ADVERTISEMENT

Trump Classified Documents case dismissed

Appointing a private citizen and given them unlimited powers to prosecute a former President is legal in your opinion? Sorry but I don't think the AG has the authority to grant those powers to a private citizen that is not confirmed by the Senate. The President of the US doesn't have that authority, neither does someone working for him.
First, a special counsel doesn't have "unlimited powers." That is false.

Second, I disagree with your private citizen argument. I understand Judge Cannon accepted this argument, but this argument or similar arguments have never been accepted before. Including with a majority of the Supreme Court, who accepted that the appointment of Smith was valid.

Are you claiming the Supreme Court was wrong with their immunity ruling now? A ruling you celebrated before.

Funny how you didn't call into question or criticize the Judge in the case they managed to convict Trump but you do Cannon. That guy was a left wing judicial activist whose daughter was making/raising millions on the case and made several questionable rulings. The judge also allowed testimony that wasn't supposed to be allowed according to the recent immunity ruling.
I'm questioning Judge Cannon based on her clearly incorrect and faulty legal rulings, not based on anything else. I'm questioning whether she is being neutral here based on her legal rulings. Remember, Cannon has already been overturned twice by the Eleventh Circuit. Quick overturns too, as will be the case here.

I don't care who appointed her, how she votes in political elections, etc.

On the other hand, that is all you point to as it relates to the NY judge. Yet, that judge didn't make clearly incorrect and faulty rulings. His rulings were not being repeatedly overturned.

There is a big difference between the two which is clear to see.

btw, the immunity ruling came after the NYC case. The NY judge has now scheduled a hearing to consider the "new law* handled down by the Supreme Court. You can't fault the NY judge for not ruling a certain way before a majority of the Supreme Court decide to create "new law".

As to the SCOTUS ruling it would be Constitutional I don't think the issue is fully resolved. Ed Meese is making a good case against it. I don't think the SCOTUS will have a choice but to hear it even though they do not want to get involved.
But again, a majority of the Supreme Court has already accepted that the appointment of Smith was valid. In order for them to now say it wasn't would be for them to completely undercut their immunity ruling.

Not to mention that only one other justice agreed with Thomas' concurrence Bearcat. That clearly isn't close to a majority.

This is just a bad ruling by Judge Cannon that will be quickly overturned. It is a delay tactic and Cannon should be ashamed of herself for playing along.

All in all I don't know how it will work out but isn't this exactly how the judicial process is designed to work? Oh and I thought you were not supposed to question Judges or the judicial system.
Yes, this is how the process is designed to work. The Eleventh Circuit will once again overturn a lower court judge who keeps getting it wrong. The process will work. I trust the process and I'm not attacking the process.

With that said Bearcat, you need to give today's bad ruling serious consideration. You need to step back and consider this ruling from a nonpartisan basis. I understand that it very briefly helps Trump to delay, but think about the impact this ruling would have moving forward for our country and for both Democrats and Republicans politicians in the future. Don't just jump to defending a bad ruling because it may briefly help one politician you support.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: okcpokefan12
I hear jack Smith may have a little trouble himself
Even if he doesn't, I have no doubt that if Trump is allowed to be President again, Trump will definitely try to find something to go after Smith on. Trump has made it clear that he wants to enact revenge on his opponents and has even pointed towards military tribunals for his opponents. How in the world you can support any of this and claim to love our Constitution and country is beyond me.

Just more reason why Trump must be defeated in November.
 
The judge knows the DOJ is corrupt. There’s going to be so many changes between today and when this thing ever comes up again it’s already yesterday’s news. Besides, all Trump would have to do in his defense is say he’s old and doesn’t have a good memory. I think that excuse worked for some other guy. Can’t remember him name at the moment.
Time to move on.
 
Even if he doesn't, I have no doubt that if Trump is allowed to be President again, Trump will definitely try to find something to go after Smith on. Trump has made it clear that he wants to enact revenge on his opponents and has even pointed towards military tribunals for his opponents. How in the world you can support any of this and claim to love our Constitution and country is beyond me.

Just more reason why Trump must be defeated in November.
In other words, Trump will beat the democrooks at their own game. You people aren’t doing anything if you’re not projecting. Now, I’ll sit back and wait for your AI-generated response.
 
Add in that Trump has not been sentenced, and there is a good chance he will never be, then he is not a convicted felon. Evey time someone calls him that is grounds for liable as there is harm that can be proven.
1. The case in NY, in which Trump was convicted was a STATE court case with zero to do with Jack Smith.

2. Trump was convicted by a jury of 34 felonies. There is NO requirement that he be sentenced to be called a "felon," "convict," "crook," etc.

3. Is the word you're looking for "LIBEL" (meaning defamation) as the word "liable" has a completely different meaning.

In short, there is basically nothing in your post that is factually correct.
 
Even if he doesn't, I have no doubt that if Trump is allowed to be President again, Trump will definitely try to find something to go after Smith on. Trump has made it clear that he wants to enact revenge on his opponents and has even pointed towards military tribunals for his opponents. How in the world you can support any of this and claim to love our Constitution and country is beyond me.

Just more reason why Trump must be defeated in November.
Predicting what Trump might do is no longer working. Trying to scare people to vote a certain way. Calling him a Nazi, threat to Democracy, the gig is over. People know Senile Joe is weak, wrecked the country, and lies more than any politician in Washington currently.
 
In short, there is basically nothing in your post that is factually correct.
Yep.

Of course, that is almost always the case with that poster. And a number of other posters on this board as well.

It's both amazing and sad how they actually believe the junk they spew out.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: OUSOONER67
Wrong.

Show me where President Biden has suspended our legal system and placed Trump in front of a military tribunal?

When you can, you might actually have a point. Until then, you just sound like the neo-fascist cultist you are.
Your side just tried to kill our candidate. Time for you to drop the whole fAsCiSt schtick. You clearly have no clue what the word means.
 
Predicting what Trump might do is no longer working.
Sure it is. And isn't going to stop.

btw, I'm and others are not predicting. We quoting Trump himself and referring to his own actions. Now, unless you think Trump is a liar, I don't know what your problem is.

Calling him a Nazi, threat to Democracy, the gig is over.
I don't think anyone should call Trump a Nazi. I agree. He isn't one.

He is a neo-fascist and that is what he should continue to be called. He empowers Christian nationalists and that will continue to be noted.
He is also definitely a threat to our democracy and this truth will also continue to be said.

No "gig" is up. And if you think so, you are very mistaken.
 
Your side just tried to kill our candidate.
So couldn't point to the military tribunals set up for Trump, right? lol!

No one on "my side" tried to kill Trump. If you are going to continue with this nonsense, at least be honest and admit the shooter was a registered Republican.

We still don't know enough about Thomas Matthew Crooks to determine why he did what he did.

Time for you to drop the whole fAsCiSt schtick. You clearly have no clue what the word means.
Well, I'm not going to, so you are going to have to get over it. Or better yet, just be honest about who you are. It's ok to admit who you are. You won't shock any of us, trust me.

And I've told you numerous times what it means and you know it.
 
This ruling isn't the final word on the case, not even close. This is just a legal delay tactic that Cannon has apparently agreed to play along with.
Funny, all the legal experts I have been watching on the major networks, including MSNBC and CNN (i.e., lib point of view), have said this all but kills this case. But what do they know compared to your legal expertise? 😂
 
Funny, all the legal experts I have been watching on the major networks, including MSNBC and CNN (i.e., lib point of view), have said this all but kills this case.
This is a flat out lie. I have been flipping between MSNBC and CNN this evening keeping up with the convention and the other news, and I've not seen any legal experts claim this kills the case. Not one. Indeed, they are all saying the complete opposite. That the Eleventh Circuit will overturn the ruling.

No need to lie.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: OUSOONER67
Military tribunals would require a constitutional amendment and/or legislation by congress. If both get passed, then hell yeah. Let’s do it, especially considering the fraud they perpetrated on all of us with their Hollywood produced “hearings”.

But if you think the president can somehow give an order for this to happen, then you are fundamentally ignorant of the American legal system. In fact you would be fundamentally ignorant of basic high school civics.

Regardless, your side are the only ones showing fascist tendencies, what with the attempted assassination and the leftist fan base that the shooter has acquired over the last 48 hours, not to mention the nightly “ Kristallnacht” re-enactments against police in 2020 and Jews in 2023-2024.
 
This is a flat out lie. I have been flipping between MSNBC and CNN this evening keeping up with the convention and the other news, and I've not seen any legal experts claim this kills the case. Not one. Indeed, they are all saying the complete opposite. That the Eleventh Circuit will overturn the ruling.

No need to lie.
It pretty much did. I read you said it previously. Getting to another docket pre election ? Slim or none?
 
I read you said it previously. Getting to another docket pre election ? Slim or none?
I've not stated this ruling kills the case. Not once.

If you are asking if this case is going to trial before election day, most likely not, no. Yes, this is a legal delay tactic, happens all the time.

But none of that kills the case.
 
I've not stated this ruling kills the case. Not once.

If you are asking if this case is going to trial before election day, most likely not, no. Yes, this is a legal delay tactic, happens all the time.

But none of that kills the case.
Sorry my meds thought I typed where you referenced that’s why he can not be reelected. Because you want him to be tried and if re elected he dismisses it.
 
Sorry my meds thought I typed where you referenced that’s why he can not be reelected. Because you want him to be tried and if re elected he dismisses it.
Yes, if he is elected in November, I'm sure he will do everything in his power to kill the case since he believes he is above the law.

This is just one reason (among many) why he must be defeated in November.
 
1. The case in NY, in which Trump was convicted was a STATE court case with zero to do with Jack Smith.

2. Trump was convicted by a jury of 34 felonies. There is NO requirement that he be sentenced to be called a "felon," "convict," "crook," etc.

3. Is the word you're looking for "LIBEL" (meaning defamation) as the word "liable" has a completely different meaning.

In short, there is basically nothing in your post that is factually correct.
1. I didn't tie those two cases. Smith/Trump is active in more courts than that.

2. No sentence no convict. The jury did its duty but the trial is incomplete. It must be finalized first. He most likely will not be sentenced as the case should be throw out.

3. Thanks. My Kings English can be sketchy from time to time.

In short. Welcome back. The only thing in your post factually correct is number 3 and I always enjoy people correcting my English. It's good to have good servants to do that, you work cheap to.
 
2. No sentence no convict. The jury did its duty but the trial is incomplete. It must be finalized first. He most likely will not be sentenced as the case should be throw out.
The case should not be thrown out. There is no legitimate legal reason for the case to be thrown out at this point and a jury found Trump guilty.

Trump is a convicted felon. Simple as that.
 
First, a special counsel doesn't have "unlimited powers." That is false.

Second, I disagree with your private citizen argument. I understand Judge Cannon accepted this argument, but this argument or similar arguments have never been accepted before. Including with a majority of the Supreme Court, who accepted that the appointment of Smith was valid.

Are you claiming the Supreme Court was wrong with their immunity ruling now? A ruling you celebrated before.


I'm questioning Judge Cannon based on her clearly incorrect and faulty legal rulings, not based on anything else. I'm questioning whether she is being neutral here based on her legal rulings. Remember, Cannon has already been overturned twice by the Eleventh Circuit. Quick overturns too, as will be the case here.

I don't care who appointed her, how she votes in political elections, etc.

On the other hand, that is all you point to as it relates to the NY judge. Yet, that judge didn't make clearly incorrect and faulty rulings. His rulings were not being repeatedly overturned.

There is a big difference between the two which is clear to see.

btw, the immunity ruling came after the NYC case. The NY judge has now scheduled a hearing to consider the "new law* handled down by the Supreme Court. You can't fault the NY judge for not ruling a certain way before a majority of the Supreme Court decide to create "new law".


But again, a majority of the Supreme Court has already accepted that the appointment of Smith was valid. In order for them to now say it wasn't would be for them to completely undercut their immunity ruling.

Not to mention that only one other justice agreed with Thomas' concurrence Bearcat. That clearly isn't close to a majority.

This is just a bad ruling by Judge Cannon that will be quickly overturned. It is a delay tactic and Cannon should be ashamed of herself for playing along.


Yes, this is how the process is designed to work. The Eleventh Circuit will once again overturn a lower court judge who keeps getting it wrong. The process will work. I trust the process and I'm not attacking the process.

With that said Bearcat, you need to give today's bad ruling serious consideration. You need to step back and consider this ruling from a nonpartisan basis. I understand that it very briefly helps Trump to delay, but think about the impact this ruling would have moving forward for our country and for both Democrats and Republicans politicians in the future. Don't just jump to defending a bad ruling because it may briefly help one politician you support.
Like everything in government corrupt people eventually abuse the system for their own benefit. IMO no special council should ever be convened without Senate approval.
 
1. I didn't tie those two cases. Smith/Trump is active in more courts than that.

2. No sentence no convict. The jury did its duty but the trial is incomplete. It must be finalized first. He most likely will not be sentenced as the case should be throw out.

3. Thanks. My Kings English can be sketchy from time to time.

In short. Welcome back. The only thing in your post factually correct is number 3 and I always enjoy people correcting my English. It's good to have good servants to do that, you work cheap to.
I always enjoy people correcting my English, German and Spanish. Boy do I need it.
 
Yeah, this is a very bad legal ruling by Cannon and in my opinion, it seriously calls into question her ability to be a neutral party in this case.

She clearly took her marching orders from Clarence Thomas here, but it is important to note that only one other Supreme Court justice agrees to signed on to Thomas' concurrence. Not to mention that, of course, concurrences aren't legal precedents.

Another tactic Smith could take here is to just simply join another United States Attorney's Office and re-indict.
Yeah. Until the roles are reversed. Wait, your party is the witch hunt party, so they probably won’t.
 
Yeah. Until the roles are reversed. Wait, your party is the witch hunt party, so they probably won’t.
Holding someone responsible for possibly breaking the law under the rule of law is not a witch hunt.

Do you believe Republicans are engaged in a witch hunt concerning Hunter Biden? When they called for an investigation of President Biden over classified documents? Investigations of Hillary Clinton? Bill Clinton? Need I go on? Is all of this dIfFeReNt??

How you right-wingers can't see your own hypocrisy and foolishness is beyond me.
 
Holding someone responsible for possibly breaking the law under the rule of law is not a witch hunt.

Do you believe Republicans are engaged in a witch hunt concerning Hunter Biden? When they called for an investigation of President Biden over classified documents? Investigations of Hillary Clinton? Bill Clinton? Need I go on? Is all of this dIfFeReNt??

How you right-wingers can't see your own hypocrisy and foolishness is beyond me.
You’re too far gone to engage rationally and intellectually. My bad, I’ll never do it again.
 
You’re too far gone to engage rationally and intellectually. My bad, I’ll never do it again.
lol, lame.

Again, was it "witch hunts" in your opinion when Republicans wanted Hunter Biden, President Biden, Hillary Clinton, President Bill Clinton, etc. investigated and/or charged with crimes? 2016, "lock her up." Witch hunt?

Don't run and hide now just because you can't deal with the truth and your own contractions.
 
Who would be his peers? Only members of his cult who refuse to ever admit Trump does any wrong?

Yeah, that would have been a real fair jury lol.

You clowns are pitiful.

And your delusion is profound.

You have no idea who I am or what I believe, and yet you call me a clown for stating the obvious.

Anyone who takes you seriously is a fool.
 
Holding someone responsible for possibly breaking the law under the rule of law is not a witch hunt.

Do you believe Republicans are engaged in a witch hunt concerning Hunter Biden? When they called for an investigation of President Biden over classified documents? Investigations of Hillary Clinton? Bill Clinton? Need I go on? Is all of this dIfFeReNt??

How you right-wingers can't see your own hypocrisy and foolishness is beyond me.
Just think, you were only inches away from freedom.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OUSOONER67
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT