé.

 

[PEPPERJAX]

 

[McDad]

Fair warning. My emotions from the assassination attempt are settling. That means bad puns are ahead.

Here goes.

No biggie on the dismissal. They didn't have a shot anyway.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

The Crybabies just can't get a break lately.

FYP.

 

[Sea Ray]

There goes 40 felony counts. Bye bye

 

[Majors]

MSNBC back to the hateful rhetoric


Luckiest criminal
Benefits because of who he is


No mention of Biden being dismissed for being too old

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

 

[BigOrangeMojo]

Fair warning. My emotions from the assassination attempt are settling. That means bad puns are ahead.

Here goes.

No biggie on the dismissal. They didn't have a shot anyway.

You missed by more than an inch...

 

[Sandman 423]

You missed by more than an inch...

Twss

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

 

[McDad]

Trump should handle reporter questions with, "Can you repeat that, my ears aren't what they used to be."

 

[Vol423]

Fair warning. My emotions from the assassination attempt are settling. That means bad puns are ahead.

Here goes.

No biggie on the dismissal. They didn't have a shot anyway.

I was trying to figure out what a "ban pun" was until I read this post. Then it immediately became clear.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

 

[Vol423]

You missed by more than an inch...

He's used to it. His wife has been telling him that for years.

 

[Tman44]

So the Justice Department wanted to "get" Biden's political opponent so bad they engaged in an illegal prosecution. Hopefully now people will see democrats for who they really are. Sounds familiar:

Putin's opposition: Dead, jailed or exiled

Putin's staunchest critic of the last decade, Alexei Navalny, died last month in a prison colony. Dozens of others remain behind bars.

www.japantimes.co.jp

 

[RockyTop85]

So the Justice Department wanted to "get" Biden's political opponent so bad they engaged in an illegal prosecution. Hopefully now people will see democrats for who they really are. Sounds familiar:

Putin's opposition: Dead, jailed or exiled

Putin's staunchest critic of the last decade, Alexei Navalny, died last month in a prison colony. Dozens of others remain behind bars.

www.japantimes.co.jp

And Hunter Biden. Ruthless parenting.

 

[Ritzwatch]

I asked in another post, but haven't gotten a response, so I will ask here, just for posterity: (@BowlBrother85, tagging you in on this thread to get it out of the Assassination Attempt thread)

If you contend this ruling is incorrect, please point to where in the opinion the judge's legal reasoning was flawed and tell us why.
Otherwise, you are just complaining to complain. All the while telling the R's to accept the judge's rulings in NY, DC and heck, Alec Baldwin.

Of course, if you are just a partisan, you can wait for the news media clips you can copy and paste and then claim the news reports as your own logic, but by then we will know that you were just making noise without thought.

I have skimmed the 93 page opinion. I don't know enough about this area of the law to have any idea if the reasoning is correct, but for all of you claiming it is flawed, please educate me: How is it flawed? Cite the place in the ruling it is flawed. It is not magic. The opinion is there. If you are going to claim it is flawed, point out where.

Otherwise, just tell us you wish the judge didn't reach this conclusion, because trump, then sit back down and see what else happens like the rest of us. Don't play expert without some level of willingness to back it up, that is a bad look that discredits you.

 

[McDad]

He's used to it. His wife has been telling him that for years.

It's a good thing i never listen to her. My ego might be shattered.

 

[CobbVol]

From Judge Cannon's ruling:

Upon careful study of the foundational challenges raised in the Motion, the Court is convinced that Special Counsel’s Smith’s prosecution of this action breaches two structural cornerstones of our constitutional scheme—the role of Congress in the appointment of constitutional officers, and the role of Congress in authorizing expenditures by law.

The Framers gave Congress a pivotal role in the appointment of principal and inferior officers. That role cannot be usurped by the Executive Branch or diffused elsewhere—whether in this case or in another case, whether in times of heightened national need or not.

In the case of inferior officers, that means that Congress is empowered to decide if it wishes to vest appointment power in a Head of Department, and indeed, Congress has proven itself quite capable of doing so in many other statutory contexts. But it plainly did not do so here, despite the Special Counsel’s strained statutory readings.

 

[volinbham]

No one is above the law (as we've been told). This includes the DOJ.

 

[Orangeburst]

Dang..between Chevron and SC Appointments, Congress might have to actually work..pass a freakin budget while you are at it.

 

[hog88]

Dang..between Chevron and SC Appointments, Congress might have to actually work..pass a freakin budget while you are at it.

Now you're really going off the deep end.

 

[Orangeburst]

Now you're really going off the deep end.

that occured about a decade ago my pig footed friend