@sonhouse saidDistracting you? Your mind distracts itself, it needs no help.
@AverageJoe1
Yet another piss poor attempt at distraction,
Take my simple question.....Did the Senate approve Jack Smith? WHY will a liberal not answer that question? Your dodging questions distacts me, by golly, and I am still going to whip your butt.
Note I asked Marauder if the Senate approved Jack Smith. Will you answer it.....it does not even require that you have been schooled in Marx.
@no1marauder saidso you think smiths app was constitutional?
It will be reversed by the Federal Appeals Court.
But this will significantly delay the case which has been Trump's and Cannon's game all along.
@Mott-The-Hoople saidI detect tears from Sonhhouse....he is like all those pitiful ladies when they discovered that Trump beat Hillary!!!!
LMFAO OH MY GOD...desperation is setting in
@AverageJoe1
Respouting the Trump line and his buddies whose lips are permanently sewn to Trump's ass.
Why don't you wait till courts deal with it which makes no difference to you, MUCH more interested in weaponizing ANYTHING you think will either defend Trump or put down Biden.
@Mott-The-Hoople saidBeyond question; the issue has been litigated numerous times in other cases (including Hunter Biden's BTW) all with the same result. Cannon is likely to get yet another unanimous slap down from the 11th Circuit.
so you think smiths app was constitutional?
@Mott-The-Hoople
Desperation? More like PISSED that an inexperienced judge picked by Trump would totally let him off on Treason. And you would never in a million years admit what he did WAS treason.
If that had been Biden, Obama, Clinton, EITHERE of them HANG THE BASTARDS.
@no1marauder saidlist a case that was litigated
Beyond question; the issue has been litigated numerous times in other cases (including Hunter Biden's BTW) all with the same result. Cannon is likely to get yet another unanimous slap down from the 11th Circuit.
@sonhouse saidI agree with you
@Mott-The-Hoople
Desperation? More like PISSED that an inexperienced judge picked by Trump would totally let him off on Treason. And you would never in a million years admit what he did WAS treason.
If that had been Biden, Obama, Clinton, EITHERE of them HANG THE BASTARDS.
@sonhouse saidOh, my gosh, Sonhouse is backed into a corner. Here he is saying "Why don't we wait until the courts deal with it?" When the Trump conviction occurred, he did not given one inkling of thought to saying""""Let us wait until the courts deal with it"".
@AverageJoe1
Respouting the Trump line and his buddies whose lips are permanently sewn to Trump's ass.
Why don't you wait till courts deal with it which makes no difference to you, MUCH more interested in weaponizing ANYTHING you think will either defend Trump or put down Biden.
Sonhouse tells me to make no judgement on the rulilng of Judge Cannon until he courts deal with her! He did NOT say that about the Trump conviction. Golly, I hope that my pointing this out is not considered a distraction, shining a light on Sonhouse stuck in a corner!!!!
@Mott-The-Hoople saidhttps://www.advocate.com/crime/cannon-dismisses-trump-documents-case
list a case that was litigated
This article cites decisions by Federal judges in Hunter Biden's case and multiple decisions by various Federal courts (including the DC Court of Appeals) in the Mueller prosecutions reaching opposite conclusions from Cannon on the same issue.
There are many more; the relevant statute has been used for 30 years by every Presidential administration (including Trump's for the Durham appointment).
@no1marauder saidLMFAO!!! your link is to a queer web site LOL the advocate
https://www.advocate.com/crime/cannon-dismisses-trump-documents-case
This article cites decisions by Federal judges in Hunter Biden's case and multiple decisions by various Federal courts (including the DC Court of Appeals) in the Mueller prosecutions reaching opposite conclusions from Cannon on the same issue.
There are many more; the relevant statute has been used for 30 years by every Presidential administration (including Trump's for the Durham appointment).
Anywho...I did not see a link to any case that has been litigated...did you lie when you made that claim?
@Mott-The-Hoople saidI'll waste no more time with such a childish idiot.
LMFAO!!! your link is to a queer web site LOL the advocate
Anywho...I did not see a link to any case that has been litigated...did you lie when you made that claim?
I'll give the actual case cites when I get home; not that someone as stupid as you could actually find, much less understand them, even with such information.
Moron.
@AverageJoe1
Actually we SAID and KNEW there would be appeals, that is part of law and order.
But of course all you can do is weaponize even THAT. Now I am desperate. It is YOU who WILL be desperate in a couple of years after you find out your hero is not the man you thought he would be and it will be a HARD thing for you to finally understand, WAY too late.
Another thing you will NEVER understand, this fascist BS has happened before time after time and the US is no better insulated from that twisted POS than any other country and you are in la la land if you thing it could never happen here, Trump says I will be a dictator on day one. Ha Ha you go, just joking, he is SUCH a kidder and every OTHER lie just rolls off your back like water over a ducks ass.
You can't even admit he HAS lied. Much less understand just how evil your orange Jesus really is.
@Mott-The-Hoople saidHere's the decision in the Mueller case by the United States Court of Appeals
LMFAO!!! your link is to a queer web site LOL the advocate
Anywho...I did not see a link to any case that has been litigated...did you lie when you made that claim?
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT: https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/5750999/2-26-19-DC-Circuit-Andrew-Miller-Opinion.pdf
At p. 7: "As interpreted by the Supreme Court, the Appointments
Clause distinguishes between “principal officers,” who must be
nominated by the President with advice and consent of the
Senate, and “inferior officers,” who may be appointed by the
President alone, or by heads of departments, or by the judiciary,
as Congress allows. Morrison v. Olson, 487 U.S. 654, 670–71
(1988) (quoting Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 132 (1976)).
Thus, if Special Counsel Mueller is a principal officer, his
appointment was in violation of the Appointments Clause
because he was not appointed by the President with advice and
consent of the Senate. Binding precedent instructs that Special
Counsel Mueller is an inferior officer under the Appointments
Clause."