Elections Trump Indicted On 91 Counts

[Andy Capp]

Right, right. I'm sure everyone reading this believes you don't have political beliefs and affiliation.

Right on, brother.

Sure.

That wasn't the claim being discussed though, was it?

 

[BFoe]

Of course Biden is directing the prosecution of a political opponent. Biden appointed Merrick Garland. All of these prosecutions against Trump either start with Garland with the federal charges, or his office is aiding the state AG's like Leticia James and the county DA's like Fani Willis. Both James and Willis have visited the white house several times, obviously to discuss these cases. Additionally, the acting deputy director of the DOJ, Colangelo magically ends up in the NY DA's office to oversee and direct Bragg's prosecution of Trump. That was all Biden and Garland.

With regard to official vs unofficial immunity, Jack Smith and his team were claiming POTUS should confirm with the DOJ as to the legality of his actions. In essence, they were arguing POTUS should be accountable to the DOJ. POTUS immunity isn't up to the DOJ. SCOTUS just cleared it up so the DOJ doesn't continue to abuse their power.

As far as Thomas and his view of the illegality of Smith's appointment, Thomas thinks a private citizen appointed to prosecute POTUS is unconstitutional. Hur and Mueller were appointed as special counsel to investigate.

Wow there is a whole lot wrong here. Like, every paragraph.

Re: Special Counsel, that is not what Thomas said, and it isn’t correct anyhow: Jack Smith was appointed Spec Counsel to take over ongoing investigations. Here is Garland’s order appointing Smith, where he says:

“In order to discharge my responsibility to provide supervision and management of the Department of Justice, and to ensure a full and thorough investigation…”
and again:
“ I hereby order as follows:
(a) John L. Smith is appointed to serve as Special Counsel for the United States Department ofJustice.
(b) The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the ongoing investigation…”

Spec Counsels are given a scope of authority, they investigate, and if they find reason to charge the person they do, if they don’t find reason then they don’t charge them. Examples: Mueller investigated and charged quite a few people but not Trump; Weiss investigated Hunter Biden and charged him; Hur investigated Joe Biden and didn’t charge him; Smith investigated Trump and charged him. Etc.
—Clarence Thomas is making the argument that the office of the Special Counsel itself is invalid. Luckily, no other judge signed on to that wackjob shit.

So, down in GA:

Fanni Willis first submitted a request to the Chief Judge of the county Superior Court, asking for a Special Grand Jury. In order to get that, the chief judge presents the request to ALL of the judges of the county Superior Court. Those judges—there are currently 19 of them—vote. A majority vote is required in order to impanel a Special Grand Jury.

WTF is a Special Grand Jury? Click my link for the long answer
The short answer is that they have no set 2 month term like a regular GJ, they are convened solely for this one case, due to its complexity. This allows them to subpoena witnesses, review documents, etc., with no distraction or without the burden of a time limit.
The Chief Judge of the Superior Court assigns a judge specifically to assist the Special Grand Jury, and requires periodic reports from them of their progress as well as a final report.

The Special GJ cannot idict. They issue a final report with recommendations; these can even be just recommendations for reform in instances where they don’t think criminal indictments are warranted, or it can be a recommendation to indict, including which specific people they feel should be indicted.

But to actually indict, Fanni Willis had to next convene a regular Grand Jury, and go through that process.

So while the right wing media would like you to believe that it’s super duper easy to trump up (ha!) charges and get an grand jury indictment easy-peasy, in reality it was an extremely long road that included 19 different judges and two different types of grand juries to get where we are in this GA case.

—You’re telling me that 81 year old Dark Brandon, Wearer of Diapers and Shitter of Pants, pulled allllll the strings to make that indictment happen?
Laughable. Delusional.

 

[DoctorTaco]

It’s a long way til January 6th, I’m excited for Biden to break as many laws as he wants provided it’s under the guise of “official duty”.

 

[GhostZ06]

Do you trump fuckers actually have fantasy about our country becoming third reich or Dictatorship?

 

[curryjunkie]

Do you trump fuckers actually have fantasy about our country becoming third reich or Dictatorship?

as long as it winds up the libs, thats all they care about.









and something about trannies..

 

[Limbo Pete]

Do you trump fuckers actually have fantasy about our country becoming third reich or Dictatorship?

yes

 

[Fergelmince]

Wow there is a whole lot wrong here. Like, every paragraph.

Re: Special Counsel, that is not what Thomas said, and it isn’t correct anyhow: Jack Smith was appointed Spec Counsel to take over ongoing investigations. Here is Garland’s order appointing Smith, where he says:

“In order to discharge my responsibility to provide supervision and management of the Department of Justice, and to ensure a full and thorough investigation…”
and again:
“ I hereby order as follows:
(a) John L. Smith is appointed to serve as Special Counsel for the United States Department ofJustice.
(b) The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the ongoing investigation…”

Spec Counsels are given a scope of authority, they investigate, and if they find reason to charge the person they do, if they don’t find reason then they don’t charge them. Examples: Mueller investigated and charged quite a few people but not Trump; Weiss investigated Hunter Biden and charged him; Hur investigated Joe Biden and didn’t charge him; Smith investigated Trump and charged him. Etc.
—Clarence Thomas is making the argument that the office of the Special Counsel itself is invalid. Luckily, no other judge signed on to that wackjob shit.

So, down in GA:

—You’re telling me that 81 year old Dark Brandon, Wearer of Diapers and Shitter of Pants, pulled allllll the strings to make that indictment happen?
Laughable. Delusional.

You are literally losing your mind after the last few days. But at least I found an emoji you like quite a bit.

Thomas said, “If there is no law establishing the office that the Special Counsel occupies, then he cannot proceed with this prosecution. A private citizen cannot criminally prosecute anyone, let alone a former President." That legal question will get presented before a court. That's it.

As far as Biden, no he's not working the day to day details of the prosecutions, but he definitely directed his AG to prosecute his political opponent in federal court, and Garland's office is aiding the State AG's and associated districts to do the same.

But hey, you keep dreaming that Leticia James and Fani Willis are visiting the White House to talk about soul food and smoking weed.

 

[Seano]

That wasn't the claim being discussed though, was it?

Tomato, tomato.

You're going to vote a certain way, even if its not a great candidate. I'm just using a less colorful and derogatory way of saying the same thing.

You'll vote for a shitty person because you think they believe what you believe. We all do. I'd say, for example, you and I will probably have different boxes checked on our ballots. You know you're voting for people who are going to make life tough for a lot of people but you'll justify it as the greater good or whatever. Yeah, you'll put country and people first.... if they fall in line with what you believe. Thats just the nature of politics, ESPECIALLY our 2 party system.

 

[Andy Capp]

Tomato, tomato.

You're going to vote a certain way, even if its not a great candidate. I'm just using a less colorful and derogatory way of saying the same thing.

You'll vote for a shitty person because you think they believe what you believe. We all do. I'd say, for example, you and I will probably have different boxes checked on our ballots. You know you're voting for people who are going to make life tough for a lot of people but you'll justify it as the greater good or whatever. Yeah, you'll put country and people first.... if they fall in line with what you believe. Thats just the nature of politics, ESPECIALLY our 2 party system.

lol

 

[CantCucktheTuck]

It’s a long way til January 6th, I’m excited for Biden to break as many laws as he wants provided it’s under the guise of “official duty”.

The Supreme Court is effectively saying Biden has been breaking the law the whole time and you support it.

 

[BFoe]

You are literally losing your mind after the last few days. But at least I found an emoji you like quite a bit.

Thomas said, “If there is no law establishing the office that the Special Counsel occupies, then he cannot proceed with this prosecution. A private citizen cannot criminally prosecute anyone, let alone a former President." That legal question will get presented before a court. That's it.

As far as Biden, no he's not working the day to day details of the prosecutions, but he definitely directed his AG to prosecute his political opponent in federal court, and Garland's office is aiding the State AG's and associated districts to do the same.

But hey, you keep dreaming that Leticia James and Fani Willis are visiting the White House to talk about soul food and smoking weed.

You’re quoting the right thing, you’re just not understanding it.
Look at what I said:

Thomas isn’t saying that the issue is being confirmed by the Senate, his opinion is that there is no law that explicitly creates the Office of the Special Counsel. This would ostensibly affect every Special Counsel that was appointed since 1999 when the former statutes on the Independent Counsel expired (Independent Counsel is what they were previously called, e.g. Kenneth Starr).

And now look at what you quoted:

Thomas said, “If there is no law establishing the office that the Special Counsel occupies, then he cannot proceed with this prosecution. A private citizen cannot criminally prosecute anyone, let alone a former President."

In Thomas’s mind, what makes Jack Smith a “private citizen” is that the entire office of the Special Counsel is invalid. This would apply to any Special Counsel. David Weiss for example is a U.S. Attorney in Delaware. He only has jurisdiction there. If there is no law making him a Spec Counsel, he has no authority to prosecute Hunter in the upcoming tax case in CA. There would be jurisdictional issues like this in several Spec Counsel investigations, I imagine.

 

[king hippo]

corrupt clown court makes another decision to help out king clown. I can't believe how corrupt the GOP has become. Always pretty shady but now it's just blatant corruption with all these recent scotus rulings.

"SCOTUS is a threat to our democracy!"

 

[Fergelmince]

You’re quoting the right thing, you’re just not understanding it.
Look at what I said:

And now look at what you quoted:



In Thomas’s mind, what makes Jack Smith a “private citizen” is that the entire office of the Special Counsel is invalid. This would apply to any Special Counsel. David Weiss for example is a U.S. Attorney in Delaware. He only has jurisdiction there. If there is no law making him a Spec Counsel, he has no authority to prosecute Hunter in the upcoming tax case in CA. There would be jurisdictional issues like this in several Spec Counsel investigations, I imagine.

Oh, and I misspoke earlier. It's already before a court, so it's going to be ruled on, and probably appealed several times until it ends up at the Supreme court.

 

[Seano]

lol

Thats all you got because you know I'm right.

 

[Andy Capp]

Thats all you got because you know I'm right.

I gave you a second chance to be honest. You declined. No need to bother further with you.

 

[BFoe]

Oh, and I misspoke earlier. It's already before a court, so it's going to be ruled on, and probably appealed several times until it ends up at the Supreme court.

Yes, the issue is being taken up by Cannon, because of course it is.
Yeah, we’ll see. Not a single other justice signed on to Thomas’s opinion, and I think it’s a pretty radical opinion. But hey, radical is what the Roberts Court does, so who knows.

 

[DoctorTaco]

The Supreme Court is effectively saying Biden has been breaking the law the whole time and you support it.

Huh?

 

[GhostZ06]

I'm sorry but if your a trump fan at this point you have no business speaking to any one about your political points an or views. No one is above the law weather you like it or not.
The fact people are praising this, indicates Trump fans an most republicans, key words, most ....are utterly retarded an support the unification of united states, do not support the constitution. Disgusting....


The Supreme Court has basically demonstrated they are corrupt fucks, and needed to step down. They are incapable of supporting the law.

 

[Darkballs]

Thomas said, “If there is no law establishing the office that the Special Counsel occupies, then he cannot proceed with this prosecution. A private citizen cannot criminally prosecute anyone, let alone a former President." That legal question will get presented before a court. That's it.

And here's why that's retarded:

SCOTUS has long held that executive appointees, like the AG, have the authority to appoint junior officers. You know, the people that are gonna work under them. This tends to work better than requiring the president, and ratification from Congress, every fucking employee in the justice department.

Specifically, the Court has long held valid the idea of Special Counsels. We've had them appointed by the AG through almost every administration. We had them when Clinton got blown and republicans got jealous; we had one for Enron; we had one for the fucking steroid scandal in baseball. So the idea that all along, the entire office of the special counsel has been unlawful, is certainly a fucking novelty that only Clarence seems to have thought up. And it just so happens when one of them is investigating trump. Clarence better come out swinging this hard for Hunter Biden, when he makes the same damn argument.

 

[AWilder]

Huh?

he's fighting tooth and nail with @ShadowRun to be the dumbest right wing dork on the forums. It's a wide field but these two really know how to make a dumbass out of themselves.