I don't see a thread on this, surprisingly since it is major news.
{In a filing supporting the former president’s move to dismiss the case, some experts argued that Mr. Smith was not properly appointed special counsel by Attorney General Merrick Garland because he wasn’t confirmed by the Senate and is exercising powers beyond his authority.
The argument gained notoriety when President Ronald Reagan’s attorney general and two law professors who clerked for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia challenged Mr. Smith’s authority to prosecute Mr. Trump, saying a private citizen can’t bring criminal charges.}
In short, Biden's attack dog is illegal, He has no authority to prosecute Trump or anyone, because Merrick Garland violated the appointments clause of the constitution and has no authority to usurp the power of the United States Senate to create positions for prosecutors to go after the opposition candidate. It was precisely this that the appointments clause was established to prevent.
Thomas Massie NAILS corrupt Garland on this,
{The Appointments Clause confers plenary power to the President to nominate, and confers plenary power to the Senate to reject or confirm a nominee, through its advice and consent provision. As with other separation of powers provisions in the Constitution, the wording here seeks to ensure accountability and preempt tyranny.[2] Alexander Hamilton defended the use of a public confirmation of officers in Federalist No. 77, where he commented "a conclave in which cabal and intrigue will have their full scope. . . . [T]he desire of mutual gratification will beget a scandalous bartering of votes and bargaining for places."[2]: ¶12 This separation of powers between the President and Senate is also present in the (immediately preceding) Treaty Clause of the Constitution, which gives international treaty-making power to the President, but attaches to it the proviso of the Senate's advice and consent.}
en.wikipedia.org
{In a filing supporting the former president’s move to dismiss the case, some experts argued that Mr. Smith was not properly appointed special counsel by Attorney General Merrick Garland because he wasn’t confirmed by the Senate and is exercising powers beyond his authority.
The argument gained notoriety when President Ronald Reagan’s attorney general and two law professors who clerked for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia challenged Mr. Smith’s authority to prosecute Mr. Trump, saying a private citizen can’t bring criminal charges.}
Loading…
www.washingtontimes.com
In short, Biden's attack dog is illegal, He has no authority to prosecute Trump or anyone, because Merrick Garland violated the appointments clause of the constitution and has no authority to usurp the power of the United States Senate to create positions for prosecutors to go after the opposition candidate. It was precisely this that the appointments clause was established to prevent.
Thomas Massie NAILS corrupt Garland on this,
{The Appointments Clause confers plenary power to the President to nominate, and confers plenary power to the Senate to reject or confirm a nominee, through its advice and consent provision. As with other separation of powers provisions in the Constitution, the wording here seeks to ensure accountability and preempt tyranny.[2] Alexander Hamilton defended the use of a public confirmation of officers in Federalist No. 77, where he commented "a conclave in which cabal and intrigue will have their full scope. . . . [T]he desire of mutual gratification will beget a scandalous bartering of votes and bargaining for places."[2]: ¶12 This separation of powers between the President and Senate is also present in the (immediately preceding) Treaty Clause of the Constitution, which gives international treaty-making power to the President, but attaches to it the proviso of the Senate's advice and consent.}
