Judge Aileen Cannon has dismissed the high-profile classified documents case, citing the unlawful appointment of Special Counsel Jack Smith.
This decision comes as a significant blow to the Biden regime and the Department of Justice, raising questions about the integrity of the entire investigation.
Attorney General Garland violated the Constitution by appointing Jack Smith to conduct this politically motivated persecution against President Trump.
The decision effectively halts the prosecution led by Special Counsel Jack Smith, appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland.
In her ruling, Judge Cannon wrote:
Former President Trump’s Motion to Dismiss Indictment Based on the Unlawful Appointment and Funding of Special Counsel Jack Smith is GRANTED in accordance with this Order [ECF No. 326]. The Superseding Indictment is DISMISSED because Special Counsel Smith’s appointment violates the Appointments Clause of the United States Constitution. U.S.
Const., Art. I, $ 2, cl. 2. Special Counsel Smith’s use of a permanent indefinite appropriation also violates the Appropriations Clause, U.S. Const., Art. I, § 9, cl. 7, but the Court need not address the proper remedy for that funding violation given the dismissal on Appointments Clause grounds.
The effect of this Order is confined to this proceeding.
The court found that Smith’s appointment did not adhere to the Appointments Clause, which requires that principal officers of the United States be appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate.
The Special Counsel’s use of a permanent indefinite appropriation was also deemed a violation of the Appropriations Clause, although the court did not address the remedy for this funding violation given the dismissal on Appointments Clause grounds.
The case, which stemmed from a grand jury indictment on June 8, 2023, charged Trump with 31 counts of willful retention of national defense information and additional conspiracy and concealment charges against Trump and his co-defendants, Waltine Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira. The indictment was later expanded to 42 charges in a superseding indictment.
President Trump previously filed a motion to dismiss Jack Smith’s classified documents charges based on the “unlawful appointment and funding of Special Counsel.”
Day one of the expanded evidentiary hearing was held last month.
According to NBC News, President Trump’s lawyers “argued that an officer like the special counsel must be appointed “by law” and that the special counsel should be categorized as a “principal officer” and subject to Senate confirmation. The statutory text cited by the special counsel’s office “does not authorize” the U.S. attorney general’s appointment of the special counsel, his lawyer, Emil Bove, argued.”
Cannon did question whether Attorney General Merrick had any oversight role in seeking the indictment against Trump.
Jack Smith’s prosecutor James Pearce refused to answer and claimed it would be against policy to answer the question.
“Why would there be any heartburn to answer whether the attorney general signed off on the indictment?” Cannon asked.
Last month, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that Trump has absolute immunity for his core constitutional powers. Former presidents are entitled to at least a presumption of immunity for their official acts.
The Supreme Court ruled that there is no immunity for unofficial acts.
Clarence Thomas questioned Jack Smith’s authority because he was a private citizen when he was tapped as a special prosecutor.
“I write separately to highlight another way in which this prosecution may violate our constitutional structure. In this case, the Attorney General purported to appoint a private citizen as Special Counsel to prosecute a former President on behalf of the United States. But, I am not sure that any office for the Special Counsel has been “established by Law,” as the Constitution requires. Art. II, §2, cl. 2. By requiring that Congress create federal offices “by Law,” the Constitution imposes an important check against the President — he cannot create offices at his pleasure. If there is no law establishing the office that the Special Counsel occupies, then he cannot proceed with this prosecution. A private citizen cannot criminally prosecute anyone, let alone a former President,” Clarence Thomas said.
Clarence Thomas argued that no other former US President has been prosecuted for official acts despite numerous past Presidents taking actions that would argue constitutes crimes.
“No former President has faced criminal prosecution for his acts while in office in the more than 200 years since the founding of our country. And, that is so despite numerous past Presidents taking actions that many would argue constitute crimes. If this unprecedented prosecution is to proceed, it must be conducted by someone duly authorized to do so by the American people. The lower courts should thus answer these essential questions concerning the Special Counsel’s appointment before proceeding,” Clarence Thomas wrote.
Thomas also argued that Jack Smith is not senate confirmed (Trump’s lawyers are also using this argument before Judge Cannon).
“The Constitution sets forth how an office may be created and how it may be filled. The Appointments Clause provides: “[The President] shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Department.” Art. II, §2, cl. 2. The constitutional process for filling an office is plain from this text. The default manner for appointing “Officers of the United States” is nomination by the President and confirmation by the Senate. Ibid. “But the Clause provides a limited exception for the appointment of inferior officers: Congress may ‘by Law’ authorize” one of three specified actors “to appoint inferior officers without the advice and con-sent of the Senate.” NLRB v. SW General, Inc., 580 U. S. 288, 312 (2017) (THOMAS, J., concurring). As relevant here, a “Hea[d] of Department”—such as the Attorney General—is one such actor that Congress may authorize “by Law” to appoint inferior officers without senatorial confirmation. Art. II, §2, cl. 2.
Thomas once again reiterated that a special prosecutor must be senate confirmed.
“Before the President or a Department Head can appoint any officer, however, the Constitution requires that the underlying office be “established by Law.”1 The Constitution itself creates some offices, most obviously that of the President and Vice President. See §1. Although the Constitution contemplates that there will be “other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for,” it clearly requires that those offices “shall be established by Law.” §2, cl. 2. And, “established by law” refers to an office that Congress creates “by statute.” Lucia v. SEC, 585 U. S. 237, 254 (2018) (THOMAS, J., concurring); see also United States v. Maurice, 26 F. Cas. 1211, 1213 (No. 15,747) (CC Va. 1823) (Marshall, C. J.).”
In her detailed opinion, Judge Cannon emphasized the importance of the separation of powers and the role of Congress in the appointment process. She highlighted that none of the statutes cited by the Special Counsel—28 U.S.C. §§ 509, 510, 515, and 533—provided the Attorney General with the authority to appoint a Special Counsel with the full powers of a United States Attorney.
“The Appointments Clause is a critical constitutional restriction stemming from the separation of powers, and it gives to Congress a considered role in determining the propriety of vesting appointment power for inferior officers,” Cannon wrote.
“The Special Counsel’s position effectively usurps that important legislative authority, transferring it to a Head of Department, and in the process threatening the structural liberty inherent in the separation of powers,” she added.
Yesterday the Supreme Court rulled on Presidential Immunity. Yes Virginia, the President has it when it comes to his official duty. For some reason Biden, MSM, and far left extreemists just don’t get it.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that Trump cannot be prosecuted for any actions that were within his constitutional powers as president, but can be for private acts, in a landmark ruling recognizing for the first time any form of presidential immunity from prosecution.
we might see a more precise demarcation line drawn around the nebulous concept of executive privilege and absolute immunity. Specific requirements could be held up for executive privilege assertions – proof of assertion by a present or former president, validation of the defendant’s advisory role at the relevant time, and the privilege claim made on a question-by-question basis before Congress. Satisfying these requirements could become critical for criminal and civil enforcement efforts in future legislative-executive branch face-offs.
Here's what we found in the transcript following our big legal win last night.
Biden's ghostwriter Mark Zwonitzer admitted he deleted the audio recordings of Biden interviews after Hur was appointed SC. Hur's team still found them. https://t.co/cY3QuFRFfupic.twitter.com/iKWkLVlSua
Zwonitzer testified about how President Biden knew he wasn’t supposed to have the classified material in such an unsecure setting and needed to be “careful” in discussing classified material with Zwonitzer, who did not have a security clearance. pic.twitter.com/6bKAXywjc8
Zwonitzer told investigators that Biden read frequently from his personal diary and journals in their interviews for the memoir. President Biden wouldn’t let Zwonitzer make copies of the documents. pic.twitter.com/XciaCekviq
But President Biden mentioned he “needed to be careful” because he was reading from documents with classified markings. At one point, President Biden told Zwonitzer he had just found a classified document downstairs in his home. pic.twitter.com/KEH0ZF8k70
Zwonitzer confirmed he never possessed a security clearance and DOJ curiously redacted his answer to the question of whether he has ever dealt with classified material. pic.twitter.com/jzpesLDXIi
“Zwonitzer stated that at some point he deleted the audio files subfolder from his laptop and external hard drive. No relevant deleted files were recovered from the laptop. Deleted audio files were recovered from a subfolder on the external hard drive labeled “Audio.” Based on the available evidence from the forensic review, we assess that all deleted audio files were recovered from that subfolder. For three of the recovered files, portions of the audio appeared to be missing, and a fourth file appeared to have portions overwritten with a separate recording. These results are possible when forensic tools are used to recover deleted files. For each of these four incomplete or overwritten files, Zwonitzer produced his corresponding transcripts to investigators. These notes summarized the content of the conversations, two of which were with Mr. Biden and two of which were with Beau Biden’s doctor,” the report read.
Below are links to articles that MSM usually ignores and hopes that the common man and woman won’t read? Why? They aren’t written from a progressive spin.
MORE LAWFARE! (They’ll be coming for others soon) Epoch Times CFO Arrested and Charged with $67 Million Money Laundering Scheme
The charges against Guan “do not relate to the Media Company’s newsgathering activities,” the Bidem DOJ noted in a press release.
Prosecutors alleged the money laundering scheme benefited “a multinational media company headquartered in Manhattan, New York.” The Epoch Times is headquartered on West 28th Street in Manhattan.
The chief financial officer of conservative global news outlet The Epoch Times has been arrested and charged with leading a yearslong scheme to launder at least $67 million in illicit funds, federal prosecutors said Monday.
The scheme — which involved cryptocurrency, tens of thousands of prepaid debit cards, fraudulently obtained unemployment insurance benefits and stolen personal information — fueled a massive increase in The Epoch Times’ reported annual revenue, prosecutors alleged.
Weidong “Bill” Guan, 61, is charged in U.S. District Court in lower Manhattan with one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering and two counts of bank fraud.
Guan was arrested Sunday morning, and pleaded not guilty on Monday afternoon before a federal magistrate judge in Manhattan, according to a court notice. He was released on a $3 million personal recognizance bond, and his travel is restricted to parts of New York and New Jersey, among other restrictions. [Guess they’re trying to look more ‘even-handed’ –TPR]
Guan “conspired with others to benefit himself, the media company, and its affiliates by laundering tens of millions of dollars in fraudulently obtained unemployment insurance benefits and other crime proceeds,” U.S. Attorney Damian Williams said in a statement.
“When banks raised questions about the funds, Guan allegedly lied repeatedly and falsely claimed that the funds came from legitimate donations to the media company,” Williams said.
The Epoch Times is not mentioned by name in the indictment. But Guan is listed as Epoch Times’ chief financial officer on the nonprofit media company’s most recent tax return, filed in late 2023.
Prosecutors alleged the money laundering scheme benefited “a multinational media company headquartered in Manhattan, New York.” The Epoch Times is headquartered on West 28th Street in Manhattan.
Prosecutors allege the scheme by Guan and his co-conspirators caused the company’s revenue to jump from “approximately $15 million to approximately $62 million” between 2019 and 2020.
According to The Epoch Times’ publicly available IRS nonprofit tax returns, in 2019 the company reported program revenue of $15.5 million. The following year, The Epoch Times reported tax-exempt revenue of $62.7 million.
Guan, a resident of Secaucus, New Jersey, managed the Epoch Times’ “Make Money Online team,” which carried out the scheme to buy “crime proceeds” and transfer them to bank accounts linked to the media outlet, according to his indictment.
From 2020 to 2024, the team allegedly used a crypto platform to buy tens of millions of dollars in crime proceeds at discounted rates, of 70 to 80 cents on the dollar, in exchange for cryptocurrency. The crime proceeds, which came from sources including “fraudulently obtained unemployment insurance benefits,” were loaded onto tens of thousands of prepaid debit cards, prosecutors alleged.
After purchasing the crime proceeds, participants allegedly used stolen personally identifiable information to open various types of accounts and transfer the proceeds into bank accounts linked with the media outlet and related entities.
Gotcha now!
They were often laundered again through other accounts, including Guan’s own personal bank and crypto accounts, according to prosecutors.
To hide the illegal nature of the proceeds, Guan and his co-conspirators allegedly lied to banks and other entities about their sources.
An attorney for Guan could not immediately be reached, but a case docket showed late Monday that Guan had been appointed a public defender.
A spokesperson for the Manhattan U.S. Attorney’s Office declined to provide any additional comment on the indictment against Guan, which was filed in late May and unsealed Monday.
The bank fraud counts each carry a maximum sentence of 30 years in prison, while the conspiracy holds a 20-year maximum prison sentence. The charges against Guan “do not relate to the Media Company’s newsgathering activities,” the Department of Justice noted in a press release.
NBC News and other outlets have reported on The Epoch Times’ affiliation with the Chinese religious group Falun Gong, which in recent years has supported former President Donald Trump as an ally in its opposition to the country’s ruling Chinese Communist Party.
That’s a far different wish list than Trump’s campaign:
Biden’s response to a porous southern border
The lack of law and order in America’s cities
Rampant inflation
I would like to see the corruption in the DOJ covered. Also if Trumps court cases are brought up, then so should the Hunter laptop and Hunter and Joe’s family cases and Chinese business dealings.
Yesterday’s verdict represents the culmination of a legal process that has been bent to the political will of the actors involved: a leftist prosecutor, a partisan judge, and a jury reflective of one of the most liberal enclaves in America—all in an effort to “get” Donald Trump.
That this case—involving alleged misdemeanor business records violations from nearly a decade ago—was even brought is a testament to the political debasement of the justice system in places like New York City. This is especially true considering this same district attorney routinely excuses criminal conduct in a way that has endangered law-abiding citizens in his jurisdiction.
It is often said that no one is above the law, but it is also true that no one is below the law. If the defendant were not Donald Trump, this case would never have been brought, the judge would have never issued similar rulings, and the jury would have never returned a guilty verdict.
In America, the rule of law should be applied in a dispassionate, even-handed manner, not become captive to the political agenda of some kangaroo court.
57
