Judge Aileen Cannon has dismissed the classified documents case against Donald Trump.
In a ruling Monday, Cannon said the appointment of special counsel Jack Smith violated the Constitution.
Judge Aileen Cannon has dismissed the classified documents case against Donald Trump.
In a ruling Monday, Cannon said the appointment of special counsel Jack Smith violated the Constitution.
Judge Aileen Cannon has dismissed the classified documents case against Donald Trump.
In a ruling Monday, Cannon said the appointment of special counsel Jack Smith violated the Constitution.
In a ruling Monday, Cannon said the appointment of special counsel Jack Smith violated the Constitution.
trump appointee !
who didnt see this coming several months ago ?
In a ruling Monday, Cannon said the appointment of special counsel Jack Smith violated the Constitution.
trump appointee !
who didnt see this coming several months ago ?
In a ruling Monday, Cannon said the appointment of special counsel Jack Smith violated the Constitution.
trump appointee !
who didnt see this coming several months ago ?
In a ruling Monday, Cannon said the appointment of special counsel Jack Smith violated the Constitution.
trump appointee !
who didnt see this coming several months ago ?
The dismissal comes following Supreme Court conservative Justice Clarence Thomas’ criticism of Smith’s appointment in the presidential immunity case.
The dismissal comes following Supreme Court conservative Justice Clarence Thomas’ criticism of Smith’s appointment in the presidential immunity case.
Trump faced dozens of felony counts accusing him of illegally hoarding classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida, and obstructing FBI efforts to get them back.
Trump faced dozens of felony counts accusing him of illegally hoarding classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida, and obstructing FBI efforts to get them back.
so she is not ruling on the merit of the case itself but only saying that the appointment of special counsel jack smith was erroneous ??
so she is not ruling on the merit of the case itself but only saying that the appointment of special counsel jack smith was erroneous ??
so she is not ruling on the merit of the case itself but only saying that the appointment of special counsel jack smith was erroneous ??
so she is not ruling on the merit of the case itself but only saying that the appointment of special counsel jack smith was erroneous ??
@KellyM_1964
Right. The Trump appointee is choosing to agree with the Trump team that Jack Smith should not be prosecuting the case. The case itself can still proceed after refiling with a different prosecuter, according to her ruling.
She is not ruling on the merits of the case itslef.
@KellyM_1964
Right. The Trump appointee is choosing to agree with the Trump team that Jack Smith should not be prosecuting the case. The case itself can still proceed after refiling with a different prosecuter, according to her ruling.
She is not ruling on the merits of the case itslef.
Cannon, whose handling of the case had drawn scrutiny since before the charges were even filed, wrote her ruling in a 93-page order
Cannon, whose handling of the case had drawn scrutiny since before the charges were even filed, wrote her ruling in a 93-page order
Interesting!
Interesting!
@Zeus4par
Just tuned into MSNBC and following the action now...
@Zeus4par
Just tuned into MSNBC and following the action now...
naturally chump is on his partisan social media site lying his ass off about this
naturally chump is on his partisan social media site lying his ass off about this
@KellyM_1964
Of course! Includes ranting that the rape case was all political fraud; that he never even met the woman, blah, blah, blah
@KellyM_1964
Of course! Includes ranting that the rape case was all political fraud; that he never even met the woman, blah, blah, blah
they r calling aileen loose cannon an " outlier" with making this ruling which goes against 25 years of legal precedent
they r calling aileen loose cannon an " outlier" with making this ruling which goes against 25 years of legal precedent
they r saying this ruling by the trump appointed judge could be wrong and overturned on appeal to the 11th circuit
they r saying this ruling by the trump appointed judge could be wrong and overturned on appeal to the 11th circuit
@KellyM_1964
Most definitely!
The ruling does not address the case at all, only the prosecutor bring the case.
@KellyM_1964
Most definitely!
The ruling does not address the case at all, only the prosecutor bring the case.
some legal analysts r suggesting this case of theft & obstruction with 3 defendents could b refiled in the dc district which would eliminate that chump lover florida judge who had been deliberately delaying this case for months
some legal analysts r suggesting this case of theft & obstruction with 3 defendents could b refiled in the dc district which would eliminate that chump lover florida judge who had been deliberately delaying this case for months
@KellyM_1964
I heard that too. The appointment of conservative Robert Muller during the Trump regime was done the same way as was done here for Jack Smith, but that was ok Same for others!
@KellyM_1964
I heard that too. The appointment of conservative Robert Muller during the Trump regime was done the same way as was done here for Jack Smith, but that was ok Same for others!
appeal coming soon ??
appeal coming soon ??
@KellyM_1964
Likely! Very soon! Wouldn't be surprised if it was tomorrow!
@KellyM_1964
Likely! Very soon! Wouldn't be surprised if it was tomorrow!
hoooo boy now they r saying that this ruling means the hunter biden conviction must be thrown out for the same reason
hoooo boy now they r saying that this ruling means the hunter biden conviction must be thrown out for the same reason
hoooo boy now they r saying that this ruling means the hunter biden conviction must be thrown out for the same reason
hoooo boy now they r saying that this ruling means the hunter biden conviction must be thrown out for the same reason
@KellyM_1964
Say what?
@KellyM_1964
Say what?
Yeah, what's that all about?
Yeah, what's that all about?
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.