Author

Topic: Special Counsel Jack Smith's Appointment Is Unconstitutional (Read 124 times)

legendary
Activity: 3906
Merit: 1373
I think DeSantis is probably quite an honest and honorable guy. I think that the media simply paints a bad picture of him at times. He might not come anywhere close to being elected President in 2024, but history shows us that the world just might remain for a few years longer than that. His time might be in 2028, or even later.


DeSantis Promises 'Day One' Firing Of Special Counsel Jack Smith If Elected



https://www.zerohedge.com/political/desantis-promises-day-one-firing-special-counsel-jack-smith-if-elected
The declaration came during a campaign event on Thursday and aimed at setting himself apart from his chief GOP rival, former President Donald Trump, who faces two federal prosecutions led by Mr. Smith.

The Florida governor expressed his concern that President Trump, as the Republican nominee, would overshadow the election, focusing on legal issues and investigations rather than addressing the nation's challenges.

Should President Trump become the Republican nominee for the third consecutive time, said Mr. DeSantis, then "the whole election will be about him," his behavior, and "all these different investigations and legal cases."

"Which, look," he added, "I think are unfair. I will fire Jack Smith on day one when I'm president. That is without saying."
...



Cool
legendary
Activity: 3906
Merit: 1373
~

As I said. Obama appeared essentially out of nowhere. Why he would have been selected by the Dems is a question. A 'nobody' doesn't stand much chance of winning a popularity contest. So, was his win a fluke? Or was it fraudulently done?

A population of 330 million doesn't look like a very big number when you simply look at it - 330,000,000. Not big. You can write it many times on an 8.5 x 11 sheet of paper. It takes a lot longer to get 330 million people to understand election fraud, and how it is being done. Since Trump didn't do election fraud, and is against it, that's why people are in favor of Trump more and more. However, election fraud has been done for many decades... at least to some extent.

If no fraudulent prosecutorial activity was done, the investigation would simply have been dropped long ago. Nobody knows what would happen if somebody else other than Smith were illegally appointed like Smith was... or in other illegal ways. Your 'question' is a non-question until you lay the groundwork for it.

Cool

So you cannot just take in your head the simple consideration that Obama could have just been more appealing to the average voter within the country than his political foes and so got elected? Is it not simpler than assuming there has been decades long of electoral fraud going on in the United States?
The most ironic part of the stuff you say and it gets repeated by o many, is that you all think you are going a good deed for the sake of your country and democracy, when it is the complete opposite. Before Trump a Republican defeat in the ballot was just accepted and people moved on to try to improve their strategy and politics, not anymore, from now on people will start to further lose faith in democracy.
You believe you are saving your lovely country but in fact you are harming it beyond what you can even assume. Makes me believe you could actually be an agent from the Kremlin.

Even Fox has already admitted there has been no election fraud in 2020 and people like you who used to consume Fox 24/7 during the 2020 cannot just admit Trump was defeated in a free election in the United States.


Take a look at Bush (W), President before Obama. His Dad was a CIA head for a while. How did his dad get elected? Then consider that W's grandfather, Prescott Bush, helped Hitler with banking, and supplies through shipping in WW2 - https://duckduckgo.com/?q=bush+nazi&ia=web. So, the people might have voted for anybody - even Donald Duck, if he had been on the ballot - just to get out from under the Bush crime family. Obama just happened to be pushed into the forefront by the Dem leaders.

What's wrong with losing faith in Democracy? Self-rule doesn't mean Democracy is the necessary way. As I have been showing you for weeks now, the American Republic is better than any Democracy for self-rule. The American Republic is based on two things:
1. The right of individual people to private property, including your body, your land, and everything else you own;
2. The right of individual people to contract (meaning the right to contract out of contracts, as well as, into them).
But since the American people don't know this, they don't know how to get themselves out from under the thumb of the Federal Government. However, Bitcoin and the Altcoins are a good start.

As for election fraud, the fraud might not exist in somebody doing something illegal. For example, if the election controllers of every State made a law/policy that Hispo was allowed to vote in every election, and that he/she could vote a million times at every poll, when you voted, it would not be illegal... at least until the election people were called out on it and it was adjudicated to be illegal in court.

Why would such a thing NOT be illegal? Because the election people in every State have been given authority by the Federal Constitution for handling the elections.

Now here is the big HOWEVER. Doing something like this by the election people would be unconscionable... against good conscience. But until the election people are called out on it, it is not illegal... necessarily.

So, from a legal direction, there has been no fraud. But from a spirit-of-the-American-people, the fraud was great. Neither Trump nor anybody else has figured out how to answer this one correctly, yet, except by making corrections, and doing the next election the right way.

As long as you have electronic voting machines that are connected to the Internet, and that can be manipulated from the outside via the Internet, you can't be certain of having fair and honest elections.

Cool
legendary
Activity: 1162
Merit: 2025
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
~

There are reasons why the law is as it is. There are reasons why policy is as it is. Nobody knows what things would be like if a legal prosecutor had been appointed, because that route hasn't been taken.

Paperwork can be manipulated. Obama appeared out of nowhere. His winning of the election might have happened through fraudulent election practices. Trump didn't have to go that route. He was popular enough that he could win on popularity... even back in the day.

The whole idea of MAGA and Trump's fight is to make things legal. How can an illegal prosecutor legally prosecute somebody? Isn't it somebody who is on the job legally what we are after? Or should we get a bunch of second grade school kids to be the court? Such would have about as much validity as Smith, whatever the outcome might be... at least according to Smith's validity as reported in the article.

If you look through American court cases, you will find that things like the illegality of Smith have set loads of people free, even when they were guilty.

Cool

What do you mean Obama victory for the presidency of the United States could have been fraudulent? The whole idea and movement of election denial one started to seriously have repercutions in the political state of your country after the first presidency of Trump, not before. The Republican party did not need to resort on denial of the election results because back then, they were reasonable enough to focus on legislation and policies.
Also, Donald Trump was not always as popular as you claim he was, he actually had other presidential runs before his infamous one in 2016 and he ended up losing all of them, so in my opinion, to claim Trump's popularity was always high is false.  Roll Eyes


You did not quite explained to me how this investigation would be impacted if Smith was appointed by other politician , by the way.

As I said. Obama appeared essentially out of nowhere. Why he would have been selected by the Dems is a question. A 'nobody' doesn't stand much chance of winning a popularity contest. So, was his win a fluke? Or was it fraudulently done?

A population of 330 million doesn't look like a very big number when you simply look at it - 330,000,000. Not big. You can write it many times on an 8.5 x 11 sheet of paper. It takes a lot longer to get 330 million people to understand election fraud, and how it is being done. Since Trump didn't do election fraud, and is against it, that's why people are in favor of Trump more and more. However, election fraud has been done for many decades... at least to some extent.

If no fraudulent prosecutorial activity was done, the investigation would simply have been dropped long ago. Nobody knows what would happen if somebody else other than Smith were illegally appointed like Smith was... or in other illegal ways. Your 'question' is a non-question until you lay the groundwork for it.

Cool

So you cannot just take in your head the simple consideration that Obama could have just been more appealing to the average voter within the country than his political foes and so got elected? Is it not simpler than assuming there has been decades long of electoral fraud going on in the United States?
The most ironic part of the stuff you say and it gets repeated by o many, is that you all think you are going a good deed for the sake of your country and democracy, when it is the complete opposite. Before Trump a Republican defeat in the ballot was just accepted and people moved on to try to improve their strategy and politics, not anymore, from now on people will start to further lose faith in democracy.
You believe you are saving your lovely country but in fact you are harming it beyond what you can even assume. Makes me believe you could actually be an agent from the Kremlin.

Even Fox has already admitted there has been no election fraud in 2020 and people like you who used to consume Fox 24/7 during the 2020 cannot just admit Trump was defeated in a free election in the United States.
legendary
Activity: 3906
Merit: 1373
~

There are reasons why the law is as it is. There are reasons why policy is as it is. Nobody knows what things would be like if a legal prosecutor had been appointed, because that route hasn't been taken.

Paperwork can be manipulated. Obama appeared out of nowhere. His winning of the election might have happened through fraudulent election practices. Trump didn't have to go that route. He was popular enough that he could win on popularity... even back in the day.

The whole idea of MAGA and Trump's fight is to make things legal. How can an illegal prosecutor legally prosecute somebody? Isn't it somebody who is on the job legally what we are after? Or should we get a bunch of second grade school kids to be the court? Such would have about as much validity as Smith, whatever the outcome might be... at least according to Smith's validity as reported in the article.

If you look through American court cases, you will find that things like the illegality of Smith have set loads of people free, even when they were guilty.

Cool

What do you mean Obama victory for the presidency of the United States could have been fraudulent? The whole idea and movement of election denial one started to seriously have repercutions in the political state of your country after the first presidency of Trump, not before. The Republican party did not need to resort on denial of the election results because back then, they were reasonable enough to focus on legislation and policies.
Also, Donald Trump was not always as popular as you claim he was, he actually had other presidential runs before his infamous one in 2016 and he ended up losing all of them, so in my opinion, to claim Trump's popularity was always high is false.  Roll Eyes


You did not quite explained to me how this investigation would be impacted if Smith was appointed by other politician , by the way.

As I said. Obama appeared essentially out of nowhere. Why he would have been selected by the Dems is a question. A 'nobody' doesn't stand much chance of winning a popularity contest. So, was his win a fluke? Or was it fraudulently done?

A population of 330 million doesn't look like a very big number when you simply look at it - 330,000,000. Not big. You can write it many times on an 8.5 x 11 sheet of paper. It takes a lot longer to get 330 million people to understand election fraud, and how it is being done. Since Trump didn't do election fraud, and is against it, that's why people are in favor of Trump more and more. However, election fraud has been done for many decades... at least to some extent.

If no fraudulent prosecutorial activity was done, the investigation would simply have been dropped long ago. Nobody knows what would happen if somebody else other than Smith were illegally appointed like Smith was... or in other illegal ways. Your 'question' is a non-question until you lay the groundwork for it.

Cool
legendary
Activity: 1162
Merit: 2025
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Same with Biden as President. It was done unlawfully and illegally. He is not the President of the USA that the people hold in their hearts. He is a usurper who has been given the job of stealing the country... through the ignorance of the people about what the law is and what is really going on.
The perpetrators don't really care about the people. As long as they can achieve their results, that's all they care about. Standard criminal ideals and methods.

Cool

Okey, but let us assume the prosecutor was not appointed by Biden or someone under the orders of Biden. Would make any difference who appointed the prosecutor in the State of Florida?
Let us assume it is not Jack Smith who was not given the task to prosecute Trump but someone appointed long ago by Obama. What would be the problem? Because as far as I know there is no reasonable doubt even among those in the Republican party about the legitimacy of the presidency of Obama back in the day.

I recall Republicans wanted to try and bring on the table that Obama was a not natural American and he had been born outside of the United States, which was debunked, but that a different talking point.

Would it make any difference if Jack Smith would be replaced by a registered Republican? I do not think so, he would be still need to be required to do his job.


There are reasons why the law is as it is. There are reasons why policy is as it is. Nobody knows what things would be like if a legal prosecutor had been appointed, because that route hasn't been taken.

Paperwork can be manipulated. Obama appeared out of nowhere. His winning of the election might have happened through fraudulent election practices. Trump didn't have to go that route. He was popular enough that he could win on popularity... even back in the day.

The whole idea of MAGA and Trump's fight is to make things legal. How can an illegal prosecutor legally prosecute somebody? Isn't it somebody who is on the job legally what we are after? Or should we get a bunch of second grade school kids to be the court? Such would have about as much validity as Smith, whatever the outcome might be... at least according to Smith's validity as reported in the article.

If you look through American court cases, you will find that things like the illegality of Smith have set loads of people free, even when they were guilty.

Cool

What do you mean Obama victory for the presidency of the United States could have been fraudulent? The whole idea and movement of election denial one started to seriously have repercutions in the political state of your country after the first presidency of Trump, not before. The Republican party did not need to resort on denial of the election results because back then, they were reasonable enough to focus on legislation and policies.
Also, Donald Trump was not always as popular as you claim he was, he actually had other presidential runs before his infamous one in 2016 and he ended up losing all of them, so in my opinion, to claim Trump's popularity was always high is false.  Roll Eyes


You did not quite explained to me how this investigation would be impacted if Smith was appointed by other politician , by the way.
legendary
Activity: 3906
Merit: 1373

Same with Biden as President. It was done unlawfully and illegally. He is not the President of the USA that the people hold in their hearts. He is a usurper who has been given the job of stealing the country... through the ignorance of the people about what the law is and what is really going on.
The perpetrators don't really care about the people. As long as they can achieve their results, that's all they care about. Standard criminal ideals and methods.

Cool

Okey, but let us assume the prosecutor was not appointed by Biden or someone under the orders of Biden. Would make any difference who appointed the prosecutor in the State of Florida?
Let us assume it is not Jack Smith who was not given the task to prosecute Trump but someone appointed long ago by Obama. What would be the problem? Because as far as I know there is no reasonable doubt even among those in the Republican party about the legitimacy of the presidency of Obama back in the day.

I recall Republicans wanted to try and bring on the table that Obama was a not natural American and he had been born outside of the United States, which was debunked, but that a different talking point.

Would it make any difference if Jack Smith would be replaced by a registered Republican? I do not think so, he would be still need to be required to do his job.


There are reasons why the law is as it is. There are reasons why policy is as it is. Nobody knows what things would be like if a legal prosecutor had been appointed, because that route hasn't been taken.

Paperwork can be manipulated. Obama appeared out of nowhere. His winning of the election might have happened through fraudulent election practices. Trump didn't have to go that route. He was popular enough that he could win on popularity... even back in the day.

The whole idea of MAGA and Trump's fight is to make things legal. How can an illegal prosecutor legally prosecute somebody? Isn't it somebody who is on the job legally what we are after? Or should we get a bunch of second grade school kids to be the court? Such would have about as much validity as Smith, whatever the outcome might be... at least according to Smith's validity as reported in the article.

If you look through American court cases, you will find that things like the illegality of Smith have set loads of people free, even when they were guilty.

Cool
legendary
Activity: 1162
Merit: 2025
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Same with Biden as President. It was done unlawfully and illegally. He is not the President of the USA that the people hold in their hearts. He is a usurper who has been given the job of stealing the country... through the ignorance of the people about what the law is and what is really going on.
The perpetrators don't really care about the people. As long as they can achieve their results, that's all they care about. Standard criminal ideals and methods.

Cool

Okey, but let us assume the prosecutor was not appointed by Biden or someone under the orders of Biden. Would make any difference who appointed the prosecutor in the State of Florida?
Let us assume it is not Jack Smith who was not given the task to prosecute Trump but someone appointed long ago by Obama. What would be the problem? Because as far as I know there is no reasonable doubt even among those in the Republican party about the legitimacy of the presidency of Obama back in the day.

I recall Republicans wanted to try and bring on the table that Obama was a not natural American and he had been born outside of the United States, which was debunked, but that a different talking point.

Would it make any difference if Jack Smith would be replaced by a registered Republican? I do not think so, he would be still need to be required to do his job.

legendary
Activity: 3906
Merit: 1373
Actually, all the Dem criminality is connected. What we need is to get at the root. Smith and Biden are both Dem criminals, even though their areas of criminality may not be directly connected.

Whatever Trump does or doesn't do regarding the 2020 election, the damage has been done. If the election fraud had been answered immediately, things would be different.

The thing that Trump is looking at now is the future. MAGA. MAGA is still on the agenda. In the process, the Dems might be taken down. Also, the 2020 election truth might be brought out into the open.

If you really want to see how good Trump is as President, watch the two videos here http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Article/355556-2023-12-22-two-trump-speeches-to-the-united-nations.htm. Then consider the criminal activities of Biden.

Cool

But what is the crime which has been allegedly committed by Jack Smith as a prosecutor, though? What were you exactly expected for the federal government to do about all the documents Trump had stored in Mar-a-Lago? Just to ignore those documents wrongfully held in a private property?
Even when Biden discovered he had some documents in his home, he collaborated and he also got a prosecutor appointed to his case, a Republican one, in the end there were not charges against Biden; but there has been some against Trump. The difference is the amount of documents and the fact Trump tried to held those documents since he knew he had them, even got one of his lawyer to lie to the government in a documents signed for her. That could easily ruin her career in law.

You can argue all you want that Biden is a crook and he is also the head of a crime family (while at the same time he is also senile and does not not where he is), but what possible thing you can say against Jack Smith, who is just doing his job as a prosecutor. Even if he did not agree with what in going on politically in the country, he is supposed to do his join, because he took an oath to protect his Republic from criminals, after all.  Tongue


I apologize. I assumed you had read the OP, and maybe looked at the info at the websites listed there.

According to the OP, etc., Smith was appointed to the job in an unlawful way. So, legally he doesn't hold that position. This makes the whole hearing a sham.

Same with Biden as President. It was done unlawfully and illegally. He is not the President of the USA that the people hold in their hearts. He is a usurper who has been given the job of stealing the country... through the ignorance of the people about what the law is and what is really going on.

The perpetrators don't really care about the people. As long as they can achieve their results, that's all they care about. Standard criminal ideals and methods.

Cool
legendary
Activity: 1162
Merit: 2025
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
Actually, all the Dem criminality is connected. What we need is to get at the root. Smith and Biden are both Dem criminals, even though their areas of criminality may not be directly connected.

Whatever Trump does or doesn't do regarding the 2020 election, the damage has been done. If the election fraud had been answered immediately, things would be different.

The thing that Trump is looking at now is the future. MAGA. MAGA is still on the agenda. In the process, the Dems might be taken down. Also, the 2020 election truth might be brought out into the open.

If you really want to see how good Trump is as President, watch the two videos here http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Article/355556-2023-12-22-two-trump-speeches-to-the-united-nations.htm. Then consider the criminal activities of Biden.

Cool

But what is the crime which has been allegedly committed by Jack Smith as a prosecutor, though? What were you exactly expected for the federal government to do about all the documents Trump had stored in Mar-a-Lago? Just to ignore those documents wrongfully held in a private property?
Even when Biden discovered he had some documents in his home, he collaborated and he also got a prosecutor appointed to his case, a Republican one, in the end there were not charges against Biden; but there has been some against Trump. The difference is the amount of documents and the fact Trump tried to held those documents since he knew he had them, even got one of his lawyer to lie to the government in a documents signed for her. That could easily ruin her career in law.

You can argue all you want that Biden is a crook and he is also the head of a crime family (while at the same time he is also senile and does not not where he is), but what possible thing you can say against Jack Smith, who is just doing his job as a prosecutor. Even if he did not agree with what in going on politically in the country, he is supposed to do his join, because he took an oath to protect his Republic from criminals, after all.  Tongue
legendary
Activity: 3906
Merit: 1373
Actually, all the Dem criminality is connected. What we need is to get at the root. Smith and Biden are both Dem criminals, even though their areas of criminality may not be directly connected.

Whatever Trump does or doesn't do regarding the 2020 election, the damage has been done. If the election fraud had been answered immediately, things would be different.

The thing that Trump is looking at now is the future. MAGA. MAGA is still on the agenda. In the process, the Dems might be taken down. Also, the 2020 election truth might be brought out into the open.

If you really want to see how good Trump is as President, watch the two videos here http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Article/355556-2023-12-22-two-trump-speeches-to-the-united-nations.htm. Then consider the criminal activities of Biden.

Cool
legendary
Activity: 1162
Merit: 2025
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
You are talking about the Counsel of Jack Smith and you are also talking about your thoughts on Biden being a illegitimate President in the United States. But are you even aware Jack Smith has nothing to do with alleged election fraud in the 2020 election or something like it? Jack Smith is investigating Donald Trump because he seems to have willingly decided to take secret documents to his home in Florida, even though he was not supposed to do so.
Also, Why people like you never mention or talk about the countless lawsuits Trump tried to push forward about election fraud and could not doing because he did not have enough evidence to convince judges?

Even if Trump manages to get rightfully elected as president this next year and somehow tried to continue to push the narrative of a fraudulent election happening in the 2020, it would only hurt even further the trust people is supposed to have in the American democracy. The best thing he could do if he gets elected would be to apologize (he wont do that, so it would be enough to keep quiet about 2020). on the other hand if he tried to find evidence when there is none, it would be a continuous damage to the people trust on democracy in USA.
legendary
Activity: 3906
Merit: 1373
Jack Smith is an illegal counsel. This borders on treason if it isn't treason. The important point is, when it is found out that election fraud was done by the Dems in the 2020 election, it will be shown that Biden is an illegal president. Treason.


Special Counsel Jack Smith's Appointment Is Unconstitutional



https://reason.com/volokh/2023/12/20/special-counsel-jack-smmiths-appointment-is-unconstitutional/
On November 18, 2022, Attorney General Merrick Garland purported to appoint private citizen Jack L. Smith to be a Special Counsel with the power of one of the 93 U.S. Attorneys but with nationwide jurisdiction.  This makes Jack Smith more powerful than any of the 93 U.S. Attorneys even though they have been Senate-confirmed to their particular offices, and Jack Smith has not been Senate confirmed for the particular office, which he now claims to hold.  A close examination of the Justice Department's (DOJ's) organic statute makes it clear that, unlike at least four other Heads of Cabinet Departments, the Head of the Justice Department has not "in, the words of the Appointments Clause, been "by Law" *** vested" with the power to appoint inferior officers like Jack Smith who have more power than any of the 93 Senate-confirmed U.S. Attorneys.  This is made clear by an examination of the DOJ's organic statute, 28 U.S. C. Sections 509, 510, 515-519, 533, and, most importantly, Section 543.  This latter statute, 28 U.S.C. Section 543, explicitly allows the appointment by the Attorney General of a Special Counsel to assist a U.S. Attorney but not to replace him.  Comparison of the DOJ's organic statute with the organic statutes of at least four other Cabinet Departments illustrates the kind of clear laws by which Congress exercises its power "to by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, *** in the Heads of Departments."
...




Jack Smith Lacks Standing to File in the Supreme Court Because He is Only a Private Citizen



https://reason.com/volokh/2023/12/21/jack-smith-lacks-standing-to-file-in-the-supreme-court-because-he-is-only-a-private-citizen/
Private citizen Jack Smith lacks standing to petition the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari before judgement in United States v. Trump for the same reason I do.  Jack Smith is in the eyes of the Supreme Court a private citizen not an officer of the United States.  Standing issues need not be raised by the parties to a case nor can they be waived.  The Supreme Court justices must address them sua sponte.

The Supreme Court in United States v. Nixon overlooked Leo Jaworski's lack of standing because, if one consults the briefs in that case, one will find that no party ever raised the issue.  The Court cursorily assumed Jaworski was legally appointed without ever examining the issue raised by me, former Attorney General Ed Meese, and Professor Gary Lawson.  We discuss this issue at length in Steven G. Calabresi & Gary Lawson, Why Robert Mueller's Appointment as Special Counsel Was Unlawful, 95 Notre Dame Law Review 87, at pp. 118-125 (2019).  The D.C. Circuit and District Courts have declined to readdress this issue because of erroneous precedent in the D.C. Circuit, which does not bind the Supreme Court,  and in which the standing issue was never raised. See id., at 125-127.
...



Cool
Jump to: