- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: BREAKING: One of Jack Smith’s prosecutors has been charged with MULTIPLE FELONIES for stea
Posted on 5/20/26 at 6:11 pm to Rebel
Posted on 5/20/26 at 6:11 pm to Rebel
quote:
i have to call a spade a spade here. you swung pretty hard on Jack Smith's sack.
SFP: “Show me where I said those words verbatim.”
1
Posted on 5/20/26 at 6:12 pm to Rebel
quote:
i inferred he was talking about the way the DOJ will pressure people caught up in process crimes and other lower rated felonies to get them to more forthcoming on their crimes.
But we are talking about the Jack Smith investigation. That doesn't overlap with what we know so again, silliness.
Posted on 5/20/26 at 6:12 pm to BurlesonCountyAg
quote:
SFP: “Show me where I said those words verbatim.”
That's the response strawman arguments get
How would you respond to people dishonestly re-stating your positions/arguments? If you have another idea I'm all ears
Posted on 5/20/26 at 6:13 pm to SlowFlowPro
I educated lots of people who needed help either due to ignorance or following bad/dishonest online content. Was that slop posted a lot? Yes, which means I did have to respond quite a bit.
You seem to always respond quite a bit to topics you know nothing about. In your mind, you are the genius in the room and have to enlightened us with your brilliance, but in reality you are just the village idiot.
You seem to always respond quite a bit to topics you know nothing about. In your mind, you are the genius in the room and have to enlightened us with your brilliance, but in reality you are just the village idiot.
Posted on 5/20/26 at 6:14 pm to Branson
quote:
You seem to always respond quite a bit to topics you know nothing about.
Uh, no
quote:
In your mind, you are the genius in the room and have to enlightened us with your brilliance, but in reality you are just the village idiot.
This Dunnin-Kruger move always makes me chuckle
Posted on 5/20/26 at 6:15 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Your favorite illegally appointed special counsel
?
quote:
?
AI Overview
The legality of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s appointment has been highly disputed, remaining an unresolved constitutional question. While the Department of Justice Jack Smith (U.S. Department of Justice special counsel) and other courts historically upheld the role, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon ruled it unconstitutional, though that decision was ultimately vacated after Smith withdrew his appeals following the 2024 election Jack Smith (U.S. Department of Justice special counsel).
The Legal Dispute
Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Smith in 2022 using standard DOJ special counsel regulations. Legal challenges to his authority centered on the U.S. Constitution's Appointments Clause:
The Challenge: Attorneys for Donald Trump argued that the U.S. Attorney General lacks the constitutional or statutory authority to independently appoint a private citizen to wield such sweeping federal prosecutorial power without a Senate-confirmed appointment Can the Attorney General Appoint a Special Counsel? - Podcast.
The District Court Ruling: In July 2024, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon agreed, dismissing the classified documents case against Trump Judge says Jack Smith wasn't validly appointed in .... She ruled that Smith's appointment violated the Appointments Clause because neither Congress nor the President granted the Attorney General authority to appoint a "principal" or "inferior" officer of this nature Judge says Jack Smith wasn't validly appointed in ....
Posted on 5/20/26 at 6:15 pm to Branson
His post history can be summarized as objection nonresponsive. Never answers direct questions
Posted on 5/20/26 at 6:16 pm to tigerfan 64
There is only one appellate ruling on the issue and it's on my side.
Posted on 5/20/26 at 6:18 pm to NC_Tigah
She looks like Jeff Ross.
Posted on 5/20/26 at 6:20 pm to Rebel
My shocked face is in the shop due to excessive use…
Posted on 5/20/26 at 6:21 pm to Rebel
When FLTech was right about everyone starts its gonna be glorious
Posted on 5/20/26 at 6:23 pm to stuntman
quote:
She looks like Jeff Ross
I think you nailed it.
Posted on 5/20/26 at 6:23 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
There is only one appellate ruling on the issue and it's on my side.
How so?
It appears the appellate ruling only ruled to dismiss Jack's case, not on the legality of his appointment.
quote:
following the 2024 presidential election, Smith moved to dismiss the appeal and his pending cases, citing longstanding DOJ policy that a sitting president cannot be criminally prosecuted Jack Smith (lawyer) - Wikipedia. Because the appellate court granted the dismissal, the issue was never reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court, leaving the constitutional question unresolved by higher courts Jack Smith (U.S. Department of Justice special counsel).
Posted on 5/20/26 at 6:27 pm to tigerfan 64
There is a DC Court of Appeals ruling on this exact issue that was raised with Robert Mueller.
*ETA: The Trump admin rushed to dismiss their case against Trump's co-Defendants to avoid the appellate ruling by the 11th Circuit. There was a reason for that.
*ETA: The Trump admin rushed to dismiss their case against Trump's co-Defendants to avoid the appellate ruling by the 11th Circuit. There was a reason for that.
This post was edited on 5/20/26 at 6:32 pm
Posted on 5/20/26 at 6:30 pm to Sweep Da Leg
quote:
Bigger surprise is that this happened recently. Why in the frick was this person STILL working with or for the DOJ???
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.Posted on 5/20/26 at 6:32 pm to VoxDawg
Need to offer her immunity for information on Smith
Posted on 5/20/26 at 6:33 pm to texag7
quote:
Need to offer her immunity for information on Smith
See, reb? This is the silliness I was talking about
Posted on 5/20/26 at 6:36 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
This is the silliness I was talking about
There’s nothing silly about that suggestion
Posted on 5/20/26 at 6:40 pm to texag7
Why would they exchange immunity for what seems to be a clear, major crime for information for an extreme longshot that you could even get an indictment?
The problem is assuming illegality by Jack Smith when every one of his cases was litigated and scrutinized to such a degree. It's hard to imagine what crimes he could have committed that would withstand all of that examination.
This isn't Fanni Willis committing potential perjury and fricking her special counsel (which, was exposed via these same litigation methods, mind you).
The problem is assuming illegality by Jack Smith when every one of his cases was litigated and scrutinized to such a degree. It's hard to imagine what crimes he could have committed that would withstand all of that examination.
This isn't Fanni Willis committing potential perjury and fricking her special counsel (which, was exposed via these same litigation methods, mind you).
Posted on 5/20/26 at 6:43 pm to SlowFlowPro
If you want a really good corollary, your argument is as strong as when the insane leftists thought Trump's tax returns would reveal all of this illegal behavior, when Trump is under constant audit, basically. It has the same overview/scrutiny scenario as the Jack Smith prosecution and the same unlikeliness to be fruitful.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News