General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCannon questions Special Counsel funding, independence. Gets schooled.
Katie Phang @KatiePhang 2hNext up was James Pearce, on behalf of the Special Counsel's Office.
Pearce: Special Counsel is independent counsel that can access Congressionally-enacted permanent, indefinite funding.
Cannon: So it's limitless appropriations?
Pearce: Yes, consistent with the idea of
Cannon: Can you provide some examples of limitless appropriations?
Pearce: Yes, I can think of two. And it means that they are not limited by time or by amount.
Cannon then started to ask Pearce about the Special Counsel's website that showed the latest expenditure report. She even drilled down on specific line items, including the total amount of expenditures for November
Cannon: Is it $5.4 million or really $9 million?
Pearce: I'm not sure, but we can supplement w/the Court.
Cannon: That would be helpful because these are public documents.
Pearce: I understand, but your Honor, there is no case where any court has suggested that the total amount of expenditures is relevant.
Cannon: But when it's limitless, there is a separation of powers concern...
Pearce: In fact the caselaw says only to focus on the source [of funding] and the purpose [of the funding].
Cannon: Don't interrupt me.
Cannon: What about other funding sources? What is your substantiation for your argument that there is alternate funding available to the SCO?
Pearce: I can represent that there is the full commitment of the DOJ to fund the Special Counsel in this prosecution.
Pearce: The DOJ has over a billion dollars that can be used as appropriations to fund the Special Counsel's Office.
Pearce: There is sufficient independence and the special counsel strikes that balance of independence and accountability.
Pearce furthers that the special counsel can and should be able to operate outside of the DOJ.
Cannon: Are there any examples that you can think of when an Attorney General rescinds or modifies order of appointment of SC?
Pearce: I can't think of any examples where regulations were rescinded midstream, other than perhaps the Saturday Night Massacre.
Cannon: So this idea of
Pearce: So it's not really a question of whether the rescission happened or not, it's how is the power structured.
Cannon: Janet Reno said it's too much political pressure to yank a special prosecutor.
Pearce: There is a presumption of regularity. As far as our SC are concerned, SC have complied with specific framework, complying with DOJ policies, etc.
Pearce: The test of what makes someone a "principal officer" is not whether they are President-nominated and Senate-confirmed.
Link to tweet
"Don't interrupt me!"
https://www.rawstory.com/judge-cannon-hearing/
edhopper
(37,370 posts)is astounding
erronis
(23,882 posts)I'd love to be able to ask Cannon who is funding her?
bluestarone
(22,179 posts)TFG. WTF is wrong with this STUPID judge?
Mister Ed
(6,927 posts)She is answerable only to those who put her where she is: Donald Trump and the Federalist Society.
japple
(10,459 posts)GWB also had a hand in it.
mitch96
(15,804 posts)johnnyfins
(3,768 posts)1) She is overseeing a case against the guy who put her in office
2) OPINION ONLY: She could be getting rewarded and threatened at the same time.
3) She actually has consumed the kool aid and thinks that TSF could never do wrong.
4) She actually thinks that after all of this horseshit, she has a shot at being confirmed to SCOTUS one day.
onethatcares
(16,992 posts)isn't a certain someone known for line iteming any bill that passed across his desk? sounds like that certain person is acting like it's his money being spent to convict his self
chowder66
(12,245 posts)in matters of law that they use their lawsuits to learn on the job.
Same goes for Cannon in this case.
Pepsidog
(6,365 posts)triron
(22,240 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(60,320 posts)NoRethugFriends
(3,753 posts)Emile
(42,289 posts)to be arrested and removed as a judge.
Aviation Pro
(15,579 posts)And specialize in parking lot law.
If they keep their licenses.
WiVoter
(1,620 posts)A leak, 11th circuit, something? It is clear that justice will not be done here.
Diraven
(1,898 posts)But not sound like an idiot. Not going great so far.
live love laugh
(16,383 posts)NoMoreRepugs
(12,076 posts)Skittles
(171,716 posts)WHY THE FUCK IS THIS EVEN ALLOWED
LiberalFighter
(53,544 posts)GiqueCee
(4,259 posts)This woman is an imbecile! How did she ever get a law degree?
Aileen, sweetie, baby, cookie, honey. When the hole you've dug for yourself starts to look like a grave, it's time to stop digging.
Katcat
(574 posts)Retrograde
(11,419 posts)is often a sign that the person is in way over their heads and doesn't understand the bigger picture. So they focus on things they think they understand, whether it has bearing on the issue or not. Next I expect her to go into detail about the brands of office supplies the Special Prosecutor's office uses.
ms liberty
(11,237 posts)Response to bigtree (Original post)
Blue Idaho This message was self-deleted by its author.