Apeals court: Release Jack Smith’s report

Thats what I said. You just seem to have missed the significance.

The "11th Circuit" is a court of appeals. Jack appealed the lower court's ruling (that he was illegally appointed, and therefore never had standing to prosecute the case), then dismissed his own appeal BEFORE the 11th cicuit court of appeals could rule on it, and thereby divested the 11th DCA of jurisdiction to rule on the issue.

Therefore the lower court's dispositive judgment stands.

Any case on the same facts would have to start from scratch, by someone with legal standing to prosecute such a case.

Dig bra?

 

any mention of the 2 co-Defendents would have to be omitted until their appeals are ruled upon is my understanding

 

LOL. NOPE, try again.

 

Not necessarily. The issue with Smith is that he was not Senate confirmed. If Garland replaced him with someone that has been confirmed by the Senate in their current position, then they would be the new Special Counsel and could turn in Smith's report.

 

Sure, but whatever follows, would be a brand new case.

The report could serve as a basis to seek a new indictment, for a new case--not revive the old one.

....and well, now your Defendant is days away from becoming sitting POTUS...

 

The only purpose would be to get the Documents case report turned into the AG before Jan 20th. If we do not hear anything about a new Special Counsel today, I do not think it will happen.

 

Lawfare warriors crying foul over the courts running interference against their desperately desired lynching.

Me:

 

...and lawfare never grows old in banana republix...

 

Lawfare is selectively prosecuting political opponents to eliminate competition in the political arena.

That's *democracy* in TDS world.

...and commie land, and banana republics, and mohammystan, and tyranny land... throughout history, around the world, time immemorial....

 

y'all don't seem to be bothered by the law breaking of the illegal aliens that are in this country

 

For me, that is basically correct. The USA has had a huge non-native workforce for practically the entirety of its existence; slaves, Chinese, Irish, Italians, Latinos.

It's not new, and neither is scaring up votes by riling up bigoted and uninformed people by fabricating lies about those workers, and portraying them as a non-white Other. In fact, it's one of the oldest "tricks" in the American political playbook, and it's downright embarrassing that it still works. But that is who we are, apparently.

Additionally, these people fill jobs that Americans don't want - about 8-9 million of them, according to most experts. If they were gone, we'd need someone else to do the jobs, and that replacing group would probably be almost identical.


That said, there are two tangential points;
1) I would greatly prefer a legitimate system of "guest workers" or such. That would allow us to truly secure the border as well.

2) I am extremely opposed to crime. For example, I think that if a rapey felon criminal receives appx 90 felony indictments from grand juries in different jurisdictions....then he should face a fair trial in each of them, rather than being protected by a corrupt judiciary.

 

As my original post was deleted for being condescending toward the poster, I submit that it remains to be seen if the poster can provide the name of anyone that was: "selectively prosecuting political opponents to eliminate competition in the political arena.". Or it it simply a made up farce similar to the corrupt, illegal election farces.

 

like the political witch-hunt into Hunter where the informant was just sentenced for feeding the fbi the red meat from the russians that the pub congressman wanted to put on the record? was that lawfare?