Rule of Law or Just Rule?

a reply to: ADVISOR

Blame game. I am not impessed.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

It looks to me like they did.

Yes, and Biden and Garland did it anyway.
Friends of the court brought it up in amici briefs at the circuit court level.
Then Justice Thomas wrote about it.
Then Judge Cannon kicked it because it’s illegitimate.
That’s where we are.

Like I said, the DOJ can’t solely invent an office without complying with the Appointments Clause.

Anyway, President Biden told Merrick Garland to do whatever he needed to do to prosecute Donald Trump.

I’m happy you finally see the political prosecution lawfare.
These cases are getting demolished one by one because they’re ridiculous.

a reply to: Vermilion

Yes, and Biden and Garland did it anyway.

Did what anyway? Biden as the constitutional right to direct his AG to investigate and charge obvious criminals with obvious charges, especially when there's public outcry and demand.

I’m happy you finally see the political prosecution lawfare.

What I see is a criminal being brought up on charges, as he should be. I don't see an innocent Trump being singled out for unfair and illegal "lawfare".

Even Mitch McConnell basically called for the DOJ to file charges for Trump's part in Jan 6th.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

You say Biden told Merrick Garland to do whatever he needed to do to prosecute Donald Trump. Was that the official "in writing" legal "appointment"? 😊

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Maybe Biden and Garland would have been smarter to NOT make anybody into a SC? Think about why they allowed the exit door to be left wide open. 😃

originally posted by: Terpene
a reply to: worldstarcountry
Sacrificing a little foreskin taken without consent never hurts...

When I was a teenager and heard about things from other girls, I was a bit confused. Being an adult now and the life I have lived, I don't think it is such a bad sacrifice myself.

a reply to: Sookiechacha
There was a law that existed from like '78 - '99 that established a Three Judge panel for all Special prosecutor appointments. It was passed in congress after the mess with Jimmy Carter (or maybe Nixon) , and then was renewed every so many years until it was allowed to lapse in 1999.
I think they tried to revive this in the early 2000's as well to little success. But since then it just fell back to the original constitution stuff, which is where we are now. But for twenty or so years, it was a law in the USA that a special prosecutor had to be appointed by a panel of three federal judges.

a reply to: namehere
ahh so zero accountability for the folks who ALREADY committed all the trasnsgressions you just mentioned?? Just they did it, oops well don't hold them to account they are above the law and it would just be revenge to not allow them to skirt consequence free of all their transgressions, of which everything you mentioned they are guilty of??

Is that how it works? Pretend none of it ever happened, and then when they do it all over again just pretend it never happened again and zero consequences? Are you essentially advocating that every time one political party commits all these transgressions, they should just be ignored, but if the other seeks to hold them accountable through actual legal proceedings because actual crimes have happened, that is considered vindictive revenge and is bad. Is that right? Is this the argument?

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Sookiechacha

You say Biden told Merrick Garland to do whatever he needed to do to prosecute Donald Trump. Was that the official "in writing" legal "appointment"? 😊

I remember Biden saying something like that publicly, that he had total trust in Garland's and is office to handle the Trump prosecutions anyway he saw fit.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Maybe Biden and Garland would have been smarter to NOT make anybody into a SC? Think about why they allowed the exit door to be left wide open. 😃

Biden was being accused, by Republicans, of not having an independent DOJ, and that he, in fact, was weaponizing it. So, he made a public statement, refuting those suggestions, handing Garland complete authority and independence to prosecute the Trump cases, as he saw fit.

Garland mirrored Biden's sentiment, turning the cases over to Smith.

Of course, Biden could just appoint Jack Smith now. I don't know if the courts would require Smith to start all over, but that would be dumb if they did.

originally posted by: worldstarcountry
a reply to: Sookiechacha
There was a law that existed from like '78 - '99 that established a Three Judge panel for all Special prosecutor appointments. It was passed in congress after the mess with Jimmy Carter (or maybe Nixon) , and then was renewed every so many years until it was allowed to lapse in 1999.
I think they tried to revive this in the early 2000's as well to little success. But since then it just fell back to the original constitution stuff, which is where we are now. But for twenty or so years, it was a law in the USA that a special prosecutor had to be appointed by a panel of three federal judges.

I understand that. Nevertheless, there is a precedent for the AG appointing special prosecutors.