Could someone explain: was this special council appointed in a different manner than/without the oversight that others have historically had? Or is this ruling saying that all past special councils have been unconstitutional? And if so, does that imply past findings and prosecutions were unconstitutional?
FBI Search and Seizure at Trump's Mar-A-Lago Residence, August 8, 2022, Case Dismissed July 15, 2024
I don’t expect it to work. So then, it’s not just me thinking she should be removed. It’s formally asking her to be, and it being denied by an appellate court because she’s not doing anything worth being removed. It formalizes, and normalizes, what she is doing - I imagine it would embolden her (not sure how it can get worse, but it can).
That’s the downside I see. But I get your point.
No.
Yes.
Yes.
It’s a ridiculous ruling.
- No
- Yes (I don’t agree. But yeah. Everyone has been doing it wrong all along, until this genius bravely pointed out the error (which coincidentally helps one defendant.))
Though how can that embolden her more than just shrugging and saying “that no good rapscallion has got away with it again”? And TBH who cares if she is? Judge Cannon will disappear into the obscurity she deserves, so it doesn’t matter how emboldened or otherwise she is (until Trump appoints her to the supreme court, but all of this is irrelevant if Trump gets reelected)
It doesn’t seem like a ridiculous thing to appeal to me. IANAL but everything I’ve read says this is has crossed the line into something appealable
Just heard it on the radio, I’ll have to read when I get home. I seem to recall a Supreme Court case upholding special counsel in the 90s. And where was this argument for Mueller?
~Max
When you’re saying appeal, you mean asking the appellate court to remove Cannon from this case, right? Definitely Jack will appeal her ruling and win. That’s easy (but then you’re just back in front of her and that’s no good - there’s still 9 other motions I know of waiting to be ruled on).
Assuming that’s what you mean, then I’ll leave it to people smarter than me. If they say this has crossed a line, then good. I definitely think you should try at this point, I’m just saying it’s not all good like I’m hearing elsewhere (it’s more least bad option). I’ve only read one expert I trust who said removing a Judge from a case is a very hard thing. Certainly since it only involves her legal analysis (ie, no evidence of bribes or whatnot). But I’ll leave it to Jack’s ability to paint a very vivid, evidence based damning picture and hope it works.
I don’t suppose there is any chance of this happening in the near future? Because this seems to me like something the 11th Circuit could rule on today if they were so inclined. Of course, if that were to be the case they’d get overruled by the Supreme Court tomorrow but still.
If near future means months, then yes. That’s doable I’d think. It depends what Jack does* and if the 11th will deviate from the normal schedule/rules.
Jack might ask Cannon to reconsider before appealing. That would obviously take some time (months) since Cannon would control the clock/set the hearing/drag it out, etc. She won’t ultimately reverse her decision, but Jack might want to do this to use in a separate removal hearing…gave her every. last. chance. type of thing.
Nitpick; it’s special counsel not council.
I’m listening to Deadline Whitehouse and Andrew Weissman just said one other option is that Jack Smith can be made an employee instead of named special counsel since that’s what she ruled on.
He said that could happen quickly.
If you get at least three of them together, they can be the Counsel Council.
My Latin teacher would be ashamed!
I believe that judge cannon is hanging her robe on the fact that Mr smith was never appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate or a previous U.S. attorney.
Mr smith was an acting U.S. attorney and then worked at The Hague.
A judge invalidated the special counsel probing Trump. How could it impact other cases? - ABC News.
Could it? I thought SCOTUS was done for the summer.
SCOTUS sets their own schedule. If they really feel like it, they can re-convene whenever they want.
But I don’t think they would. Much easier for them to just pretend this doesn’t exist until their next scheduled meeting.
Which is the first Monday in October. Just enough time for them to get a last minute play in for TFG.
Like the one that investigated Bill Clinton.
Or the one who investigated (is still investigating?) Hunter Biden.
Oh fuck.
Jesus fucking Christ God damn it.
Fuck fuck fuckitty fuck.