Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: djstex

Agree and thanks.

Although I think the Dems will continue the lawfare.


225 posted on 07/01/2024 8:31:07 AM PDT by Enlightened1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies ]


To: Enlightened1
Well, the crooked dems will but wow they got blown up a bit with today's decision! I'll relish it and love it US!
227 posted on 07/01/2024 8:35:25 AM PDT by djstex ( (All I Have to Say... President Trump was right about everything!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies ]

To: Enlightened1

Justice Thomas’ concurrence in Trump v. U.S. is hugely significant. He questions whether Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office is constitutional.

“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.”


232 posted on 07/01/2024 8:40:10 AM PDT by CFW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies ]

To: Enlightened1

The dems may continue to try to pursue their lawfare, as well as their other usual tricks, but my admittedly non-lawyer impression from the decisions handed down over the past two days is that while the Court was only clarifying the obvious meaning of the Constitution, it effectively handed us an entire arsenal of legal weapons to now use against the deep state. The federal government has slid so far left that constitutional government seems radical to the left. Well, they’d better get ready for an avalanche of “radical” Americanism.


246 posted on 07/01/2024 8:59:33 AM PDT by noiseman (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson