• Neuromancer@lemm.eeM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    3 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
      ·
      3 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.

      • Neuromancer@lemm.eeM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        3 months ago

        SCOTUS may have a different take this one. Maybe not. To me it’s telling only Thomas wrote about it.

        • Lauchs@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          3 months ago

          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!

          • Neuromancer@lemm.eeM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            3 months ago

            He was found liable for sexual assault. Yes, he paid Josh money to a porn star

            • Lauchs@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              3 months ago

              So when it comes to the special counsel, you are willing to Unequivocally say he was appointed illegally. When it comes to trump, you won’t say he committed sexual assault only that he was found liable? Or are you just mis-speaking?

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

                I don’t have a dog in this fight. Why would I take a hard stance over an issue that is best left to the court?

                When you look at the evidence, I don’t believe he committed sexual assault. As someone who worked in the legal system for years, I have never seen such a lack of evidence win in court. She didn’t even have basic facts such as the year, the time, the day, etc. It was just her statement as evidence.

                He was not found guilty of a crime, he was found legally liabel.

                • Lauchs@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  But you’re willing to, despite multiple precedents and repeated legal confirmation, declare the special counsel illegal because one wild judge said so.

                  It’s neat.

                  • Neuromancer@lemm.eeM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    Do you confuse me with Judge Cannon? I am not Judge Cannon. What I did is provide a cite to explain to you the differences