Is Jack Smith Operating Ultra Vires?

[Rightguide]

Hearing on Whether Jack Smith Was “Unlawfully Appointed” Scheduled by Judge Cannon​

By
Jordan Sekulow
June 6

Judge Aileen Cannon, the judge overseeing his classified documents trial, has once again outraged the far Left. She will hold a hearing on whether Special Counsel Jack Smith should be declared “unlawfully appointed” as a prosecutor.

Judge Cannon will hear from multiple lawyers on both sides and independent legal experts during the forthcoming “sprawling hearing,” as Yahoo News describes it. You can expect this to be a lengthy hearing.

Trump’s argument concerns the process for appointing Special Counsels. If a U.S. attorney were to be handling Trump’s Mar-a-Lago case in Florida, nobody would be questioning their authority.

The issue is Smith was appointed as Special Counsel under federal regulations establishing the procedure for doing so – bureaucratic regulation, not congressionally passed law. And that’s the rub here. The statutory authority to appoint someone like Smith is murky at best.

More here: https://aclj.org/government-corrupt...nlawfully-appointed-scheduled-by-judge-cannon
https://www.supremecourt.gov/Docket...0231220140217967_US v. Trump amicus final.pdf
https://docs.house.gov/meetings/JU/JU00/20240604/117383/HHRG-118-JU00-20240604-SD013.pdf

In the coming weeks, we shall see if Jack Smith is acting beyond legal authority.

 

[ll74]

He was not.


You've already provided commentary on the subject in other threads.

 

[Rightguide]

He was not.


You've already provided commentary on the subject in other threads.

Your opinion.

A real court hearing will be held in the coming weeks that will examine the legalities involved.

Take note the SCOTUS is already wrestling with a case involving administrative regulatory overreach. Justice Thomas did inquire about the challenge against Smith's authority going forward during the immunity hearing.

 

[ll74]

Your opinion.

A real court hearing will be held in the coming weeks that will examine the legalities involved.

And they will agree with me.

But Im sure you have different predictions.

 

[Rightguide]

And they will agree with me.

But Im sure you have different predictions.

There will be attorneys from both sides testifying in front of Judge Cannon. I think she will follow the constitutional arguments, but no matter which way it goes the losing party will appeal it all the way to the SCOTUS, Which means no trial for Trump before the election, and if he's elected maybe never.

 

[ll74]

There will be attorneys from both sides testifying in front of Judge Cannon. I think she will follow the constitutional arguments, but no matter which way it goes the losing party will appeal it all the way to the SCOTUS, Which means no trial for Trump before the election, and if he's elected maybe never.

I don't give a shit about the timing of the trials.

 

[Rightguide]

I don't give a shit about the timing of the trials.

You don't give a shit about anything except being argumentative without reason.

 

[ll74]

You don't give a shit about anything except being argumentative without reason.

Lol.

Your arguments are shit and always have been....all about your
B
D
S

Sorry that I have a brain that isn't led by delusions about a singular person.

45 will get prosecution for his bullshit about the election eventually.

 

[Rightguide]

Lol.

Your arguments are shit and always have been....all about your
B
D
S

Sorry that I have a brain that isn't led by delusions about a singular person.

45 will get prosecution for his bullshit about the election eventually.

List the delusions.

 

[ll74]

List the delusions.

Just go to your profile and list out the threads you've created.

 

[HisArpy]

The left is going apocalyptic over this hearing but I believe Cannon is just dotting her I's and crossing her T's.

If Smith has no authority then the court has no jurisdiction. Knowing the answer to that question is a basic requirement for any pleading or court matter.

It's why the VERY FIRST statement in a properly drawn complaint will assert that the court where the pleading is filed has both proper jurisdiction and venue. That statement must then be backed up with facts supporting it.

The defense gets to challenge every word in the pleadings. Here they're saying that the prosecution isn't empowered to bring the action before the court. As a matter of law, the court must determine if that is the case or not. Failure to do so is an error of law.

 

[Chobham]

Hearing on Whether Jack Smith Was “Unlawfully Appointed” Scheduled by Judge Cannon​

By
Jordan Sekulow
June 6

Judge Aileen Cannon, the judge overseeing his classified documents trial, has once again outraged the far Left. She will hold a hearing on whether Special Counsel Jack Smith should be declared “unlawfully appointed” as a prosecutor.

Judge Cannon will hear from multiple lawyers on both sides and independent legal experts during the forthcoming “sprawling hearing,” as Yahoo News describes it. You can expect this to be a lengthy hearing.

Trump’s argument concerns the process for appointing Special Counsels. If a U.S. attorney were to be handling Trump’s Mar-a-Lago case in Florida, nobody would be questioning their authority.

The issue is Smith was appointed as Special Counsel under federal regulations establishing the procedure for doing so – bureaucratic regulation, not congressionally passed law. And that’s the rub here. The statutory authority to appoint someone like Smith is murky at best.

More here: https://aclj.org/government-corrupt...nlawfully-appointed-scheduled-by-judge-cannon
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-624/293864/20231220140217967_US v. Trump amicus final.pdf
https://docs.house.gov/meetings/JU/JU00/20240604/117383/HHRG-118-JU00-20240604-SD013.pdf

In the coming weeks, we shall see if Jack Smith is acting beyond legal authority.

It's about time that this is resolved. Both the left and the right have argued this point on various occasions depending on who was being 'investigated.' Eventually this needs to go before the SCOTUS for a final resolution. For this to happen Cannon has to declare Smith's appointment unlawful. That will immediately kick it up to the 11th circuit with the ultimate destination the SCOTUS.

This is an unresolved point of law that needs to finally be dealt with.

 

[Rightguide]

It's about time that this is resolved. Both the left and the right have argued this point on various occasions depending on who was being 'investigated.' Eventually this needs to go before the SCOTUS for a final resolution. For this to happen Cannon has to declare Smith's appointment unlawful. That will immediately kick it up to the 11th circuit with the ultimate destination the SCOTUS.

This is an unresolved point of law that needs to finally be dealt with.

I think if she finds For Smith I think Trump will take it all the way up.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

There will be attorneys from both sides testifying in front of Judge Cannon. I think she will follow the constitutional arguments, but no matter which way it goes the losing party will appeal it all the way to the SCOTUS, Which means no trial for Trump before the election, and if he's elected maybe never.

Reading between the lines, "To me all I care about is Trump winning", "it matters not if he's a criminal".

 

[Rightguide]

Just go to your profile and list out the threads you've created.

Perhaps if you were to avoid my threads your ovaries wouldn't be in such an uproar all of the time. That way you'd have more time to giggle and snicker with MajorRuns and Dcovid77.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Perhaps if you were to avoid my threads your ovaries wouldn't be in such an uproar all of the time. That way you'd have more time to giggle and snicker with MajorRuns and Dcovid77.

avoid? How? You're here everyday (as long as Putin's cheque didn't bounce) spamming the forum with threads on the same topics over and over and over.

 

[ll74]

Perhaps if you were to avoid my threads your ovaries wouldn't be in such an uproar all of the time. That way you'd have more time to giggle and snicker with MajorRuns and Dcovid77.

It doesn't matter whether I see them or not. The delusions are there.

 

[Rightguide]

It doesn't matter whether I see them or not. The delusions are there.

Only in your mind. You are loathe to confront realities or perceptions that challenge your cloistered worldview.

 

[ll74]

Only in your mind. You are loathe to confront realities or perceptions that challenge your cloistered worldview.

Biden lives in your head 24/7.

You wake up thinking about him. You go to sleep thinking about him.

Your threads demonstrate that clearly.

 

[stxjimmy]

The left is going apocalyptic over this hearing but I believe Cannon is just dotting her I's and crossing her T's.

If Smith has no authority then the court has no jurisdiction. Knowing the answer to that question is a basic requirement for any pleading or court matter.

It's why the VERY FIRST statement in a properly drawn complaint will assert that the court where the pleading is filed has both proper jurisdiction and venue. That statement must then be backed up with facts supporting it.

The defense gets to challenge every word in the pleadings. Here they're saying that the prosecution isn't empowered to bring the action before the court. As a matter of law, the court must determine if that is the case or not. Failure to do so is an error of law.

For a so called lawyer you do have some strange legal opinions.

 

[dkovic77]

Your opinion.

A real court hearing will be held in the coming weeks that will examine the legalities involved.

Take note the SCOTUS is already wrestling with a case involving administrative regulatory overreach. Justice Thomas did inquire about the challenge against Smith's authority going forward during the immunity hearing.

Ohhhh RV man… and overreach. Please do continue!

 

[SmokingFap]

Hearing on Whether Jack Smith Was “Unlawfully Appointed” Scheduled by Judge Cannon​

By
Jordan Sekulow
June 6

Judge Aileen Cannon, the judge overseeing his classified documents trial, has once again outraged the far Left. She will hold a hearing on whether Special Counsel Jack Smith should be declared “unlawfully appointed” as a prosecutor.

Judge Cannon will hear from multiple lawyers on both sides and independent legal experts during the forthcoming “sprawling hearing,” as Yahoo News describes it. You can expect this to be a lengthy hearing.

Trump’s argument concerns the process for appointing Special Counsels. If a U.S. attorney were to be handling Trump’s Mar-a-Lago case in Florida, nobody would be questioning their authority.

The issue is Smith was appointed as Special Counsel under federal regulations establishing the procedure for doing so – bureaucratic regulation, not congressionally passed law. And that’s the rub here. The statutory authority to appoint someone like Smith is murky at best.

More here: https://aclj.org/government-corrupt...nlawfully-appointed-scheduled-by-judge-cannon
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-624/293864/20231220140217967_US v. Trump amicus final.pdf
https://docs.house.gov/meetings/JU/JU00/20240604/117383/HHRG-118-JU00-20240604-SD013.pdf

In the coming weeks, we shall see if Jack Smith is acting beyond legal authority.

Ms. Cannon best watch herself, or she may find herself removed from the bench or reassigned for her blatant and disgusting defense of Trump. She was already bitch-slapped by her supervising court for interfering in the initial search process.

 

[Rightguide]

Ms. Cannon best watch herself, or she may find herself removed from the bench or reassigned for her blatant and disgusting defense of Trump. She was already bitch-slapped by her supervising court for interfering in the initial search process.

No chance in hell. The DOJ has zero authority to do so. Tell us where she has made a legal mistake in her handling of this case.

 

[Rightguide]

For a so called lawyer you do have some strange legal opinions.

They're not strange, you just didn't hear them on MSNBC.

 

[SmokingFap]

No chance in hell. The DOJ has zero authority to do so. Tell us where she has made a legal mistake in her handling of this case.

Not worth my time. You've been hit in the face with a baseball bat a dozen times with the actual laws of this case, and you still claim that there was no crime committed, no law on the books, that everyone except Trump is corrupt, that black is white, and down is up. I will no longer debate facts with you, because you are intentionally living in another reality and trying to annoy the rest of us to death with it.

Dismissed.