listening to msnbc, mcquade and weissman also gave these options.
refile the case could result in a different judge.
the southern district of florida calls a grand jury, shows the case, then hope you don’t get cannon.
bring the case to new jersey through that district due to the boxes being moved to new jersey.
bring the case to dc due to the boxes originating there.
mr smith has quite a few more options now. this case wasn’t due to go before election day.
Jack Smith’s tweet:
That’s what I’m wondering; if this holds up, how does it affect the many other cases brought by special counsels?
FYI, that’s not really Jack Smith.
I thought it was…my bad.
Still, whoever it is has reminded us:
If they can turn a bribe into a “gratuity” and a president into an autocrat, they can certainly concoct a reason to make some special counsels more equal than others.
It seems to me that any and all cases against Trump have been DOA as of July 1. In theory, maybe they can go ahead, but in practice, they won’t.
Don’t be silly…His was constitutional.
Wait… A Trump-supporting judge who owes her position to Trump, who has obstructed justice in favour of Trump at every step (without crossing the legal line for obstruction) has dismissed the case? Who could have seen that coming?
What’s that sound???
Richard Nixon spinning in his grave, as is his nemesis, Archibald Cox.
This is nuts.
A slight side track that I’ve been wanting to ask - Does Trump still have those documents? Do we know? Is he storing them in Russia?
He may have managed to hide some, but the documents otherwise have been retrieved.
I do hope that Jack Smith writes his memoirs, even if he has to do so from exile.
Alternatively, it could have been timed to help magnify the upswell of support and sympathy for Trump following the shooting. And when the appeal is inevitably launched, this will further enrage and mobilize those supporters. They will see it as a further vile shot at someone who has already (literally) taken a bullet for them.
This case was never going to a jury in Cannon’s court.
Here’s a link to the opinion. It’s 93 pages. A lot of reliance on J. Thomas concurrence in the recent immunity case which was not about appointments clause. A lot of ignoring decades of clear precedent about appointments clause.
The options are generally:
(1) appeal to the 11th Cir, win and resume (assuming SC doesn’t interfere);
(2) appeal and ask for Judge’s removal;
(3) refile the case with a US Attorney in whole (Espionage + Obstruction) in Florida or in part (just Obstruction) in a different venue.
None of these options are good.
In what sense aren’t they good? This case was never going see trial this year, so it’s only happening if Trump isn’t elected (which is utterly messed up, like thats a huge deal that’s just a given now 
) so whether it happens in 2025 or 2026 isn’t a huge deal.
Are you saying all these options have a small chance of success?
Well, yes, and by all rights it should have been handled before the election, but Cannon had already delayed it enough that it was going to be after, anyway. Better late than never.
I just mean they all taint the case. A fairly straightforward case is a huge mess and now dismissed - it’s objectively not good. (2) appeal and new Judge is the best option, and that’s going to look bad to get her removed. And also, yea, 2 has a very small chance of success of getting her removed.
Briefly, Judge Cannon is saying Jack Smith/Special Prosecutors need to be appointed by the President/confirmed by the Senate. Like federal Judges, US attorneys, Dept Heads, etc. This was not done here and so it’s not constitutional.
I say this because, in Hunter Biden’s case, that special prosecutor is a US Attorney (appointed and confirmed). It’s factually different than this case, but unclear if that would make a legal difference or not (the attorney is still acting in capacity as Special Prosecutor to bring case against Hunter, not as a normal US Attorney). Not that anyone is likely to follow Cannon’s ruling except the alleged criminals being prosecuted by them (which will further complicate the big picture image when I imagine Hunter Biden will likely agree with Cannon and use her logic to try to dismiss his case).
Cannon concludes that special counsel Jack Smith’s appointment violated the Appointments Clause of the Constitution.
I’ll say this about Cannon-she has integrity. When she is bought she stays bought, oath of office be damned.
Any result that ends up with another judge will be better than having it in Cannon’s hands.
Who cares if the case is tainted when the judge is tainted.
But what practical difference would that make? As long as it works and ends up with a new judge, (and Trump doesn’t win the election, which again is utterly fucked, the press should be pointing out whenever the subject comes up that Trump will likely use the position of POTUS to get out of numerous felony charges) what is the downside of that?