• Lauchs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    But you’re willing to, despite multiple precedents and repeated legal confirmation, declare the special counsel illegal because one wild judge said so.

    It’s neat.

    • NeuromancerM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Do you confuse me with Judge Cannon? I am not Judge Cannon. What I did is provide a cite to explain to you the differences

      • Lauchs@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Yes and it doesn’t really defend Cannon’s decision so much as say that it is different from Weiss.

        But you’ve decided that despite all other rulings, precedent etc that Cannon’s ruling means Smith is illegal.

        BUT when a court comes to an opinion you don’t like and finds trump guilty of sexual assault, well, that’s a matter for the courts and you don’t believe them.

        Basically, a nonsense ruling that flies in the face of precedent/common sense/previous cases but supports your side, obviously correct.

        But a court and jury finds trump committes sexual assault, well, y’know, that may or may not have happened etc.

        It’s almost like the facts don’t matter, all that matters is whether the ruling is good or bad for your side. Weird.

        Edit: I’ll also point out that the judge said the “proof convincingly established and the jury implicitly found that Mr trump deliberately and forcibly penetrated Ms Carroll’s vagina with his fingers” and that as many people understand the word rape, trump did exactly that.

        • NeuromancerM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          You keep confusing me with someone else.

          I said the courts will sort it out.

          • Lauchs@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            Me:

            Did judge Cannon decide that special counsels were actually illegal? So why do we care? And if we do care about this special counsel shouldn’t we also care about the one charging trump about all those classified documents?

            Your response:

            No, that isn’t what she said at all. Not all special counsels are illegal. It is that Jack Smith was not appointed properly that made it illegal.

            • NeuromancerM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              3 months ago

              Yes that’s what she said in her opinion.

              I am not judge cannon

              • Lauchs@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                Your original response didn’t you were echoing Cannon’s opinion rather than simply agreeing with her it was illegal.

                Apologies.

                • NeuromancerM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  It’s beyond my legal knowledge to know if her and Thomas are correct or not. This is a nuance the courts will have to sort out. I’m only repeating her opinion. Unlike most people I don’t expertise in everything and will admit my limits.

                  Thank you for the apology.