• @Lauchs
      link
      117 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.)

        • @Lauchs
          link
          97 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.

            • @Lauchs
              link
              87 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!

                • @Lauchs
                  link
                  76 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?