Corrupt judge

Trump’s bid to toss documents case was seen as long shot

From CNN's Hannah Rabinowitz 

Donald Trump’s efforts to dismiss the case under the Constitution’s Appointments Clause were seen as a long shot. 

Over the past few years, several special counsels – even during the Trump presidential administration – were structured the same way as Smith’s investigation and were allowed to proceed. 

Federal judges in other cases reached the opposite conclusion as Cannon, upholding the legality of the special counsel’s office. Special counsel David Weiss, who is prosecuting Hunter Biden, and special counsel Robert Mueller, who led the Trump-Russia probe, survived repeated legal challenges on these same grounds. 

Still, Cannon held a hearing on the issue several weeks ago, pushing attorneys to explain exactly how Smith’s investigation into Trump was being funded. The judge’s questions were so pointed that special counsel attorney James Pearce argued that even if Cannon were to throw out the case due to an appointments clause issue that the Justice Department was “prepared” to fund Smith’s cases through trial if necessary. 

And the fringe argument gained steam earlier this month, when Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas threw his support behind the theory. He wrote in a footnote in the high court’s presidential immunity decision that there are “serious questions whether the Attorney General has violated that structure by creating an office of the Special Counsel that has not been established by law. Those questions must be answered before this prosecution can proceed.”