• Lauchs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      8 个月前

      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.

        • Lauchs@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          8 个月前

          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.)

            • Lauchs@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              8 个月前

              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.

                • Lauchs@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  ·
                  8 个月前

                  And zero other justices decided it was a legitimate enough thought to agree with. (Typically, when a Justice writes an opinion like that, others will also sign it. It is telling that none chose to do so.)

                  But, if we are taking judges rulings as gospel, does that mean both of us admit that donald trump has committed sexual assault and in a different sexual criminal case, paid hush money to the pornstar with whom he cheated on his wife? Just curious!