Posted on 06/06/2024 8:37:33 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Democrats' lawfare got a wet snap of the towel in the face when Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky questioned the very basis for the appointment of a special counsel to target President Trump in questioning Attorney General Merrick Garland at a congressional hearing.
Yesterday in the Judiciary committee, I asked AG Garland if Jack Smith’s Special Counsel office is even legal, and submitted former AG Meese’s amicus brief on that topic for the record. A few hours later, Judge Cannon agreed to allow that question to be debated in the courtroom.
pic.twitter.com/TedmtbkmMP— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) June 5, 2024
He gripped onto Garland like a rat dog, shaking and shaking the political catspaw until Garland admitted that Joe Biden didn't appoint Smith, nor was he confirmed by the Senate in contrast to what Massie read out loud at the beginning of the exchange in the Massie video, called "the appointment clause of the Constitution," which described the critical importance of appointments being approved by the Senate. He also forced Garland to admit that that the special council's law had expired, which was his basis for arguing that the appointment was legal.
That left the Constitution as the law on special counsel appointments, the little carveout on special counsels was gone, and Garland was clearly not acting within the Constitution by appointing Jack Smith, who was not a public official confirmed by anyone when he got the job to Get Trump, which is another issue.
Former Attorney General Ed Meese of the Reagan era, a respected legal scholar now, put in his pithy two cents in a friend of the court brief describing what that meant:
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Twice Garland referred to Smith as impartial.
As if anything will stop the Biden regime. The democrats don’t care. When they said “by any means necessary “ they meant it.
Yet y’all let this crap go on for how long now?
Ouch!! That’s gonna leave a mark!!
Massie just OWNED that turd AG!
Why has this taken so long. Glad Massie is fighting but holy cow, elected republicans are so weak
I could be attributing devious intelligence, where there is just ignorance and stupidity - but my first thought is that Garland (and Biden’s handlers) had to understand there may be questions about Jack Smith’s actual legal status.
If so, what were their reasons for proceeding along that route anyway?
Garland is a corrupt SOB.
Not only is that a LIE, impartiality is absolutely IRRELEVANT when there has been knowing and willing Unconstitutional conduct by the DOJ. Claiming impartiality is nothing but a p-poor lame excuse for this administration’s unconstitutional conduct
The headline writer is confused. The Congress has no direct authority with respect to prosecution. The Independent Counsel has expired and it was unconstitutional anyway.
The problem with the appointment is that the Executive branch didn’t follow the law in doing so, for obvious reasons (because it’s a political prosecution).
Its a key question. Meese (a old man, long-retired, with no official capacity) wrote his brief months ago. Did no one on the entire GOP side even think to look into it?
Certainly if the tables were turned, Democrats would have had a legal narrative out within 24 hours, AND TV interviews with Jack Smith's high-school prom date claiming date-rape.
The GOP leadership is NOT merely ineffective - they are actual controlled elements of the Uniparty. Fake opposition, beholden to the deep-state, no different from most Democrats.
The law, as written, demands Special Council to be Approved by Congress, the Senate. All Special Council in the past, like 95 of them, have been.
The new Fascist Dictatorship decided that they don’t need the SCOTUS or Congress, and went ahead and appointed ‘Special Council’ without them.
Why? The answer is that a Special Council would be forced to answer to Congress and the Senate. When Hurr found that Biden had been in the espionage business for many years, profiting from US secret information, it would have come back to Congress. The interviews, the information, the crime would have been public and reviewable. They couldn’t have that, because Joe Biden would have been the first ‘Espionage’ POTUS.
This isn’t about Trump. Yes, they used Jack Smith and Weismann for dirty little political hits and coordinated illegal lawfare against Trump (clear RICO act violation), but it was slight of hand to get Biden off.
Garland, appointed and beholding to Biden, appointed people to investigate Trump and Biden. That means Joe Biden, and his family espionage ring, has NEVER been investigated by a independent Special Council......LET THAT SETTLE WITH YOU.
Note also that at an earlier Supreme Court hearing, one of the justices asked Trump’s attorney if they were making an issue of Jack Smith’s appointment, and Trump’s attorney responded, “Not at this time.”
I think the Supreme Court is just waiting for its chance to tear this thing down, if no one else.
The three main arguments that will be presented during the June hearing before Judge Cannon are[Taken from Motion for Leave to Participate in Oral Argument by Landmark Legal et al]
1. All officers of the United States, principal and inferior, must hold permanent or continuing positions. Prior to Mr. Smith’s “appointment” as Special Counsel, he was not already holding another “officer of the United States” position. Mr. Smith’s position as Special Counsel was not a secondment or transfer from some other post in the government. Unlike other United States Attorneys who have been appointed as special counsels, Mr. Smith was not already a senate-confirmed principal “officer of the United States” to which new duties were merely added.
2. More importantly, the Special Counsel’s position is not a permanent or continuing position. It is a temporary or ad hoc position. When that single “case” is over, the Special Counsel’s position ceases-as such, the Special Counsel’s position cannot be characterized as a permanent or continuing one. Under Lucia v. SEC and other Supreme Court binding precedent, such a temporary or ad hoc position cannot be characterized either as a principal officer of the United States or as an inferior officer of the United States. Such a temporary or ad hoc position is, at most, a mere employee of the United States. See Buckley, 424 U.S. at 126 n.162. And as, at most, a mere employee of the United States, such a position cannot be endowed with the powers that the Special Counsel exercises. The Special Counsel only argues that his position is properly characterized as an inferior officer of the United States. However, post-Lucia, the Special Counsel’s legal position is a non-starter.
3. Finally, the primary purpose of the Special Counsel regulations, which were modeled on the Independent Counsel statute, was to avoid conflicts of interest when the Executive Branch investigates itself. But here, Attorney General Garland appointed Mr. Smith not to investigate someone connected to the United States Department of Justice, the President, or the Biden Administration—as was the case with Hunter Biden—but to investigate the Biden Administration’s leading political opponent. Mr. Smith’s appointment was not made to eliminate any internal conflict of interest. Quite the opposite. Mr. Smith was appointed to shield the Attorney General, the Department of Justice, the President, and the Biden administration, from the political accountability associated with investigating and prosecuting a political rival. These dynamics further demonstrate why Smith’s appointment is inconsistent with the separation of powers and political accountability. The appointment of a special counsel in the face of internal conflicts makes the government more accountable to the American people. The appointment of a special counsel to investigate and prosecute a political rival makes the government less accountable to the American people.
All of what they are doing to Trump.. They make up reasons and find a hole they can use.. While the republicans sit.
With the lies being spread., using words, felony, at random.. Using it as if it was earned.. It was used by a corrupt justice dept, to smear and embarrass.
The attacks have been constant.
You have the bidens with all their dirt and corruption.. Protected compared to Trump treatment.
Joe has committed treason.. But hey, who cares..
John Kennedy had an attorney general brother .. I don’t think we have anyone on our side to count on.
We all know Joe biden is not able to govern. So who is? If this was a republican in hiding, the media would not let it be..
This 2 sided fairness system is not serving the nation nor the people. The way gov works now, has come about by sliding into the abyss of lies, imagination,
hate, and power. The people are named deplorables.
My United States... The greatest in the world.. Has been fundamentally changed by a foreigner who hoodwinked people willing to be hoodwinked.
If you stop thinkning that they're too weak and scared to oppose dems and begin to ask yourself 'is it possible they never meant it when they said they were different then democrats' then it all makes sense.
So Smith is off the case and anything he’s been paid is going to be returned to the Treasury right?
I agree with the premise of the article, but if Congress is not requesting his immediate removal and asking for money back, this is just more posturing for the cameras.
RE: The problem with the appointment is that the Executive branch didn’t follow the law in doing so
Ok, since the Independent Counsel has expired, exactly how should the lawful procedure be to appoint one, if any?
Did Biden ignore the Constitutional requirement because he didn't think Smith could be approved by a Democrat-majority Senate, or just to show his defiance of the Constitution?
Agree with previous responses, Rep’s aren’t weak, they’re as corrupt as Dem’s. This is why I don’t call myself a republican anymore. They don’t represent me in any, shape, manner or form. 80% of rep’s need to thrown out with the dem’s.
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.
