59 Comments

So if this ruling eventually stands ... why wouldn't it apply to all the Robert Mueller SCO cases too? He was never Senate confirmed either.

Expand full comment
author

Might be too late...

Expand full comment

Too late?

The left is reversing court rulings post humus in some cases...

If the Left thought they could get John Wilkes Booth off on a technicality, they would.

They wouldn't even let the fact that the technicality in their argument didn't exist back during the crime stop them...

Expand full comment

I know it; I won't waste my time dissing the left wing unhinged dems.. I am focusing on MAGA AGAIN w/ Donald J Trump and J.D Vance.. ! Be of good cheer.. :) that is funny. you are right.. about that; YOU NAILED IT.. NOTHING WILL STOP THEM .. they have no plan, no vision other than the destruction and deconstruction of America. BUT WE THE PEOPLE are winning.. PRAY. :) !! if you do.

Expand full comment

Amen

Expand full comment

replying to both of those: the Mueller Special cases basically resolved nothing.. waste of money and I have never heard of "retroactively" revoking an "REPORT SUMMARY" which is what it is now called and nothing was actually ever done other than waste Donald Trump's time and accuse him of pile of crap and keep him occupied w/ nonsense which is the whole goal of the Demonrats LAWFARE. There is NO LOW they won't sink to. I am reading UNHUMAN now which is as good as Mark Levin's American Marxism. On a good note: MAKE AMERICAN GREAT AGAIN AGAIN!! :) good night.. :)

Expand full comment

Paul Manafort, Roger Stone and Michael Flynn might have something to say about that. I think none are still in jail/prison, but still...

Expand full comment

Wheels coming off this lib commie corrupt criminal gang

Expand full comment

Congratulations President Trump and hard working Patriots!!!!

Next up J6 J6 J6

It will be a doozy (Doucie;-)

Expand full comment

This is exaclty what has been needed: a judge who actually considers the Constitution in light of all the lawfare. The protagonists are going to end up only boxing themselves in if these cases continue to go to SCOTUS.

But then, the Dems have never been ones to follow the law much anyway...

Expand full comment

It’s amazing to see the effect one brave, honest individual can have on the world when they ignore the braying crowd and follow the Law.

Expand full comment

No matter what others say (and what others say is not law) and no matter whether she may err on the law from time to time, as judges often do, Judge Cannon is meticulous and cautious in her rulings. She is the last judge in the nation that one would want if one were in the mood to railroad a prosecution through. To that extent, it may very well be that in this case justice -- not just limited to the parties -- has been well served.

Expand full comment

Yes, Sumtingwong, the Constitution, in the light of all the lawfare is the central piece in evaluating a judge's actions. And clearly lawfare was the central driving force in the four

prosecutions against Trump. Yet, it is the judges themselves who are compromised when it comes to their own behavior as measured by the Constitution. It was the judges that allowed the prosecutors to break the publicity rules of professional conduct in colluding with the news media to overturn Trump's legal right to be presumed innocent. If the judges have no interest in protecting that right then they shouldn't be on the job. After all, all judges are first lawyers before they become judges. As such, they operate with a privilege and not a right. A

privilege can be taken away, but not a right.

Expand full comment

If they appeal, it will clearly indicate they do not want unity,they want to continue going after Trump. They want to avoid responsibility for the failed assignation attempt. Biden and the DOJ are very scared of DJT. Trump is fighting for America and We The People! 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

Expand full comment

They have to appeal; otherwise, the case in DC goes away. If they don't appeal, they are consenting / agreeing to Florida judge's decision.

Expand full comment
Jul 15Liked by Techno Fog

Thank you Techno for covering this. I’d be grateful(and I’m sure other Substackers as well) for some clarification on the uniqueness of Jack Smith SC compared to Robert Hur SC. My understanding is that Hur, Mueller, etc. all went through the Senate Approval process for US Attorney. Jack Smith, however, did not. This makes his appointment much more unique and it is my understanding that this was the more substantial legal issue with his DOJ appointment. Could you speak to this and did Judge Cannon discuss this in her ruling? Thanks again for being a reliable and sound adviser on federal legal matters. I always wait for your stacks before weighing an issue.

Expand full comment

Beth02 makes a great point in focusing on the role of Jack Smith as SC. The foundation to Jack Smith's ability or inability to be a Special Counsel is derived from his admission to the State

Bar Association, which has exclusive control over his professional conduct. Though the judge's decision focused on his qualifications to be SC, there was never a review of his professional conduct as a lawyer who also happened to be prosecutor. Lost in the favorability of the judicial decision is that no action by the judge or the state bar association was ever taken for Smith's disbarrable professional misconduct in his colluding with the news media to vilify Trump outside the court process in violation of the Fifth and the Sixth amendments even if the case had not yet reached jury trial though it still may.

Expand full comment

Techno Fog knows more law than I, no doubt about it. In addition to the factors you mention, it appears that questions of Smith's residency outside of the United States present concerns.

It is my hope that going forward that unless already clearly established by the Constitution or statute, all appointments of "Special Prosecutors" be carefully considered and strictly scrutinized. We need a government that does more that burn its citizens money and investigate its adversaries, which is free campaign funding in many cases, as we have seen in recent years.

Expand full comment

This is a great statement from Anon E. Mousse: "We need a government that does more than burn its citizens money and investigate its adversaries, which is free campaign funding in many cases, as we have seen in recent years." Almost always overlooked about the government is the critical role played by the judiciary. It is one of three branches of government. It has to keep its own house clean if it is to be a check on the other branches of government. Unlike the other two branches, it employs people who exist upon privilege and not right. They are all regulated by professional rules and if they break them the law requires that they be removed and disbarred. This applies not just to private lawyers but to all who operate under the authority of the judiciary, especially including prosecutors. Here we have Prosecutor Jack Smith. The public is blinded from the fact that he is regulated by the state bar association that admitted him to practice as a lawyer. It is one thing to reject his work as a special counsel as was done in this Cannon decision. It is an "entirely" different thing to disbar him if he broke the professional rules of conduct,

which he did when he colluded with the news media to vilify Trump and remove his legal right to be presumed innocence, a cornerstone of the American legal system. How does he get away with it? It's in The Runnymede Report's latest newsletter entitled: The Federal Protection Racket."

Expand full comment

Garland knew SC Smith’s appointment was unconstitutional but the goal was to take down Trump with 1,000 cuts. Their legal theory; “You throw enough shit against a wall, eventually something will stick.”

Expand full comment

This is such great news...

I pray it a sign that America is turning a corner and returning to God and our Constitution.

Expand full comment

Is this binding on the DC Circuit?

Expand full comment

The Florida court would not 'bind' the D.C. Court. However, the Supreme Court's consideration of the Smith appointment is...highly persuasive!

Expand full comment

It is a glorious thing to have the Constitution "re-discovered" by ALL parties who should know it inside out and backwards!

What a concept!

It has been ignored, re-worded, approximated, hypothesized and conjectured to fit the narrative of the day for far too long.

Same as the Ten COMMANDMENTS - not suggestions - when a million (give or take 2) BAR 'laws,' sections, subsections and sub subsections under thousands of headings, subheadings and sub subheadings have to be written to "define" them in order to present them to court (kangaroo, jackassery or clown) to defend the indefensible or prosecute the unwarranted prosecutable, there's a freakin' problem!!

May the TRUE Rule of Law and all that it entails make a most spectacular comeback.

*Tips hat

Much Love

Expand full comment

DDForTruth makes a great point in referring to the Constitution: "It has been ignored, re-worded, approximated, hypothesized and conjectured to fit the narrative of the day for far too long." At its root it is very simple in critical ways. The U.S. imported the virtues of the Magna Carta and incorporated its fair trial rights for accused defendants into the Fifth and the Sixth

Amendment. To reinforce the importance of these rights the State Bar Associations imposed strict penalties against prosecutors (both state and federal) who aborted those rights by colluding with the news media to vilify the defendant before he gets to trial to achieve an easy conviction. In an uncorrupted legal system, Smith would have been disbarred for doing that very thing via leaks to the news media. Instead, he got away with it and so did his judiciary overseers and the state bar association who approved the corruption. Until that corruption is fixed it won't matter what Judge Cannon did or didn't do.

Expand full comment

The basis for the extreme hatred of Donald Trump is beyond just corruption; bribery, blackmail, kickbacks, etc.

it is the absolute destruction of the global child/human sex, smuggling, torture, organ harvesting, ritual sacrifice, trafficking industry, that he has wrought.

This has always been a spiritual war of God vs. Satan.

And we know how this ends.

GOD WINS !!!

PRAY!!!

Expand full comment

It won't look good for the Dems if they keep going after Trump now. They know they've lost the presidency, can they take a chance on losing Senate and House races with more of their hate mongering now?

Song of the day:

https://youtu.be/uSiHqxgE2d0

Expand full comment

#MAGA

Expand full comment
Jul 15·edited Jul 15

AOC ain't gonna like this, expect Cannon Impeachment motion post haste.

Expand full comment

Another interesting facet to Cannon’s decision was the question of the $24,000,000 that Smith has spent on this case. It will be interesting to see how Judge Chutkan will proceed now.

Expand full comment

Jack Smith is a dead man walking.

Expand full comment

yes Deb, but wait can you say that? only lib commies can say the D word about patriots and conservatives. They can say it proudly, draw it , paint it shout it out etc. but dare breath a word towards them and that shitting corpse biden, and all hell breaks out!

Expand full comment

I say it all the time. Fight! Fight! Fight! Trump is fighting fire with fire I've noticed. Me too.

Expand full comment

Deb Nance's statement is a good one: "Jack Smith is a dead man walking." From a professional point of view he should be "a dead man walking." He is a federal prosecutor. Like any lawyer who is subject to the professional rules of conduct of the state bar association. Indeed, he is held to a higher standard than the private lawyer. This is because a private lawyer harms a client whereas the prosecutor can harm the defendant and all of society in how prosecutes the criminal case. He intentionally broke the rules of conduct in extrajudicial publicity against Trump. So why isn't he "a dead man walking" in the professional context? It is because he receives the illicit protection of all of the judiciary and the state bar association. This is documented in the latest Runnymede Report Newsletter entitled: "The Federal Protection Racket."

Expand full comment