Respect for Judge Cannon. After the reaction of other Judges tryi g to remove her from case saying she was not qualified. She just showed entire Judicial community what Constitutional Law looks like. Bow down to brilliance
And her report covered all the bases. So smith or all those that will start the “well what abouts” cannon covered it all with back ups in her report. She knows the questions and the comments that will come from the left and she is 20 steps ahead of them….She did a Fantastic job…👏👏👏👏
cannon had already had two strikes from the 11 circuit both times they overturned her rulings and they will overturn her again only this time a new judge will be appointed to over see the case as she threw it out she screwed up badly when thew it out as she’s allowed jack to appeal
@@darrenuk Trump can still go to SCOTUS on Jack Smiths legality using J6 case. Smith is out, case can be submitted to a legally appointed prosecutor, Smith appealing on grounds he is legal will not fly the 11TH may be corrupt enough to go against law but subject of Smith will go to SCOTUS. World now watching to see if Bidens hate of Thomas(from Jim Crow KKK days) will push 11th to be that ignorant.
AG garland appointed jack smith like he appointed David Weiss and both was lawfully appointed as Garland has the authority to appoint special counsel with the senate for decades its been done this way Jack smith will appeal to the 11 circuit they will definitely overturn cannons ruling and a new judge will be appointed so a massive win for jack as he’s been waiting for weeks for her to dismiss
@@darrenukare you aware that the 11th District USSC head justice is Clarence Thomas? Smith's heavily redacted evidence PROVES that Pedo Joe & Garland CONCOCTED the documents 15 cases of documents to Maralago. Smith ADMITTED to tampering with evidence. Don't bet the farm on it!!!!
CIVIL LIABILITY!!! Jack Smith and Merrick Garland may be personal liable for their unconstitutional acts. Unconstitutional political appointments are not within the outer limits of Garland's official duties so he may have liability. As for Jack Smith, every act he did, he did without any authority (mandating dismissal) and in the face of that knowledge, he refused to dismiss. He has liability for his own acts.
Pity she just ended her involvement with the case. She should have waited until jeapody attached so the case couldn't be refiled. Now it will likely be refiled and a new judge chosen by drawing lots.
Kudos to Justice Thomas for his concurring opinion. Without that aircover, it's not clear that Judge Cannon issues this decision. And kudos to Judge Cannon for paying close attention to Thomas' opinion and taking it to heart. A great day for America.
@@chemholio8700 that's not the point. Thomas signaled that it was a relevant issue. The issue needs to be resolved by SCOTUS and will unless Smith's clock runs out and it becomes moot.
Jack smith was lawfully appointed by the AG and jack will definitely appeal and the 11 circuit will overturn cannon ruling and as she’s dismissed the case a new judge will be appointed so big win for jack
Sounds like there is a book keeping felony in there somewhere. Not that I am a legal expert but the left have been very clear about this kind of thing.
I don't know about Garland because he's protected by immunity because he's a government employee. What Jack Smith is not a government employee and he can be sued in a civil court for damages. At least it sounds right.
Only those who have no moral will see this as anything other than the right decision. Any sane person could easily see this was not the constitution, as Jack was not legal appointed. Thanks to the judge for doing the right things for our broken justice system.
Jack smith will definitely appeal the ruling and the 11 circuit will overturn cannon as jack was lawfully appointed by the AG and as she dismissed the case a new judge will be appointed to over it so a massive win for jack as been waiting for her to screw up hahah
Because Garland thinks he is above the law of the united states 🇺🇸 constitution and he has never followed it to begin with thinking he’s a good Judge and should have been appointed SCOTUS 😂😂Lol Garland thinks he & Biden are above the law 😂
Just cannon dismissing it is a massive win for jack as he will appeal to the 11 circuit where they will overturn her ruling and as jack smith was lawfully appointed and a new judge will be appointed to over see the documents case
@@darrenuk and the Supreme Court will overturn the 11th circuit if they rule in favor of corrupt Jack Smith. This won’t be settled until after Trump is re-elected and then he can fire Jack Smith. No trial before the election is a win for Trump.
And since he was illegally appointed, Smith is not protected by normal prosecutors protections. I would say this also applies to Garland, since he allowed the illegal appointment. I think Trump should file a lawsuit tomorrow to recover lost legal fees, and damages for deformation. He should include fees and charges from the DC case. I imagine a different decision by Chutkin, the Supreme court will have to get involved.
@@sherrykeers3649 should be from the pocket of the people involved, not the people, letisha wants Trump tower, and Trump money using Tax Payers money, Trump to sue Letita her assets, her money, her degree, ( who knows it could be awarded for best in bed by professors etc...) her hand me down personal frame body. She has to own nothing....
Robert, it's Shawnacy with Amos Capital Investments. I am so proud of you, and the work that you do. You are my guy. I love Doc Rich, Ratchet TV, because he is a great researcher, and yourself, because you break these filings down like no other. Trump is still here, you followed him greatly, and revealed FACTS at all times. I appreciate you my friend.
*"Congress does not hide elephants in mouseholes"~Judge Aileen Cannon* *As for § 533 Cannon delcared that Congress “does not hide elephants in mouseholes” ruling that Congress did not intend this provision to...*
Jack is nothing but a private attorney whom was never approved by Congress 😂however Jack thinks he’s a big man 😂Garland needs to be fined for appropriations that were against the law and not approved by Congress 😂Garland needs to pay every bit of that wasted Money back that we the people have paid into ! 😂❤
@@dougmacdonald6009 not necessarily, they were appointed as attorneys, but some were not current ones, like Mueller, he was at the time of appointment outside of the government, a private citizen like Smith. Whereas Weiss in the Hunter case is a serving attorney. It'll be interesting if there is a delineation between the 2 types. As Mueller led to prosecutions, if I remember correctly, which based on this could be appealed.
Except for special counsels that were an active Senate-confirmed US Attorney at the time of appointment by the Attorney General (Weiss, Durham etc), and those appointed by POTUS via Congressional legislation with advice and consent of the Senate (example: Senate Joint Resolution 54 approved February 8, 1924. 43 Stat. 5). These are legal Special Counsel appointments. Special Counsels that were NOT active Senate-confirmed US Attorneys at the time of appointment like Mueller and Jack Smith should have their convictions invalidated because they would need to go through POTUS appointment with advice and consent of the Senate to have authority to prosecute with the power of a US Attorney. AG Garland (for Jack Smith) and Acting AG Rod Rosenstein (for Mueller) cited 28 USC 515 as their source of authority. However, "Special attorneys" under 28 USC 515 are defined under 28 USC 543 (following a series of definitions such as 28 USC 541 for US Attorney and 28 USC 542 which defines Assistant US Attorney, etc) Mueller and Smith are not/were not working under or assisting a Senate-confirmed US Attorney as required by 28 USC 543. The independence of their roles as "Special Counsel" is what makes their appointments unauthorized by statute. The possible murkiness (albeit a very small one) would be for Mueller, since he was a Senate-confirmed US Attorney 2 decades ago. However when a US Attorney leaves their office, their authority expires. They would need POTUS nomination and Senate confirmation to regain authority. For example Bill Barr had to go through the nomination and Senate confirmation process for his 2nd stint as Attorney General. The argument for why an active Senate-confirmed US Attorney is appointed by the Attorney General as a Special Counsel is legal, is because the Special Counsel is wielding power he already has as an active US Attorney. The AG is assigning a case to an active US Attorney and calling that US Attorney "special counsel". When the Attorney General appoints a private citizen as Special Counsel, no statute gives the private citizen authority to prosecute like a US Attorney- they must work under a Senate-confirmed US Attorney per 28 USC 543. Private Citizen Jack Smith was NEVER a Senate-confirmed US Attorney in the past so there's no murkiness.
@@BusterMSC1 Yep. He was a never-trumper until his donors changed their minds. I’m not a fan at all. I’d rather have Vivek or Carson. But it tells me that Trump is being supported by big money donors so at least the elite class has turned in his favor, but what does that mean? Are we going to get a watered down version of Trump? Are we going to get more of the same establishment president? Run on middle/working class values, the economy and immigration but then turn right around and keep the Imperialism alive?
His argument doesn't make sense on it's face! Wouldn't the whole point of having an independent counsel be to appoint an unbiased special counsel anyway? Why would it be used to make a highly partisan political appointment of a person who's a lifetime member of the attorney general's and president's own political party to prosecute their political opponent? Dismissed!
Thank you, Robert. Excellent explanation of the entire Jack Smith appointment kerfluffle! I appreciate your legal expertise very much as well as your ability to break down complex legal issues so non-attorneys can understand. That is a skill that few have. You have it.
Florida Code 843.0855 since Jack was ruled as being illegitimate, didn’t he commit a felony in the state of Florida since he is not a public officer or even an officer of the court? I mean he did impersonate being a federally appointed officer and being a special counsel 🤔
Agreed: The _doncha wanna be a JUDGE?_ misconduct was _with prejudice_ grounds. But think just how different everything could've been. Un. REAL! 🙏Trump 2024 💯🇺🇸 (ever notice there's NO American flag in YT emojis? Just rainbow Jihad 🤮)
@@donakahorse Rules are not laws ! NARA Basic Laws and Authorities 2016 Revision Presidential Records (Title 44, Chapter 22) NARA has no criminal law attachment . and Is the servant of the President and the People of the United States . NARA has no power. President Makes the classification/Declassification, Not the National archives , or the FBI , or the DOJ... classification/Declassification Executive Privilege . Establishes in law that any incumbent Presidential records (whether textual or electronic) held on courtesy storage by the Archivist remain in the exclusive legal custody of the President, and that any request or order for access to such records must be made to the President, not NARA. they all Over step their bounds By law! Understand this includes President Trumps administration remain in the exclusive legal custody of the President Trump this is the Law
We're so abused by the Cahills, Engorons, the _Juan the Cons,_ that any fairness seems extraordinary Nothing she did required bias. Just a Judicial temperament and reverence for the constitution.
How likely is that Congress gets around to defining in law all these bureaucratic terms, such that it doesn't take a constitutional scholar to understand them?
nbc/msnbc brought out Jeh Johnson, and disagreed with ruling. Lack of oversight, endless pool money, to the point of going rogue in the pursuit Trump. The lawfare and the extent Smith, Bragg, Fani plus go to; with need to push back, and that happens.
This ruling shows beyond a doubt that her knowledge of law and the constitution place her into the realm of Supreme Court jurisprudence and would clearly be a legitimate candidate for such a position.
