So the classified documents case against Trump has been tossed on the grounds that prosecutor Smith was unlawfully appointed. This decision cannot be appealed.

IIRC, Judge Cannon was supposedly in the hip pocket of the DOJ and could not be trusted.

So does that mean she got it wrong, or was she being vilified without evidence and only because she was the unlucky judge who found this case on her docket?

Just want to be sure I have my scorecard filled out right.

$$
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

IIRC, Judge Cannon was supposedly in the hip pocket of the DOJ and could not be trusted.

So does that mean she got it wrong, or was she being vilified without evidence and only because she was the unlucky judge who found this case
on her docket?

Who was vilifying her?

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/201)

IIRC, Judge Cannon was supposedly in the hip pocket of the DOJ and could not be trusted.

So does that mean she got it wrong, or was she being vilified without evidence and only because she was the unlucky judge who found this case on her docket?

Who was vilifying her?

Conservatives were. As I said above, their claim was that she was in the
hip pocket of the DOJ and could not be trusted. IMHO, that was out there
so that if she found against Trump everyone would believe it was "lawfare."

Since she is supposedly a bad judge, but threw out the case, does that mean
she got it wrong since she is a "bad judge in the hip pocket of the
anti-Trump DOJ" or was it just a conspiracy theory?


* SLMR 2.1a * "The Metric System is the tool of the Devil!" - Granpa S
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

So the classified documents case against Trump has been tossed on the grounds that prosecutor Smith was unlawfully appointed.

What a silly reason to attempt to toss a case out. Justice in the USA is filled with special counsels.

This decision cannot be appealed.

Of course it can, and it is being appealed.

Judge Cannon will be overturned and removed from the case.

At this point judge Cannon has done what she wanted to do. Put the trial off until after the election.

Her corruption is breathtaking.

IIRC, Judge Cannon was supposedly in the hip pocket of the DOJ and could not be trusted.

She has been doing Donald Trumps dirty work since day 1.

So does that mean she got it wrong, or was she being vilified without evidence and only because she was the unlucky judge who found this case on her docket?

She must have been paid well.

Just want to be sure I have my scorecard filled out right.

Seems a little messed up.

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-7
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

On 15 Jul 2024, Mike Powell said the following...

So the classified documents case against Trump has been tossed on the grounds that prosecutor Smith was unlawfully appointed. This decision cannot be appealed.

It can be appealed and the process has already started.

United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

To my understanding private citizen Jack Smith has filed his appeal. Moreover Clarence Thomas said in the past couple of weeks that he looked forward to hearing about this case.

:start
Justice Clarence Thomas wrote his own opinion raising questions about a related issue: Was special counsel Jack Smith lawfully appointed?

"If this unprecedented prosecution is to proceed, it must be conducted by someone duly authorized to do so by the American people," Thomas wrote. It was questionable whether Smith's appointment was indeed valid under the Constitution's Appointments Clause, he added.
:stop

It was concluded that Jack's appointment broke 2 constitutional ruled. The appointments clause and the appropriations clause. Jack was not nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate... appointments clause. They were hiding how they were paying for Jack's endeavors so that Congress didn't have the over site they are due.... Appropriations clause.

Clarence said... A private citizen cannot criminally prosecute anyone, let alone a former President, Thomas wrote of the Jan. 6 case, before urging the "lower courts" to answer whether non-Senate-approved Smith was lawfully appointed at all.

This is the legal system working just fine.

Just want to be sure I have my scorecard filled out right.

Grab some popcorn...

IB Joe, Pronouns (FJB/LGB)
AKA Joe Schweier
SysOp of 4A 6F 65 73 42 42 53
-=JoesBBS.com=-

... When all else fails, read the instructions

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/201)

Who was vilifying her?

Conservatives were. As I said above, their claim was that she was in the hip pocket of the DOJ and could not be trusted. IMHO, that was out there so that if she found against Trump everyone would believe it was "lawfare."

I trusted her all along, but if she found him guilty then I'd want to know the details of the laws regarding classified documents before I call it "lawfare."

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/201)

IB Joe wrote to Mike Powell <=-

It was concluded that Jack's appointment broke 2 constitutional ruled.
The appointments clause and the appropriations clause. Jack was not nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate... appointments clause. They were hiding how they were paying for Jack's endeavors so that Congress didn't have the over site they are due.... Appropriations clause.

No surprise. The Elitists don't believe that the Constitution constrains them.

Here in Michigan, we have 3 harpies who blatently violate the Constitution and ignore Congress to unilaterally enact "laws".


... 3 stages of sex: Tri-weekly, try weekly, try weakly.
___ MultiMail/Linux v0.52

--- Mystic BBS/QWK v1.12 A47 2021/12/25 (Windows/32)
* Origin: cold fusion - cfbbs.net - grand rapids, mi (1:120/616)

This decision cannot be appealed.

Of course it can, and it is being appealed.

The report on the morning news here indicated that it could not be. They
could be wrong, of course.


* SLMR 2.1a * He knows changes aren't permanent - but change is!
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

This is the legal system working just fine.

In this case, if the prosecutor was not properly appointed, it sounds like it is working just fine.


* SLMR 2.1a * Wind in my hair - shifting and drifting...
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

On 17 Jul 2024, Ron L. said the following...

No surprise. The Elitists don't believe that the Constitution
constrains them.

Here in Michigan, we have 3 harpies who blatently violate the
Constitution and ignore Congress to unilaterally enact "laws".

Never-mind the unconstitutionality of what they do... I think they just tried to kill President Trump.

IB Joe, Pronouns (FJB/LGB)
AKA Joe Schweier
SysOp of 4A 6F 65 73 42 42 53
-=JoesBBS.com=-

... Press any key to continue or any other key to quit...

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/201)

On 17 Jul 2024, Mike Powell said the following...

In this case, if the prosecutor was not properly appointed, it sounds
like it is working just fine.

Look up Jack Smith's prior cases... He was used during the Enron case and it was over turned 9-0 in the Supreme court.

He's a hack...

We need to go back and review these cases. Not in partisan way... but open and meaningful way. If its proven that the DOJ was used in a a weaponized way they all should suffer some kind of consequence.

The problem with the left/Democrats right now. They have done a piss pore hob... and the only thing they have to talk about is... Orange-Man-Bad... because they can't talk about their record.

IB Joe, Pronouns (FJB/LGB)
AKA Joe Schweier
SysOp of 4A 6F 65 73 42 42 53
-=JoesBBS.com=-

... Great minds think alike; small minds run together

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/201)

This is the legal system working just fine.

The legal system working just fine? It's an emabarassment.

In this case, if the prosecutor was not properly appointed, it sounds like it is working just fine.

This kind of argument has been put forward before and it has always been rejected out of hand.

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-7
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

This is the legal system working just fine.

The legal system working just fine? It's an emabarassment.

In this case, if the prosecutor was not properly appointed, it sounds like it is working just fine.

This kind of argument has been put forward before and it has always been rejected out of hand.

In those other cases, maybe it was a bad argument, but that doesn't mean it always is.

Sounds like you think it is ok for the prosecution to break the law as long as they get the outcome you think is right. That isn't how it works. Unfortunately, that does mean that some guilty people walk free, which is why it is so important for the prosecution to follow the rules.

$$
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

This kind of argument has been put forward before and it has always been
rejected out of hand.

In those other cases, maybe it was a bad argument, but that doesn't mean it always is.

It's always a bad argument.

Sounds like you think it is ok for the prosecution to break the law as long as they get the outcome you think is right.

You just made that up, out of nothing.

Unfortunately, that does mean that some guilty people walk free, which is why it is so important for the prosecution to follow the rules.

This is not about the prosecution, it is about the appointment of a special prosecutor. These appointments happen all the time.

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-7
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

IB Joe wrote to Dr. What <=-

Never-mind the unconstitutionality of what they do... I think they just tried to kill President Trump.

No surprise. They NEED to do something. Their hold on power is breaking and they will be held accountable soon.


... I just took an IQ test. The results were negative.
___ MultiMail/Linux v0.52

--- Mystic BBS/QWK v1.12 A47 2021/12/25 (Windows/32)
* Origin: cold fusion - cfbbs.net - grand rapids, mi (1:120/616)

This is the legal system working just fine.

The legal system working just fine? It's an emabarassment.

Note the double '>>' above. That isn't my quote.


* SLMR 2.1a * "Gasoline clears my sinuses!" - Fred G. Sanford
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

This kind of argument has been put forward before and it has always been >> rejected out of hand.

In those other cases, maybe it was a bad argument, but that doesn't mean it always is.

It's always a bad argument.

So if the prosecution does something illegal, it is always a bad argument
to point that out?

Sounds like you think it is ok for the prosecution to break the law as long as they get the outcome you think is right.

You just made that up, out of nothing.

No, I did not. Above, you just said that "this kind of argument" -- the prosecution did something illegal so the case should be tossed -- is
"always a bad argument."

So if the prosecution breaks the law, what should the proper argument
against their actions be?

What happens when the prosecution breaks the law in Canada?

This is not about the prosecution, it is about the appointment of a special prosecutor. These appointments happen all the time.

Who appoints the special prosecutor? The defense? No. The general population? No. The side prosecuting the case, i.e. "the prosecution," appoints the special prosecutor.

What does a special prosecutor do? They are part of the prosecution. When those appointments are not legal, they should be questioned.


* SLMR 2.1a * "I didn't know chicks in videos wore underpants!"- Beavis
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

The legal system working just fine? It's an emabarassment.

Note the double '>>' above. That isn't my quote.

I know that. Do you understand context?

In any case it is an embarrassment that a federal judge in the USA would pull such a stunt.

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-7
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

Sounds like you think it is ok for the prosecution to break the law as long >> > as they get the outcome you think is right.

You just made that up, out of nothing.

No, I did not.

Yes, you did. It was an emotional response.

Above, you just said that "this kind of argument" -- the
prosecution did something illegal so the case should be tossed -- is
"always a bad argument."

We are not talking about "the prosecution", never were. We are talking about the appointment of a special council.

So if the prosecution breaks the law, what should the proper argument
against their actions be?

We are not talking about that either.

What happens when the prosecution breaks the law in Canada?

Or that.

This is not about the prosecution, it is about the appointment of a special >> prosecutor. These appointments happen all the time.

Who appoints the special prosecutor? The defense? No. The general population? No. The side prosecuting the case, i.e. "the prosecution," appoints the special prosecutor.

The department of justice, before a prosecution.

What does a special prosecutor do? They are part of the prosecution. When those appointments are not legal, they should be questioned.

A quick look up will answer this question quickly and easily.

Here's a quickie for ya.

A special counsel is an attorney appointed to investigate, and possibly prosecute, a case in which the Justice Department perceives itself as having a conflict or where itâ s deemed to be in the public interest to have someone outside the government come in and take responsibility for a matter.

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-7
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

The legal system working just fine? It's an emabarassment.

Note the double '>>' above. That isn't my quote.

I know that. Do you understand context?

In any case it is an embarrassment that a federal judge in the USA would pull such a stunt.

Toss a case because the special council was not properly appointed? That
is not a stunt. If a higher court decides she was wrong, it will come
back. Otherwise, they will have to appoint someone else and try again.


* SLMR 2.1a * "I didn't say that!" - Al, anytime he is questioned
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

Sounds like you think it is ok for the prosecution to break the law as lon
as they get the outcome you think is right.

You just made that up, out of nothing.

No, I did not.

Yes, you did. It was an emotional response.

Yours? I am sure it was.

Above, you just said that "this kind of argument" -- the
prosecution did something illegal so the case should be tossed -- is "always a bad argument."

We are not talking about "the prosecution", never were. We are talking about the appointment of a special council.

What does a special council do? As you yourself pointed out below, they investigate and prosecute cases. In this case, the special council was prosecuting and is, therefore, part of "the prosecution."

So if the prosecution breaks the law, what should the proper argument against their actions be?

We are not talking about that either.

But we are.

What happens when the prosecution breaks the law in Canada?

Or that.

What happens? I am guessing you don't know.

This is not about the prosecution, it is about the appointment of a special
prosecutor. These appointments happen all the time.

Who appoints the special prosecutor? The defense? No. The general population? No. The side prosecuting the case, i.e. "the prosecution," appoints the special prosecutor.

The department of justice, before a prosecution.

The DOJ is prosecuting the case.

What does a special prosecutor do? They are part of the prosecution. When those appointments are not legal, they should be questioned.

A quick look up will answer this question quickly and easily.

Here's a quickie for ya.

A special counsel is an attorney appointed to investigate, and possibly prosecute, a case in which the Justice Department perceives itself as having a
conflict or where it. s deemed to be in the public interest to have someone outside the government come in and take responsibility for a matter.

In this case, he was prosecuting the case.

You can play silly semantics games all you want, as you usually do, to try
to make it sound like you are right and know what you are talking about. I am waiting for the trademark "I never said that!" when the direct quote, from
you, was included in the message.


* SLMR 2.1a * "I didn't say that!" - Al, anytime he is questioned
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

In any case it is an embarrassment that a federal judge in the USA would pull >> such a stunt.

Toss a case because the special council was not properly appointed?

That is not what happened.

That is not a stunt. If a higher court decides she was wrong, it will come back. Otherwise, they will have to appoint someone else and try again.

No higher court is needed. Trump needs to be put on trial and a jury can decide his guilt or innocence.

Trump has no plan to put up a defence, mostly because he has none.

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-7
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

The DOJ is prosecuting the case.

Was there ever any doubt in your mind?

In this case, he was prosecuting the case.

Yes, Jack Smith is a prosecutor after all.

You can play silly semantics games all you want, as you usually do, to try
to make it sound like you are right and know what you are talking about. I am waiting for the trademark "I never said that!" when the direct quote, from you, was included in the message.

I do at times have to tell you "I never said that" when you get to spinning.

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-7
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

On 18 Jul 2024, Ron L. said the following...

No surprise. They NEED to do something. Their hold on power is
breaking and they will be held accountable soon.

Every day that passes more and more evidence surfaces showing the incompetence of the Secret service.

And... BTW... I think they gave Old Joe COVID so as he might die.. not trace if he actually dies.

IB Joe, Pronouns (FJB/LGB)
AKA Joe Schweier
SysOp of 4A 6F 65 73 42 42 53
-=JoesBBS.com=-

... ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/201)

And... BTW... I think they gave Old Joe COVID so as he might die.. not trace if he actually dies.

That is a an interesting possibility.

I don't believe that the lethal strains are currently in circulation. Instead, I believe that they're being kept on standby. This could be an exception where they've decided to take a dose out of the lab to use it for strategic, one-time use.

I also heard that Joe is planning to pass the mic to Kamala, the border-czar.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/201)

Hello Alan,

So the classified documents case against Trump has been tossed on the
grounds
that prosecutor Smith was unlawfully appointed.

What a silly reason to attempt to toss a case out. Justice in the USA is filled with special counsels.

This decision cannot be appealed.

Of course it can, and it is being appealed.

As expected, Special Counsel has appealed.

Judge Cannon will be overturned and removed from the case.

She can, and likely will be, replaced.

At this point judge Cannon has done what she wanted to do.

She did what Donald Trump wanted her to do.
Regardless of her sworn duty. Her loyalty to
a convicted felon is showing.

[..]

She must have been paid well.

Elon Musk is donating $45 million dollars (USD) per month
to Trump's campaign. I am sure Trump is putting that money
to good use.

For Life,
Lee

--
You can tell Monopoly is an old game because there's a luxury tax and rich people can go to jail.

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Would that "legislating from the bench" was cause enough to impeach and remove judges.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2024/05/29 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Archaic Binary (1:123/10)

IB Joe wrote to Dr. What <=-

Every day that passes more and more evidence surfaces showing the incompetence of the Secret service.

No surprise.

And... BTW... I think they gave Old Joe COVID so as he might die.. not trace if he actually dies.

He got "COVID" in order to get him out of the spotlight while they figure out what to do. The more he talks, the more voters go to Trump.


... A nudist has no reason to fear a pickpocket.
___ MultiMail/Linux v0.52

--- Mystic BBS/QWK v1.12 A47 2021/12/25 (Windows/32)
* Origin: cold fusion - cfbbs.net - grand rapids, mi (1:120/616)

Hello Alan,

No higher court is needed. Trump needs to be put on trial and a jury can decide his guilt or innocence.

Trump has immunity for all official acts. The USSC told him so.

Trump has no plan to put up a defence, mostly because he has none.

He doesn't need any. He has his fascist USSC. He can assassinate
you as one of those official acts ...

For Life,
Lee

--
The first thing a cult does is claim that everyone else is lying to you.

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Hello Aaron,

I also heard that Joe is planning to pass the mic to Kamala, the border-czar.

Wishing Joe Biden dead is truly sick and disgusting.

For Life,
Lee

--
Fox News Slogan - Rich people paying rich people
to tell middle class people to blame poor people.

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Hello Halian,

Would that "legislating from the bench" was cause enough to impeach and remove judges.

Judge Hastings was impeached and removed from the bench.
And then he came back to haunt the House of Representatives
for doing it.

For Life,
Lee

--
The first thing a cult does is claim that everyone else is lying to you.

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

On 18 Jul 2024, Aaron Thomas said the following...

That is a an interesting possibility.

I don't believe that the lethal strains are currently in circulation. Instead, I believe that they're being kept on standby. This could be an exception where they've decided to take a dose out of the lab to use it for strategic, one-time use.

I also heard that Joe is planning to pass the mic to Kamala, the border-czar.

COVID is found to be lethal if you are old and have pre-morbidities... If those pre-morbidities is a lying POS Democrat I'm surprised he's still a live.

BTW, the news says, that Joe is not endorsing Kamala. So... this coming DNC convention will be an open convention like 1968.

It'll be a sh!t Show...

Van Jones from CNN said it best... A gun's bullet couldn't take Trump down... whereas a virus has pretty much removed Biden from the champagne trail.

Republicans united and the Democrats are fractured.

IB Joe, Pronouns (FJB/LGB)
AKA Joe Schweier
SysOp of 4A 6F 65 73 42 42 53
-=JoesBBS.com=-

... The person who snores the loudest will fall asleep first

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/201)

On 18 Jul 2024, halian said the following...

Would that "legislating from the bench" was cause enough to impeach and remove judges.

Who's legislating from the bench?? She had a hearing and asked both sides to explain their views on this. She even invited experts to come in and explain the law and history of appointments. The people she invited in were
constitutional experts

Once she heard all the arguments. She said in a 93 page decision that 2 portions of the constitution were broke. The first being the Appointment clause and the 2nd was the appropriations clause. And then she took 93 pages explaining how she came about that decision.

IN the US they have an appeals process. Jack and his crew have already appealed her decision. The 12th circuit will eventually hear this case... Someone won't like what they hear... More than likely Jack... and it'll be off the Supreme Court where it'll be heard.

BTW, Hunter Biden appealed his current case based on the Florida decision... HAHAHAHA.

There is a slight difference in the 2 cases though... Hunter's case they used a prosecutor... someone who already was a prosecutor and expanded his authority to include all 50 states.

we'll see what happens

IB Joe, Pronouns (FJB/LGB)
AKA Joe Schweier
SysOp of 4A 6F 65 73 42 42 53
-=JoesBBS.com=-

... A truly wise man never argues with a Unicorn

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/201)

On 19 Jul 2024, Ron L. said the following...

He got "COVID" in order to get him out of the spotlight while they
figure out what to do. The more he talks, the more voters go to Trump.

Could be... I see it as the more Trump talks the more voters he gets.

IB Joe, Pronouns (FJB/LGB)
AKA Joe Schweier
SysOp of 4A 6F 65 73 42 42 53
-=JoesBBS.com=-

... Youth is glorious, but it isn't a career

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/201)

In any case it is an embarrassment that a federal judge in the USA would pull >> such a stunt.

Toss a case because the special council was not properly appointed?

That is not what happened.

Federal judge dismisses Trump classified documents case over concerns with prosecutor's appointment

SOURCE: The Associated Press https://apnews.com/article/trump-classified-docum ents-smith-c66d5ffb7ba86c1b991f95e89bdeba0c

"A federal judge in Florida dismissed the classified documents case against former President Donald Trump on Monday, siding with defense lawyers who said the special counsel who filed the charges was illegally appointed by the Justice Department.

"Defense lawyers filed multiple challenges to the case, including legally technical ones that asserted that special counsel Jack Smith's appointment by Attorney General Merrick Garland violated the Constitution's Appointments Clause because it did not go through Congress and that Smith's office was improperly funded by the Justice Department.

"Cannon agreed, writing Monday that Garland had exceeded his bounds by appointing a prosecutor without Senate approval and confirmation and had undermined the authority of Congress.

"'The Special Counsel's position effectively usurps that important
legislative authority, transferring it to a Head of Department, and in the process threatening the structural liberty inherent in the separation of powers,' Cannon wrote in a 93-page order that granted the defense team's request to dismiss the case but did not dissect the substance of the allegations against Trump."

Other stories that say the same thing. The first one even says "unlawfully appointed" in the link (unlawful = illegal):

SOURCE: Reuters https://www.reuters.com/legal/judge-tosses-trump-documents-case -ruling-prosecutor-unlawfully-appointed-2024-07-15/

SOURCE: CNN https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/15/politics/classified-documents-case-t rump-dismissed-aileen-cannon/index.html

SOURCE: The Washington Post https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/15/politics/classified- documents-case-trump-dismissed-aileen-cannon/index.html

SOURCE: The New York Times https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/07/15/us/trump-documents-case-dismissed

So, oh great glorious fountain of knowledge, exactly WTF do you think happened?

$$
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

Republicans united and the Democrats are fractured.

But don't make the mistake in believing that they cannot unite behind whoever is nominated, no matter how awful the choice. People should have been able to figure out that Joe was going senile in 2020 but that didn't stop Democrats from supporting him.

Kamala may not be able to complete a sentence without laughing (or lashing out at the person who asked the question), but that won't stop hardened Democrats from supporting her.

All the Democrats need is for a few celebrities to get on board and say the replacement is a good idea, and then all they need is for those who never vote for anyone but a Democrat to go out and cast their ballots.

$$
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

On 19 Jul 2024, Mike Powell said the following...

But don't make the mistake in believing that they cannot unite behind whoever is nominated, no matter how awful the choice. People should
have been able to figure out that Joe was going senile in 2020 but that didn't stop Democrats from supporting him.

I haven't made any mistake. It doesn't matter who they pick they are for the same policies.

Open boarders. The are the party for the Elites, political or otherwise. While Trump is courting the regular Americans. The Democrats are smoothing with the wealthy.

The Republicans under Trump has become the party for the working class whereas the Democrats are for the donors.

Looks like the Democrats are heading for an open convention and if 1968 is anything like what 2024 is going to be I cannot wait.

IB Joe, Pronouns (FJB/LGB)
AKA Joe Schweier
SysOp of 4A 6F 65 73 42 42 53
-=JoesBBS.com=-

... There will be a rain dance Friday night, weather permitting!

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/201)

I also heard that Joe is planning to pass the mic to Kamala, the border-czar.

Wishing Joe Biden dead is truly sick and disgusting.

Your people are wishing him dead because they think he's an obstacle in their quest for another trillion dollars.

I'm wishing Biden well because he's our president. Look at all his achievements. He's made Ukraine stronger than they were before. What could be more important than that?

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/201)

IB Joe, Pronouns (FJB/LGB)

Phrases aren't pronouns. You need to take remedial English.
-Ƕƒlian

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2024/05/29 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Archaic Binary (1:123/10)

In any case it is an embarrassment that a federal judge in the USA wo >> pull >> such a stunt.

Toss a case because the special council was not properly appointed?

That is not what happened.

Federal judge dismisses Trump classified documents case over concerns wi prosecutor's appointment

SOURCE: The Associated Press https://apnews.com/article/trump-classified
ents-smith-c66d5ffb7ba86c1b991f95e89bdeba0c

[...]

That is not what happened.

Pull your head out of the sand and read the order. On the very first page, it reads in part:

The Superseding Indictment is *DISMISSED* because Special Counsel Smith's appointment violates the Appointments Clause of the Untied States Constitution. U.S. Const., Art. II, [Sec.] 2, cl. 2. Special Counsel
Smith's use of a permanent indefinite appropriation also violates the Appropriations Clause, U.S. Const., Art. I, [Sec.] 9, cl. 7, but the Court need not address the proper remedy for that funding violation given the dismissal on Appointments Clause grounds.

(source: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24807236-trump-classified-documents-cas
e-dismissed, linked to in above-mentioned AP article; can't type the section symbol)

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2024/05/29 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Archaic Binary (1:123/10)

In any case it is an embarrassment that a federal judge in the USA would >> pull >> such a stunt.

Toss a case because the special council was not properly appointed?

That is not what happened.

Federal judge dismisses Trump classified documents case over concerns with prosecutor's appointment

SOURCE: The Associated Press https://apnews.com/article/trump-classified-doc
ents-smith-c66d5ffb7ba86c1b991f95e89bdeba0c

[...]

That is not what happened.

Sorry, several reputable news sources say that *is* what happened. You don't seem to have a (non-op-ed) source that says otherwise. I don't take your
word for anything without verifying it, and all reputable sources say you
are incorrect.

Republicans, MAGAs, and conservatives are not the only ones who won't
accept reality when it doesn't suit them. Neither do you.


* SLMR 2.1a * Make BC Great Again! Trump for Premier!!!!
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

On 20 Jul 2024, halian said the following...

IB Joe, Pronouns (FJB/LGB)

Phrases aren't pronouns. You need to take remedial English.

-Ƕƒlian

So now you are the pronoun Queen!!!

IB Joe, Pronouns (FJB/LGB)
AKA Joe Schweier
SysOp of 4A 6F 65 73 42 42 53
-=JoesBBS.com=-

... Confucius say: "Its stuffy inside fortune cookie"

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/201)

That is not what happened.

Pull your head out of the sand and read the order. On the very first page, it reads in part:

Pull your head out of the sand and read what I said.

The Superseding Indictment is *DISMISSED* because Special Counsel Smith's
appointment violates the Appointments Clause of the Untied States
Constitution. U.S. Const., Art. II, [Sec.] 2, cl. 2. Special Counsel
Smith's use of a permanent indefinite appropriation also violates the
Appropriations Clause, U.S. Const., Art. I, [Sec.] 9, cl. 7, but the Court >> need not address the proper remedy for that funding violation given the
dismissal on Appointments Clause grounds.

(source: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24807236-trump-classified-doc
ments-cas
e-dismissed, linked to in above-mentioned AP article; can't type the section symbol)

I said this is not about the prosecution. This is about the appointment of the special prosecutor.

Jack Smith was appointed like so many other special prosecutors before him by the attorney general.

There is nothing wrong with the appointment of Jack Smith as prosecutor.

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-7
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

[...]

That is not what happened.

Sorry, several reputable news sources say that *is* what happened. You don't seem to have a (non-op-ed) source that says otherwise. I don't take your word for anything without verifying it, and all reputable sources say you
are incorrect.

Republicans, MAGAs, and conservatives are not the only ones who won't
accept reality when it doesn't suit them. Neither do you.

Reality is there was/is nothing wrong with Jack Smith's appointment as special prosecutor.

Aileen acted on bad advice given to her by Clarence.

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-7
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

So now you are the pronoun Queen!!!

Imagine being this loud while being this wrong.
-̹ƒlian

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2024/05/29 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Archaic Binary (1:123/10)

Reality is there was/is nothing wrong with Jack Smith's appointment as special prosecutor.

Aileen acted on bad advice given to her by Clarence.

Is that what she said? What was the advice? What did Clarence say to her exactly?

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/201)

Reality is there was/is nothing wrong with Jack Smith's appointment as
special prosecutor.

Aileen acted on bad advice given to her by Clarence.

Is that what she said? What was the advice? What did Clarence say to her exactly?

I hope you are kidding me.

Try this.

https://tinyurl.com/45sfcvcr

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-7
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

Reality is there was/is nothing wrong with Jack Smith's appointment as >> special prosecutor.

Aileen acted on bad advice given to her by Clarence.

Is that what she said? What was the advice? What did Clarence say to her exactly?

I hope you are kidding me.

Try this.

https://tinyurl.com/45sfcvcr

This Newsweek article says that Cannon is the one who made the decision, and that Thomas "agrees" with Cannon's decision. But Judge Cannon is a US District Judge and Clarence Thomas is a US Supreme Court Justice. Newsweek can quote Justice Clarence Thomas all they want, but understand that Clarence Thomas has no say in the matter at this time, because so far the case is not being escalated to the US Supreme Court.

And even if the case did end up there, this black guy that you're oppressing is only 1 vote out of 9.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/201)

This Newsweek article says that Cannon is the one who made the decision, and
that Thomas "agrees" with Cannon's decision. But Judge Cannon is a US District
Judge and Clarence Thomas is a US Supreme Court Justice. Newsweek can quote
Justice Clarence Thomas all they want, but understand that Clarence Thomas has
no say in the matter at this time, because so far the case is not being escalated to the US Supreme Court.

You're not kidding!

Aileen copy/pasted Clarence's instruction into here dismissal.

Have another read, it's in there.

And even if the case did end up there, this black guy that you're oppressing is only 1 vote out of 9.

I am not oppressing anyone and there was no vote.

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-7
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

Hello Halian,

[..]

That is not what happened.

Pull your head out of the sand and read the order. On the very first page, it reads in part:

The Superseding Indictment is *DISMISSED* because Special Counsel Smith's
appointment violates the Appointments Clause of the Untied States
Constitution. U.S. Const., Art. II, [Sec.] 2, cl. 2. Special Counsel
Smith's use of a permanent indefinite appropriation also violates the
Appropriations Clause, U.S. Const., Art. I, [Sec.] 9, cl. 7, but the Court
need not address the proper remedy for that funding violation given the
dismissal on Appointments Clause grounds.

On Wednesday, Special Counsel Jack Smith filed an appeal to the
11th Court of Appeals based in Atlanta. The three-judge panel will
review the case and matters will be taken from there.

For Life,
Lee

--
Biden 2024 - Finisth The Job

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Hello Halian,

[..]

That is not what happened.

Pull your head out of the sand and read the order. On the very first p it reads in part:
[snip]

On Wednesday, Special Counsel Jack Smith filed an appeal to the
11th Court of Appeals based in Atlanta. The three-judge panel will
review the case and matters will be taken from there.

And hopefully they set Judge Cannon right.
-̹alian

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2024/05/29 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Archaic Binary (1:123/10)

That is not what happened.

Sorry, several reputable news sources say that *is* what happened. You don'
seem to have a (non-op-ed) source that says otherwise. I don't take your word for anything without verifying it, and all reputable sources say you are incorrect.

Republicans, MAGAs, and conservatives are not the only ones who won't accept reality when it doesn't suit them. Neither do you.

Reality is there was/is nothing wrong with Jack Smith's appointment as special
prosecutor.

That is an opinion, and it is one that higher courts could agree with. But that doesn't mean that what happened *didn't happen*.

Aileen acted on bad advice given to her by Clarence.

That is hearsay.


* SLMR 2.1a * A lawyer is the larval form of a politician
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

That is not what happened.

Pull your head out of the sand and read the order. On the very first page, i
reads in part:

Pull your head out of the sand and read what I said.

I said this is not about the prosecution. This is about the appointment of the
special prosecutor.

The special prosecutor (noun) = the prosecution (also a noun).

Basically you don't like what happened, which caused you to have an
emotional reaction and claim that something didn't happen. Then, when you
got called out on it, you started trying to play semantics while still
claiming that something that happened "didn't happen."

"That is not what happened" is what you said, that is still quoted at the
top of this message. You said that in answer to me pointing out (again)
that the judge tossed the case on the grounds that the special prosecutor
was not properly appointed.

That is what we all read and are questioning because we know "that is not
what happened" is incorrect.


* SLMR 2.1a * "Did you open the Microwave door before the 'ding'"?
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

Reality is there was/is nothing wrong with Jack Smith's appointment as
special prosecutor.

That is an opinion,

No, that's a fact.

and it is one that higher courts could agree with. But
that doesn't mean that what happened *didn't happen*.

It happened alright. It's your narrative that is off.

Aileen acted on bad advice given to her by Clarence.

That is hearsay.

Not at all. Compare Clarence's writings with Aileen's writings.

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-7
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

The special prosecutor (noun) = the prosecution (also a noun).

Wrong. A prosecution and a special prosecutor are in fact two different things.

Basically you don't like what happened, which caused you to have an
emotional reaction and claim that something didn't happen.

It doesn't matter what I like or don't like. My response to you was simply factual.

Then, when you got called out on it,

I have not been called out on anything.

[...]

I'm going to try this one more time for you.

This is not about any prosecution, by Jack Smith or anyone else.

This is about the apointment of a special prosecutor. Aileen claims the appointment of Jack Smith was unconstitutional.

Get it?

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-7
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

Aileen copy/pasted Clarence's instruction into here dismissal.

The Supreme Court is a higher court than the US District Court. If the US District Court does what the Supreme Court tells them to do, then the case will have a different experience when it escalates.

Our people have every right to network with each other the same way the Democrats do.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/201)

Aileen acted on bad advice given to her by Clarence.

That is hearsay.

Not at all. Compare Clarence's writings with Aileen's writings.

But neither Aileen Cannon nor Clarence Thomas are writers..

Check Mike's writings and mine. Me and him are writers.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/201)

Aileen copy/pasted Clarence's instruction into here dismissal.

The Supreme Court is a higher court than the US District Court. If the US District Court does what the Supreme Court tells them to do, then the case will have a different experience when it escalates.

The supreme court didn't say anything about this. Clarence did.

Our people have every right to network with each other the same way the Democrats do.

Is that what they are calling it today?

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-7
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

Not at all. Compare Clarence's writings with Aileen's writings.

But neither Aileen Cannon nor Clarence Thomas are writers..

Don't be silly.

Check Mike's writings and mine. Me and him are writers.

Don't be silly.

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-7
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

The special prosecutor (noun) = the prosecution (also a noun).

Wrong. A prosecution and a special prosecutor are in fact two different things

So you believe the special prosecutor is not a member of the prosecution?

There is your problem right there.


* SLMR 2.1a * Politically incorrect...and proud of it!!!
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

On 22 Jul 2024, Mike Powell said the following...

So you believe the special prosecutor is not a member of the prosecution?

There is your problem right there.

That is Jack's problem... Prosecutors wield a tremendous amount of authority... There has to be a process before one takes office.

Our current AG is the Barney Fife of AGs and a partisan hack to boot.

IB Joe, Pronouns (FJB/LGB)
AKA Joe Schweier
SysOp of 4A 6F 65 73 42 42 53
-=JoesBBS.com=-

... Light year: 1/3 less calories than your regular year

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/201)

Wrong. A prosecution and a special prosecutor are in fact two different

things

So you believe the special prosecutor is not a member of the prosecution?

I never said that, you did.

There is your problem right there.

This is my last attempt..

The issue is not about any prosecution or who the prosecutor is.

The issue (for Aileen) is that a special prosecution is unconstitutional and that Jack Smith was wrongly appointed.

It's a silly argument to make.

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-7
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

So you believe the special prosecutor is not a member of the prosecution?

I never said that, you did.

No, you did.

There is your problem right there.

This is my last attempt..

The issue is not about any prosecution or who the prosecutor is.

The issue (for Aileen) is that a special prosecution is unconstitutional and that Jack Smith was wrongly appointed.

NO, it isn't. The issue, per the ruling, is that the special prosecution
was improperly appointed and said appointment is therefore unconsitutional.

"A special prosecution is unconstitutional" -- your words above -- was NOT
part of the ruling. The way the special prosecution was appointed -- unconstitutionally -- *IS THE ISSUE*.

So, YES, there is an issue about the prosecution (ruled to be using a
special prosecutor that was improperly appointed) and who the prosecutor is (ruled to be someone who was not constitutionally appointed).


* SLMR 2.1a * The girl of your dreams is unavailable except in print
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

I never said that, you did.

No, you did.

No, I never said that. I never wrote that. It is your narrative.

The issue (for Aileen) is that a special prosecution is unconstitutional and >> that Jack Smith was wrongly appointed.

NO, it isn't. The issue, per the ruling, is that the special prosecution
was improperly appointed and said appointment is therefore unconsitutional.

That's what I said.

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-7
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

The issue (for Aileen) is that a special prosecution is unconstitutional an
that Jack Smith was wrongly appointed.

NO, it isn't. The issue, per the ruling, is that the special prosecution was improperly appointed and said appointment is therefore unconsitutional.

That's what I said.

No that is what I said, and you kept telling me I was wrong. I was also
not the only one to call you out on it.


* SLMR 2.1a * "I didn't say that!" - Al, anytime he is questioned
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

Hello Alan,

Not at all. Compare Clarence's writings with Aileen's writings.

But neither Aileen Cannon nor Clarence Thomas are writers..

Don't be silly.

Check Mike's writings and mine. Me and him are writers.

Don't be silly.

Aileen and Clarence get paid for their rants.
Their rants are known as opinions.

Mike and Aaron do not get paid anything at all.
Whether verbal or written.
Do keep up.

For Life,
Lee

--
The first thing a cult does is claim that everyone else is lying to you.

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Hello Aaron,

Aileen acted on bad advice given to her by Clarence.

That is hearsay.

Not at all. Compare Clarence's writings with Aileen's writings.

But neither Aileen Cannon nor Clarence Thomas are writers..

Check Mike's writings and mine. Me and him are writers.

Opinions are opinions, whether stated verbally or in writing.

If I say the moon is made of cheese, it is an opinion.
If I write the moon is made of cheese, it is an opinion.
And who knows? I very well might be right.

But getting there to prove me wrong would be one hell
of a challenge. Good luck getting there.

For Life,
Lee

--
GOP thinks banning guns won't elminate guns.
GOP thinks banning abortion will elininate abortions.

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Hello Alan,

[..]

The issue is not about any prosecution or who the prosecutor is.

No matter how others might want to spin it, that is the issue.

The issue (for Aileen) is that a special prosecution is unconstitutional and
that Jack Smith was wrongly appointed.

That is her opinion, no matter how flawed.

It's a silly argument to make.

As noted by Special Counsel (Jack Smith) in his appeal.
The judge will also likely get tossed from the case.

For Life,
Lee

--
Biden 2024 - Finisth The Job

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)