Staff Reports
The saga surrounding former President Donald Trump, the FBI, and the ever-determined Special Counsel Jack Smith continues to unfold like a poorly scripted soap opera, and not the kind anyone would want to binge-watch on a lazy Sunday. After the FBI’s infamous raid on Mar-a-Lago in August 2022, Jack Smith charged Trump with the nebulous crime of improperly keeping classified documents post-presidency. It’s as if the left has made it their mission to reshape America’s legal system into a reality show where former presidents are front and center.
Recently, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon delivered a sharp rebuke to Smith’s legal antics by tossing out the case against Trump last month. Predictably, Smith, undeterred and perhaps fueled by an insatiable desire for media attention, has appealed this dismissal to the 11th Circuit Court. While Trump and his supporters celebrate this legal victory, one can only wonder whether Smith’s next move will be a reality TV-themed courtroom special.
BREAKING: Special Counsel Jack Smith has just appealed Judge Cannon's insane (IMHO and I think his too) decision to throw out the evidence-rich slam-dunk secret documents case against Trump. Cannon has often shown she is an irrational Trump partisan; time to call her out w/facts. pic.twitter.com/SSXWrIPlKF
— Harvey G. Cohen (@CultrHack) August 26, 2024
The crux of this legal drama hinges on whether Smith was properly installed in the role of special counsel. Trump’s legal team, supported by heavyweight constitutional scholars, argues that Attorney General Merrick Garland made a big oopsie by appointing Smith without the required Senate confirmation. This isn’t just a technicality — it’s a question of whether a presidential appointee can wield the enormous power that comes with prosecuting the former president of the United States. It raises the question of whether we live in a nation governed by laws or one where bureaucratic overreach reigns supreme.
As if Justice Clarence Thomas sensed the growing absurdity of this entire situation, he chimed in during a separate case, implying that the ridiculousness of prosecuting a former U.S. president warranted immediate legal clarity regarding Smith’s appointment. It’s almost as if he forgot it’s 2023; the current political climate seems more like a circus featuring clowns and trapeze artists than a rational judiciary navigating serious constitutional questions.
Cannon wasted no time in responding to Justice Thomas’s nudge. She produced a comprehensive 93-page order that essentially stated Smith’s appointment was a classic case of overreach, likening it to an underdog college team getting an influx of professional players illegally. Her ruling underscored that such appointment power isn’t just a bureaucratic formality; it’s foundational to the preservation of liberty, effectively calling out the Democrats for trying to undermine the very fabric of constitutional law.
In a fittingly dramatic twist, Smith quickly fired back with an 81-page appeal, insisting that Attorney General Garland had more than enough authority to summon him to the dance floor. His argument was heavy on legalese but light on constitutional respect — claiming the power to appoint special counsels lay within a gnarled web of statutes that somehow allow the AG to circumvent the Senate completely. But to many onlookers, it reads more like a desperate attempt to maintain a flimsy grip on legality than a solid constitutional argument.
What’s clear is that as this legal battleground heated up, the stakes remain high. The conservatives observing this legal circus can only laugh at the irony of a system that seems to be so focused on targeting one individual while potentially overstepping its bounds. As the Republicans sit back and watch this legal drama unfold, many are left pondering whether this relentless pursuit by Smith and the Democrats will finally strengthen Trump’s resolve and voter support — and whether the legacy of this peculiar prosecutorial rush will be one for the history books, or merely another chapter in the ongoing saga of political overreach.
