So you believe the special prosecutor is not a member of the prosecution?

I never said that, you did.

No, you did.

There is your problem right there.

This is my last attempt..

The issue is not about any prosecution or who the prosecutor is.

The issue (for Aileen) is that a special prosecution is unconstitutional and that Jack Smith was wrongly appointed.

NO, it isn't. The issue, per the ruling, is that the special prosecution
was improperly appointed and said appointment is therefore unconsitutional.

"A special prosecution is unconstitutional" -- your words above -- was NOT
part of the ruling. The way the special prosecution was appointed -- unconstitutionally -- *IS THE ISSUE*.

So, YES, there is an issue about the prosecution (ruled to be using a
special prosecutor that was improperly appointed) and who the prosecutor is (ruled to be someone who was not constitutionally appointed).


* SLMR 2.1a * The girl of your dreams is unavailable except in print
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

I never said that, you did.

No, you did.

No, I never said that. I never wrote that. It is your narrative.

The issue (for Aileen) is that a special prosecution is unconstitutional and >> that Jack Smith was wrongly appointed.

NO, it isn't. The issue, per the ruling, is that the special prosecution
was improperly appointed and said appointment is therefore unconsitutional.

That's what I said.

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-7
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

The issue (for Aileen) is that a special prosecution is unconstitutional an
that Jack Smith was wrongly appointed.

NO, it isn't. The issue, per the ruling, is that the special prosecution was improperly appointed and said appointment is therefore unconsitutional.

That's what I said.

No that is what I said, and you kept telling me I was wrong. I was also
not the only one to call you out on it.


* SLMR 2.1a * "I didn't say that!" - Al, anytime he is questioned
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

Hello Alan,

Not at all. Compare Clarence's writings with Aileen's writings.

But neither Aileen Cannon nor Clarence Thomas are writers..

Don't be silly.

Check Mike's writings and mine. Me and him are writers.

Don't be silly.

Aileen and Clarence get paid for their rants.
Their rants are known as opinions.

Mike and Aaron do not get paid anything at all.
Whether verbal or written.
Do keep up.

For Life,
Lee

--
The first thing a cult does is claim that everyone else is lying to you.

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Hello Aaron,

Aileen acted on bad advice given to her by Clarence.

That is hearsay.

Not at all. Compare Clarence's writings with Aileen's writings.

But neither Aileen Cannon nor Clarence Thomas are writers..

Check Mike's writings and mine. Me and him are writers.

Opinions are opinions, whether stated verbally or in writing.

If I say the moon is made of cheese, it is an opinion.
If I write the moon is made of cheese, it is an opinion.
And who knows? I very well might be right.

But getting there to prove me wrong would be one hell
of a challenge. Good luck getting there.

For Life,
Lee

--
GOP thinks banning guns won't elminate guns.
GOP thinks banning abortion will elininate abortions.

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)

Hello Alan,

[..]

The issue is not about any prosecution or who the prosecutor is.

No matter how others might want to spin it, that is the issue.

The issue (for Aileen) is that a special prosecution is unconstitutional and
that Jack Smith was wrongly appointed.

That is her opinion, no matter how flawed.

It's a silly argument to make.

As noted by Special Counsel (Jack Smith) in his appeal.
The judge will also likely get tossed from the case.

For Life,
Lee

--
Biden 2024 - Finisth The Job

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)