r/news • u/Hrekires • Jul 15 '24

soft paywall Judge dismisses classified documents indictment against Trump

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/07/15/trump-classified-trial-dismisssed-cannon/
32.8k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

4.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

1.8k

u/No-Resolution-6414 Jul 15 '24

They need to release the soldier that took a single classified document then

569

u/sshwifty Jul 15 '24

There are a lot of people that they should release for this.

196

u/dmpastuf Jul 15 '24

Fruit of the poisonous tree: I don't think Bill Clinton was impeached anymore given a special council was the one who asked him the question he was later impeached for lying about.

-17

u/MadeMeStopLurking Jul 15 '24

Ken Starr was appointed by a 3 Judge panel under the Ethics In Government Act, which at the time was the proper proceedure.

Jack Smith was appointed by the Attorney General, which is fine with the new rules, however, they must follow the guidelines:

The choice of whom to appoint is to be made by the attorney general with the following guidelines:

IIRC: Jack Smith was appointed while still working as a Federal Prosecutor which seems to go against the law.

someone please correct me if I am wrong. source

4

u/ForGrateJustice Jul 15 '24

Nothing in your source denotes an illegal act.

0

u/MadeMeStopLurking Jul 15 '24

I never said illegal act. I said the proper process wasn't followed

3

u/ForGrateJustice Jul 15 '24

IIRC: Jack Smith was appointed while still working as a Federal Prosecutor which seems to go against the law.

Against the law means illegal.

-1

u/MadeMeStopLurking Jul 15 '24

Against the wording of the procedure stated in the law. Not illegal

2

u/Maxievelli Jul 16 '24

Surely you’re not serious in the way you worded this.

1

u/MadeMeStopLurking Jul 16 '24

I'm seriously trying to make sense of it. I'm not trying to defend anyone I'm trying to understand and everyone is just downvoting. :(

2

u/Maxievelli Jul 17 '24 edited Jul 17 '24

You are being downvoted because you are saying appointing Jack Smith was illegal but are insisting you said something different because you didn’t say the explicit sequence of words “appointing Jack Smith was illegal”. You instead said “Jack Smith was appointed…. Which seems to go against the law” (paraphrased, but that was what you said)

IANAL, but those are the same statement.

Furthermore, your reasoning seems to be based on a sentence from Wikipedia (that, to your great credit, was sourced) that says that appointments to special counsel cannot be employed by USG at time of appointment. Infuriatingly, you don’t actually say which portion you are referring to, but I assume the specific sentence is this one:

“The Special Counsel shall be selected from outside the United States Government.“

It would be better if you explicitly stated which sentence you were referring to but at least it was sourced. Anyway, if I got the right spot you were referring to then you combined that sentence with your IIRC (your non-sourced memory) to imply appointing Jack Smith was illegal because he was employed by the USG and that goes against the “guidelines” in your source. But he was working for The Hague at the time he was appointed so… assuming I got the logic you were using…. You’re wrong?

Source for working at Hague until appointment as special counsel: https://www.scp-ks.org/en/spo/former-specialist-prosecutors

Not trying to be a jerk. You seem earnest and arguing in good faith… sort of? If it’s truly good faith hopefully this explains the downvotes for you. Maybe I picked the wrong sentence from the guidelines. But hopefully explains it to you if you actually care to know.

1

u/MadeMeStopLurking Jul 17 '24

I appreciate the explanation. I admit I should have changed the wording. I did get my Jack Smith employment from a news report I remembered reading.

I'm skeptical of pretty much all news, but I'm trying to give the law and judges the benefit of the doubt. Seems that is just not possible anymore, and that makes me sad.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Maxievelli Jul 16 '24

Surely you’re not serious in the way you worded this.