But she called it! She called it every step of the way."
Jonathan Turley had Jack Smith smacked down 11 months ago, and not only that, but eviscerated Chutkan's half of this equation before 2024.
Frankly, I beat Turley by a month:
Posted on 07/15/2024 2:53:33 PM PDT by CFW
I think they have achieved 100% of their goals and have been riding the gravy train for a while since.
Another legal scholar - Justice Clarence Thomas -:gave her a roadmap.
“That Appeals Circuit will say— this prosecutor has NO office to make an Appeal. Rejected.”
More likely, the 11th Circuit will reverse her again. Smith’s people have been waiting for a chance to get one of her rulings in front of the appeals court so he can make a motion of recusal for bias.
Sounds like she has a lot to say., fwiw.
I did see Jack Smith morosely shambling down the street when a reporter from NBC tried to get a reaction regarding Cannon’s ruling.
Let me tell you, that muh fugger is beat. He did not say a fugging word. That ahole is toast. Just my two cents. A demoralized beaten fraud, a fake, a phony.
Interesting. Thank you for this.
This issue was specifically about Jack Smnith's appointment.
No, she's not. But she's right about this issue. Of course a lot of people have been explaining the issue before she got to it.
Any work product from Smith is fruit of a poisoned tree, IMO. He never was allowed to investigate, and the events since then (like the mixed up evidence) mean the toothpaste is out of the tube.
Having read the entire thing, I got the impression that Smith really pissed her off with his continual arrogance.
Thank you, I get it. It’s just that the Appointments clause is very direct, and succinct. It doesn’t require extensive explanation, in my opinion.
Not knocking Judge Cannon’s reasoning, she’s a pro.
Bkmk
But she called it! She called it every step of the way."
Jonathan Turley had Jack Smith smacked down 11 months ago, and not only that, but eviscerated Chutkan's half of this equation before 2024.
Frankly, I beat Turley by a month:
She was determined to be thorough and give Jack Smith every opportunity to present his arguments. Smith refused to answer any questions about his communications with Garland and the DOJ. That did not help him.
Read the decision and you easily see why it took so long. It’s a case of great importance and she wanted to get it right; dotting every ‘i’ and crossing every ‘t’.
She included lots of history behind the Constitutional requirements for appointments and appropriations for government offices.
She also addressed all the points raised by Smith and destroyed them one by one. That takes much research and drafting. In reality, her decision came out not long after the last hearing on the topic.
THANKS for the clarification!!
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.