Can a decision by a District Judge and a Special Prosecutor be appealed?

[kentuck]

Or do we surrender everything to a dictator, without even a whimper?

In my opinion, yesterday was the saddest day in America's history. The Justice System surrendered to a criminal, with ill intent for the future of our country, for the first time in 248 years. We can no longer say that "no one is above the law."

It is such a momentous decision, it seems to me that it should be made by the highest Court in the land. Could not Joe Biden, the President, request that the case be fast-tracked to the Supreme Court? Or are we left with nothing but a "memo" from the Office of Legal Counsel in the DOJ?

Nothing less than the survival of our democracy depends on it.

[jimfields33]

1. It's over. Maybe they will be brought up in four years.

[kentuck]

2. It will not be brought up in four years...

..and a "report" would be useless to the general public, since they would not read it or believe a word said about it by the "fake news".

We can surrender or continue to fight. The choice is ours.

[jimfields33]

5. I think there will be plenty of opportunity to oppose

many things this new administration will do. These trials are probably not going to be successful in changing anything.

[kentuck]

6. Oppose with what?

The present Democratic Party minority? Surely you jest?

[jimfields33]

8. We had the minority in 2017 as well and stopped a lot.

[kentuck]

12. Good luck!

You are going to have a lot to stop.

[jimfields33]

15. I'm not in congress. But I trust our democratic politicians.

[bucolic_frolic]

3. Agree and it would be nice to hang responsibility on SCOTUS (R)s

instead of DOJ memos and personnel.

Maybe it's the refile later idea that entices them. Do they have something in mind? Or know something they're not telling us?
I doubt it. They have hidden behind the will of the people being supreme even though the will of the people was never trusted enough to gut Electoral College or universal voting requirements. This a great Machiavellian error: the State has no way to protect itself from a hostile takeover by duped voters and malevolent politicians. The latter is a long time weakness testified to by the paltry number of impeachments, lax enforcement of 14A, to name just two. Believe in Fitzmas, Mueller Report, impeachment 2, patriotic Senators though. They're coming to save us.

[marble falls]

4. All the way to the Supreme Court as long as the jurisdictions agree to a hearing.

[Scrivener7]

7. The Supreme Court won't do anything. Six justices are literally owned by Opus Dei. This is a victory for them.

Is it possible they are waiting to reinstate the charges when we have a more sympathetic system, top to bottom?

I have little faith that this will happen for many years, but I suppose that could be a motivation.

[kentuck]

10. In this case, nothing would be something.

There are so many issues involved in this case.

It is true that they made horrible decisions with their rulings on the 14th Amendment and the "immunity" case.

But there are other questions that should be addressed. Can a former president be charged with obstruction of justice and theft of government secrets when the crimes are committed after they leave office? They are officially civilian status?

Is it constitutional to appoint a "Special Counsel"?

Can a president be sworn into office with criminal charges hanging over his head or should they be resolved before he is sworn in?

Can a "memo" from the OLC over-rule our Constitution?

Should the Democrats accept responsibility for its failure to prosecute or should they share the blame with the Supreme Court?

Can a President create his own Committee to investigate government spending, or is that a duty of the Congress?

Can a President continue to do business with foreign entities, even though it is a clear violation of the emoluments clause of the Constitution?

It seems there are a million questions and no answers.

[Scrivener7]

13. But the overriding question to all that is whether we

want these 6 to be the ones deciding those things?

I can't imagine what life must be like for the 3 sane ones.

[kentuck]

14. I think the bigger question is do we hold them responsible for their decisions?

The Court is not going to change hands anytime soon.

Let the 6 decide.

[Scrivener7]

36. How do we do that?

[ramedy]

9. No.

The case has been dismissed at the request of the SP.

It’s over.

Please thank AG Garland on the way out.

[kentuck]

11. So, you are saying it cannot be appealed?

Or that it should not be appealed?

[Solomon]

16. We are saying it's over period. Won't be appealed, and won't be brought back after 4 years.

[kentuck]

18. I sense an assumption that we will survive the four years and go back to normal?

I'm not so sure about that.

[Ocelot II]

26. There's nothing to appeal if a dismissal was ordered with the consent

of both parties. There's no controversy to be appealed.

[ramedy]

31. A case that is dismissed cannot be appealed.

There is no case to appeal. It was dismissed without prejudice which would permit it to be re filed in the future, but it won’t be.

It’s over.

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

19. No

It's done.

[Bettie]

20. Apparently, we surrender everything to a dictator

without even a whisper.

The entire "justice" system has surrendered. He owns it all now and can do whatever he pleases without any pushback.

[kentuck]

21. I'm sure we will get exactly what we deserve.

Surrender does not have an exit door.

[Bettie]

22. And the people doing the surrendering on our behalf

all have enough resources to leave the country if it is safer for them, certainly enough resources to keep going.

It's those of us who aren't wealthy who will suffer, so a win/win for the "upper classes".

[kentuck]

23. Definitely a win for the billionaires.

I would agree.

Now they just have to divide the spoils. And it seems the fights have already started between Musk and a few others?

[spanone]

24. Let's face it. Our Department of Justed failed America...miserably.

[Ocelot II]

27. Leonard Leo, Harlan Crow, Ginni Thomas, Martha Alito, John Roberts, Sam Alito,

and Clarence Thomas love it when you blame Garland and Biden for the fact that the Supreme Court stopped the cases against Trump.

[ColinC]

28. The government can probably be sued. I imagkne there can be a strong case made for it.

[onenote]

33. By whom? And on what legal basis?

[Doodley]

29. I feel we are living through the end of America.

[ramedy]

32. Yes. We are.

Take care of yourself. Nobody is going to save you.

[Marthe48]

30. At 4 a.m. I was awake

I thought that if traitor is installed, America is over. I thought if we prevent traitor from being installed, America is over. Discouraging. Probably over half of the population abhors the result of the recent travesty of law and choice. I doubt that any of us on that side will accept what has happened and go along to get along. We have to keep talking, take our views on the offensive. I think the rwnj will get tired sooner than we will. Only maschists will accept the hell on the way. Only the megolomaniacs will support it wholeheartedly. They current vanguard will die sooner or later. There can be hope that at least some of their offspring will oppose the evilness of their parents.

Just remember that not all unions need to be formalized. Every day you set an example of decency, every time you do an act of kindness, every time you choose honesty over lies, you are honoring the principles of the U.S.A. We might be in a million oieces right now, but the enemies of America, here and abroad, can't force any one of us to embrace their vision of living.

We are in for a hard time, and we need to prepare the best we can to get through it and take our country along to the other side.

[onenote]

34. Who would appeal it?

The prosecution asked for the dismissal. The defense would never dispute it. Who would have any legal standing to intervene and appeal? And what would the appeal claim?

[Igel]

35. A case is between the plaintiff and the defendants.

We outsiders and bystanders can have an opinion--so can Xi, Maduro, and the people living in some small village in Nepal.

Who matters? The plaintiffs and the defendants. We are neither. We can opine, whine, cheer and jeer, but who matters?

If you're taken to trial for something by the government, do you want 340 million people not party to the case to have the right to appeal if you win or if the prosecution drops the case against you or files to suspend it for some reason? I think not.

I get the desire for revenge, but law is there to prevent groups from forming to take personal revenge, even if claimed to be "for the common good."