Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Mr.WeRP

(1,073 posts)

2. Thomas wrote in his concurring opinion that the appointment of Jack Smith was illegal...

Reply to Raven123 (Original post)

Mon Jul 1, 2024, 04:21 PM

Jul 2024

He is telling Cannon to make the decision that the case is invalid due to this; Smith will appeal and it will go up to the Supreme Court. How do you think they will rule?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

duckworth969

7 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Doesn't the SCOTUS ruling make the documents case more important? [View all] Raven123 Jul 2024 OP

Nothing is going to happen in the document case as long as Loose Cannon RockRaven Jul 2024 #1

Thomas wrote in his concurring opinion that the appointment of Jack Smith was illegal... Mr.WeRP Jul 2024 #2

They have already ruled Smith's appointment was legal previously. nt Fiendish Thingy Jul 2024 #3

Just saying what happened Mr.WeRP Jul 2024 #6

It makes the election critical. Nothing else matters. Either we win the WH and Congress or our Country is gone. JohnSJ Jul 2024 #4

I bet he took records before leaving office. But that was illegal, so don't think ruling Silent Type Jul 2024 #5

Please don't get me wrong Raven123 Jul 2024 #7