We were TOTALLY played for fools w/Durham. I think the only person he even charged was Kevin Clinesmith, Esq. That lad had done what I always thought was THE worst thing an attorney can do: he lied to a tribunal , under OATH!! But Ol’Durham couldn’t even get a conviction of him!
And now the young deceiver is back practicing law—While Giuliani has been disbarred, and John Eastman fights to keep his law license.
HOW LONG O LORD?!?!?!
Was Clinesmith charged in DC?
DC juries are left wing rotten
They didn’t need a jury for a sweeheart plea deal:
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17445533/united-states-v-clinesmith/
The judge’s statement of reasons are still sealed.
Here is Carter Page’s victim impact statement:
I’ve forgotten the date now—when did that incredibly damning IG report come out? January ‘21? ‘22? After which some US attorney in , I think Iowa, Idaho? was appointed as prosecutor. Yay! Somebody outside the Beltway,who will actually investigate this stuff.
I remember Barr announcing, a year or so later, when asked what that guy had done: “Oh, he didn’t do anything. He thought he was supposed to wait.”
Mission accomplished, counsel.
Twitter petition to Supreme Court re Smith subpoena of Trump DMs. Up for Supreme Court conference on whether to grant 9/30/2024:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-1264.html
In the meantime, in Germany:
That has to be one of the more ridiculous requests made in the last 20 years. Guess no one serious is running Germany either. It’s like it’s an epidemic. ?Could it be “long Covid”. 
. 
8-1 decision, lone dissenter was Scalia: independent counsel act is not constitutional
But the point is that the act expired. So a key issue is where the statutory authority came from to appoint Smith.
There is a separate issue that distinguishes Smith from Durham (but not from Mueller). Durham was the current Senate-confirmed US Attorney for CT when he became special counsel. So he already was an officer holding a statutory office. Smith was not.
Here’s the 11th Circuit docket:
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/68955302/united-states-v-donald-trump/
Merrick Garland made a rookie mistake.
Scalia was always 3 steps ahead of everyone else.
Morrison v Olson was 1988.
Clarence Thomas joined Scotus in 1991.
In thought this was just an indefinite continuance. Do you think maybe he’ll just withdraw it completely? It would avoid any further questions about the legitimacy of Smith’s appointment.
Not sure I follow. Smith’s legitimacy is a separate issue from the case, ?is it not. He is or isn’t legitimate, regardless of whether the case goes forward. I would think resolving this issue would be useful for the future.