• Lauchs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    4 months ago

    And that way, without Senate confirmation, is the same way in which David Weiss was appointed special counsel in the Hunter Biden case.

    So, are you defending/citing the work of an illegal appointee? And if so, shouldn’t we also care about Jack Smith’s charges?

      • Lauchs@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        4 months ago

        What do you see as the difference that made one appointment legal and the other illegal? (Other than one is investigating a Biden and the other is investigating trump.)

          • Lauchs@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            4 months ago

            Huh, so in other words Jack Smith was appointed in the exact same manner as Nicolas Bua, Malcolm Wilkey, and Frederick Lacey.

            But, I am glad you get the silly technicality that has been rejected by every other judge who has heard this nonsensical defense.

            • Neuromancer@lemm.eeM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              10
              ·
              4 months ago

              Jack Smith was not appointed in the same manner. When did Congress approve Jack Smith? They didn’t. That is the issue as outlined in the article.

              • Lauchs@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                11
                ·
                4 months ago

                And Congress (I think you actually mean Senate) didn’t approve Bua, Wilkey or Lacey as special counsel. (All were appointed by Barr in the same manner as Smith.)

                • Neuromancer@lemm.eeM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  10
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Sounds like nobody challenged it or the prior courts had a different opinion.

                  Cannon got this from Thomas. So I expect this to go up the court system

                  • Lauchs@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    9
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    Multiple folks have challenged it, every ruling prior to this had ruled that this was a nonsense claim.

                    We both know it’s not actually a constitutional challenge, it’s a delay in the hope trump wins the presidency and can, once again, avoid repercussions for his actions.