Posted on 12/21/2023 3:51:19 PM PST by henbane
As Smith was hired directly by current AG Merrick Garland, the correct constitutional process of appointment by the President, and confirmation by the full U.S. Senate never took place. . . . the various legal actions undertaken by Smith under color of law “can be taken only by persons properly appointed as federal officers to properly created federal offices. Neither Smith nor the position of Special Counsel under which he purportedly acts meets those criteria.
But perhaps the most damning and dismissive statement of Smith’s unconstitutional appointment comes from the text of the brief itself stating that “Not clothed in the authority of the federal government, Smith is a modern example of the naked emperor. Improperly appointed, he has no more authority to represent the United States in this Court than Bryce Harper, Taylor Swift, or Jeff Bezos.”
(Excerpt) Read more at trendingpoliticsnews.com ...
This is nonsense.
The AG can hire a lawyer and have him work under the auspices of the DOJ without POTUS appointment or Congressional approval.
He’s simply a prosecutor.
A prosecutor who is outside the confines of the “Special Counsel” statute.
This is HUGH!
Nah, Garland can hire a counsel (like Mueller) or a prosecutor under another AG, but not proving prosecutor.
*roving prosecutor
Supreme Court filings are not huge. Supreme Court rulings are and that's a long ways from happening.
so then, you’ve read WITH comprehension all of the statutes associated with the Smith appointment and determined that his appointment is constitutional and lawful? Will you be personally informing the Supreme Court that you will be taking over as a chief justice and impose your remedy so they need not bother with any adjudication of their own?
He is not compliant with the Special Counsel statute, but can prosecute any US citizen for any crime the AG directs.
They just can’t call him a Special Counsel.
The referenced “law” is in the CFR, stuff made up within the bureaucracy which may or may not be enforced. Ample precedent for past special counsels appointed the same way.
Actionable law is in the US Code, not in the Code of Federal Regulations unless authorized by Congress.
We knw about this when the alleged appointment occurred...and they let it ride...Is it all about timing...and hsnging him high, i.e., let him do this and that and be in violation may make all his actions criminal. Don’t know. Just pondering.
This is HUGH!And SERIES.
He was temporarily hired as a Special Prosecutor, a de facto US Attorney (USA’s must be appointed and confirmed by the Senate) with jurisdiction over the whole United States. USA’s only have jurisdiction in the State or portion of the State they are appointed to. However, only a Presidential appointee with Senate confirmation can have such sweeping National jurisdiction.
what authority ?
he doesnt have any
thats the whole freaking point !!!!
he is one of too many rogues.
Works for me. I think Jack Smith is a political hack.
In order to prosecute Nixon they needed someone not under the control of the Nixon administration, so the position of special prosecutor was created. Since Trump isn’t being investigated by his own administration, why appoint a special prosecutor?
Well, I’m not going to argue the fine points because — I just don’t know.
But I’m willing to predict that, if SCOTUS takes up the case and it’s looking bad for Smith because of some of the issues strewn about in the article under discussion, we can count on Roberts to shine a light on what they have to do to fix it up so that the perse/prose-cutions can continue.
Yeeeesssss
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.