Posted on 01/06/2024 6:34:13 AM PST by Libloather
The federal court set to hear Special Counsel Jack Smith’s case against former President Donald Trump has told the lawyers to be prepared to answer questions on the constitutionality of Smith’s appointment.
Ed Meese, former attorney general under President Reagan, filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case against Trump on Tuesday, arguing that Attorney General Merrick Garland’s appointment of Smith — a private citizen — is in violation of the Appointments Clause of the Constitution
"Not properly clothed in the authority of the federal government, Smith is a modern example of the naked emperor. Illegally appointed, he has no more authority to represent the United States in this Court, or in the underlying prosecution, than Tom Brady, Warren Buffett, or Beyoncé," the brief argues.
On Thursday, the court issued an order that told counsel for both parties to "be prepared to address at oral argument…any inquiries by the Court regarding discrete issues raised in the briefs filed by amici curiae."
The brief was filed in Smith’s case against the 45th president on criminal charges related to Trump’s actions during the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021. The oral arguments are set for Tuesday.
Will Scharf, attorney for the former president, told Fox News Digital in an interview that the order indicates the court is taking the amicus briefs "seriously."
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
His proper title in Inquisitor Plenipotentiary.
This from a Special Prosecutor who was never formally approved. I believe his bogus case will be dismissed shortly. He has no complainant; no damages incurred; no material witnesses; even the lenders did their own due diligence and made the loans and were payed back in full, with agreed interest. He's got nothing. How did this ever get past the local dog catcher laws?
.
Jack Smith has no integrity, honesty, honor, or decency. The worst part of him is that he has no shame for being this way.
Seems like a good argument. I wonder though if it is easily fixable by Garland reassigning the case to an actual, lawful US Attorney who then brings on the Jacobin as an assistant. It might require then re-indicting the cases from scratch… and it would remove the fig leaf that this is anything other than the ruling party going after its opponents. And it would kick this aspect of the lawfare down the road past the November election.
Two of the three judges on the panel are Biden appointees. The third judge was appointed by Bush I.
Jack have psycho eyes, too.
Can Jack Smith even practice law ? LOL
One is before the DC Court of Appeals , and one is before the Supreme Court .
Both documents do indeed contain that line at the very end.
“Why is it that not one of our Republican Congressmen, women and Senators never said a word about this?”
~~~~~~~
Too many of them have been compromised by Epstein (or similar) ops?
“Jack Smith has no integrity, honesty, honor, or decency. The worst part of him is that he has no shame for being this way.”
Name one high-profile Democrat that is any different from Jack Smith re: that.
I missed that on page 32 under Conclusion.
Except when he’s being overturned by a unanimous Supreme Court.
ex fbi now retiree whistleblower reported John Lumen Smith aka Jack Smith a MGarland DOJ water carrier was in involved in bribing high govt officials .
The time spent there in the Hague . Doing this he heaped shame upon himself. One of the countries involved was Montenegro.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.