Tracking Trump Administration and Cabinet picks

[TwiceHorn 31,512]

6 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

Thanks. So, Cannon ruled that Nixon was right, and the court wrong, and Cato agreed? Or, Nixon was agreeing that special counsel appointments are valid?

No, she dismissed that part of the Nixon holding as not essential and therefore of no precedential value. Part of the problem is that Nixon the litigant didn't raise the issue of the validity of the appointment, just whether the counsel had certain powers. 

The Cato article didn't agree or disagree with the decision it just analyzed it. 

[Schulz2.0 28,993]

54 minutes ago, Balcones said:

https://www.cato.org/commentary/analyzing-judge-cannons-opinion-was-jack-smith-legally-appointed
 

read away

[Willfully Horn 8,040]

17 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

No, she dismissed that part of the Nixon holding as not essential and therefore of no precedential value. Part of the problem is that Nixon the litigant didn't raise the issue of the validity of the appointment, just whether the counsel had certain powers. 

The Cato article didn't agree or disagree with the decision it just analyzed it. 

So, did Cannon decide that everyone who had dealt with these special prosecutors was clueless on what mattered? Did Cannon discover that none of them were empaneled legally, since the statute mentions officers, and not officials?

[TwiceHorn 31,512]

4 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

So, did Cannon decide that everyone who had dealt with these special prosecutors was clueless on what mattered? Did Cannon discover that none of them were empaneled legally, since the statute mentions officers, and not officials?

No.  It is implicit in her holding that all special counsel appointed since the Ethics In Government Act expired in 1999 were appointed invalidly, as well as any appointed before that Act in 1979.

[Willfully Horn 8,040]

Just now, TwiceHorn said:

No.  It is implicit in her holding that all special counsel appointed since the Ethics In Government Act expired in 1999 were appointed invalidly, as well as any appointed before that Act in 1979.

OK. I think I understand. Thanks.

[Bullneck 19,185]

https://www.instagram.com/p/DCu1FwHyZjH/?hl=en

 

 

[TwiceHorn 31,512]

36 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

OK. I think I understand. Thanks.

The Ethics in Government Act was the only Congressional legislation (redundant) that provided for special counsel, called under the statute "independent counsel."  It was a complex scheme, but, given that it was legislation, there was no question that it complied with the Constitution, especially after Morrison v. Olson, which specifically so held.

Every special counsel appointed before or after that relied on the express and inherent powers of the Attorney General, which Cannon found were lacking, unlike every other court that has ever considered it.

[Prepuce of Doom 21,097]

[Willfully Horn 8,040]

43 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

The Ethics in Government Act was the only Congressional legislation (redundant) that provided for special counsel, called under the statute "independent counsel."  It was a complex scheme, but, given that it was legislation, there was no question that it complied with the Constitution, especially after Morrison v. Olson, which specifically so held.

Every special counsel appointed before or after that relied on the express and inherent powers of the Attorney General, which Cannon found were lacking, unlike every other court that has ever considered it.

Again, thanks. Perhaps I am missing something, but it seems as though “Yeah, except for those prosecutors appointed under the Ethics in Government Act,” could have also served in answering my last post.

Enlightened by your posts, I reread the Cato analysis. Cannon had four statutes to consider, which were cited by Garland in appointing Smith. One she did, indeed, reject by arguing the statute clearly applied to the FBI, given the distinction between officers and officials. Another she dismissed due to her belief that the phrase “attorney specially retained”, meant only attorneys that were already employed. Because “retained” was used in its past tense. As if hiring someone for a purpose is best expressed “attorney specially retain.” And for another, she proclaimed that “prosecute,” in 1966, actually was meant to convey a narrower definition of the word “prosecute.” She is arguing that, in ‘66, “prosecute” meant to help further a prosecution, and not to actually, you know, prosecute.

 

TL/dr Absent further information, I disagree that the Cato analysis was anything other than bullshit.

 

Edited yesterday at 03:58 AM by Willfully Horn

[tx 3 putt 77,235]

 

[956 Worldwide 34,738]

15 hours ago, Schulz2.0 said:

It is darkly funny that some think-tankers wrote a Serious Lawyer Analysis of Cannon’s decision as if it were something other than post hoc gobbledygook seeking to justify a pre-determined outcome.  
 

There’s a whole industry around this.  The right shits the bed and they launder the sheets down to a sickly all-over beige and tell everyone it’s normal. 

[4th&Five 41,571]

 

[TwiceHorn 31,512]

13 hours ago, Willfully Horn said:

Again, thanks. Perhaps I am missing something, but it seems as though “Yeah, except for those prosecutors appointed under the Ethics in Government Act,” could have also served in answering my last post.

Enlightened by your posts, I reread the Cato analysis. Cannon had four statutes to consider, which were cited by Garland in appointing Smith. One she did, indeed, reject by arguing the statute clearly applied to the FBI, given the distinction between officers and officials. Another she dismissed due to her belief that the phrase “attorney specially retained”, meant only attorneys that were already employed. Because “retained” was used in its past tense. As if hiring someone for a purpose is best expressed “attorney specially retain.” And for another, she proclaimed that “prosecute,” in 1966, actually was meant to convey a narrower definition of the word “prosecute.” She is arguing that, in ‘66, “prosecute” meant to help further a prosecution, and not to actually, you know, prosecute.

 

TL/dr Absent further information, I disagree that the Cato analysis was anything other than bullshit.

 

Well, to me, they just reported on her analysis, gave the pros and cons of it and kind of left it alone beyond that.  For example, this:

Which side is right? In my view, this is a genuinely close question. First, Judge Cannon may well have put too much weight on the distinction between the words “officer” and “official,” given that the government has identified other statutes in which Congress appears to have granted the authority to appoint “officials” who are officers in the constitutional sense.

I think you're conflating her bullshit with Cato's.

[tx 3 putt 77,235]

10 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

 

 

 

[InkaUtexas 26,017]

25 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

 

How about the Green Party as a thanks for Michigan?

[956 Worldwide 34,738]

On 11/23/2024 at 12:16 PM, Hank Kingsley said:

Find yourself a woman that's as patient, forgiving, and optimistic as Anastasis is about Trump's administration. 

 

“These burger patties are only 15-20 percent human feces, the rest is prime brisket and sirloin trimmings.”

[Bozo_Casanova 26,510]

 

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, to me, they just reported on her analysis, gave the pros and cons of it and kind of left it alone beyond that.  For example, this:

Which side is right? In my view, this is a genuinely close question. First, Judge Cannon may well have put too much weight on the distinction between the words “officer” and “official,” given that the government has identified other statutes in which Congress appears to have granted the authority to appoint “officials” who are officers in the constitutional sense.

I think you're conflating her bullshit with Cato's.

Cato and FedSoc: originalist except when textualism is more convenient except when they are making stuff up if they have to. 

[tx 3 putt 77,235]

 

[Surly Bevo 25,089]

5 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

 

Alexander Hamilton grew up in the Caribbean ya stupid sip

[Underdog 28,754]

Surprised it's not the pimple popper Dr. 

[Macanudo 12,999]

16 minutes ago, Surly Bevo said:

Alexander Hamilton grew up in the Caribbean ya stupid sip

And he's dead.   What's your point?

[Gap03 3,308]

1 hour ago, tx 3 putt said:

And yet she apparently is not passing the Q purity test of never supporting Covid vaccines, so they're crying about that.  (Plus, she's a woman so ... you know...)

[tx 3 putt 77,235]

Just now, Gap03 said:

And yet she apparently is not passing the Q purity test of never supporting Covid vaccines, so they're crying about that.  (Plus, she's a woman so ... you know...)

 

[Underdog 28,754]

Smart, thoughtful, compassionate and a nice person are usually automatic disqualifiers for Repubs. 

[Brisketexan 105,180]

6 minutes ago, Underdog said:

Smart, thoughtful, compassionate and a nice person are usually automatic disqualifiers for Repubs. 

Maybe they can make up some stories about marital infidelity or her molesting some kids to bolster her Republican bona fides?

[Chad Fuck 17,698]

10 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Maybe they can make up some stories about marital infidelity or her molesting some kids to bolster her Republican bona fides?

I mean, her headshot looks okay.  I might volunteer for that...

[Bozo_Casanova 26,510]

2 hours ago, Surly Bevo said:

Alexander Hamilton grew up in the Caribbean ya stupid sip

How does a bastard, orphan son of a whore and a Scotsman, dropped in the middle of a forgotten spot in the Caribbean by providence, impoverished in squalor, grow up to be a hero and a scholar?

[Underdog 28,754]

^Username and shit. 

[Balcones 309]

4 hours ago, tx 3 putt said:

 

Is this a big deal? Don’t people already know smoking is dangerous?

[Pancho 44,880]

[mchookem 16,342]

[Brisketexan 105,180]

[Fastbreak 3,989]

If you make all black people white, then the racism problem is solved. I’m not sure why others aren’t seeing this…

[Bullneck 19,185]

6 hours ago, tx 3 putt said:

 

Yeah, but is the current SG boneable?  
 

Advantage: Trump

[Bullneck 19,185]

12 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

 

They will be immune!  Like a racism vaccine.  

[HornOnTheBayou 8,942]

58 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

They will be immune!  Like a racism vaccine.  

[Hermanator 7,124]

8 hours ago, tx 3 putt said:

 

 

[Surly Bevo 25,089]

2 hours ago, Fastbreak said:

If you make all black people white, then the racism problem is solved. I’m not sure why others aren’t seeing this…

[tx 3 putt 77,235]