SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Bill who wrote (1470787)7/19/2024 5:12:41 PM
From: Tenchusatsu2 Recommendations

Recommended By
Eric
Fiscally Conservative

  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1584535
 
Bill,
You seem to want to take legal shortcuts to get Trump.
"Legal shortcut"? LOL, Cannon needlessly threw the case into a loop.

There was no impropriety behind Jack Smith's appointment as special counsel. His appointment follows years of precedent beginning with U.S. vs. Nixon:
Under the authority of Article II, Section 2, Congress has vested in the Attorney General the power to conduct the criminal investigation of the U.S. government. It has also vested in him the power to appoint subordinate officers to assist him in the discharge of his duties. Acting pursuant to those statutes, the Attorney General has delegated the authority to represent the United States in the particular matters to a Special Prosecutor with unique authority and tenure. The regulation gives the Special Prosecutor explicit power to contest the invocation of executive privilege in the process of seeking evidence deemed relevant to the performance of these specially delegated duties.
What Judge Cannon did was come up with a completely new standard for appointing Special Counsel. She doesn't give any good reason why she had to override precedent, other than she felt like it.

This is the sort of "judicial activism" that conservatives hate ... until it benefits them. (Kind of like how everyone hates lawyers until they need one.)

Tenchusatsu



To: Bill who wrote (1470787)7/19/2024 5:35:07 PM
From: FJB1 Recommendation

Recommended By
Bill

  Respond to of 1584535
 
"Last time I put up that chart I never really got to look at it..."




To: Bill who wrote (1470787)7/19/2024 5:40:49 PM
From: FJB1 Recommendation

Recommended By
longz

  Respond to of 1584535
 



To: Bill who wrote (1470787)7/19/2024 7:37:38 PM
From: FJB1 Recommendation

Recommended By
longz

  Respond to of 1584535
 
WSJ reporting Crooks was reconning the site with a drone one hour prior to rally. UFB!



To: Bill who wrote (1470787)7/19/2024 7:59:45 PM
From: FJB1 Recommendation

Recommended By
longz

  Respond to of 1584535
 
Update on 9th Circuit Arizona ruling on voter registration and citizenship. - THIS IS INSANE.

PHOENIX — Arizona won't be able to block those who sign up to vote using a federal registration form from casting a ballot in the presidential race, at least not now.

In a brief order Thursday, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a plea by Republican legislative leaders to delay a ruling by a trial judge that barring enforcement of such a ban.

In the same order, the three-judge panel also said those using that federal form still can cast their ballots by mail.

What the judges decided, however, is that anyone who tries to register to vote using a state form is required at the same time to provide documented proof of citizenship. More to the point, if they do not, the application must now be rejected.

That overturns what had been occurring.

Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer said the practice until now has been that registration requests using the state form that did not also have proof of citizenship automatically were put into the "federal only' category, as if the applicants had submitted a federal form.

Richer said he and the other 14 county recorders will stop doing that.

But Richer noted none of this disturbs the ability of those who use the federal form in the first place to be able to cast a ballot in the presidential race.

House Speaker Ben Toma acknowledged the limited nature of the victory.
"But it's still a win,' he told Capitol Media Services.

None of this precludes Toma and Senate President Warren Petersen from pursuing an appeal of last year's order by U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton about the ability of those using the federal form to cast a ballot in the presidential race.

A hearing is being scheduled on that for September. And that means there still could be a decision before the Nov. 5 election.

But unless Bolton's ruling is overturned, it means that the more than 35,000 Arizonans who have signed up using that federal form will get a say in the upcoming election. Their views could have an impact: Joe Biden won Arizona over Donald Trump in 2020 by fewer than 11,000 votes.

...



To: Bill who wrote (1470787)7/19/2024 8:26:56 PM
From: FJB1 Recommendation

Recommended By
longz

  Respond to of 1584535
 
  • New Details — Trump assassin flew drone over fairgrounds on day of Trump shooting.
  • But Secret Service did not have any drones deployed.