Legal Expert Predicts 11th Circuit Will Reverse Decision From Judge Cannon To Dismiss Trump Case

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 11 сен 2024

Комментарии • 295

  • @SKF358
    @SKF358 Месяц назад +9

    Desperate liars.

  • @markbissonnette5876
    @markbissonnette5876 Месяц назад +59

    Not if they go by the constitution

    • @scottmaltby4511
      @scottmaltby4511 Месяц назад +1

      Which one?
      🖤😎🇺🇸

    • @ericlipps9459
      @ericlipps9459 Месяц назад +1

      Can you find a reference _anywhere_ in the Constitution to special prosecutors, or any prosecutors, needing to be appointed or approved by Congress? Point me to the text.

    • @scottmaltby4511
      @scottmaltby4511 Месяц назад

      @@ericlipps9459 Which one? 1777 or 1871. What was the Civil War about again? 🖤😎🇺🇸

    • @ericlipps9459
      @ericlipps9459 Месяц назад

      @@scottmaltby4511 What are you talking about? Do you even know? There was no constitution in 1777, and no new one in 1871. You don't seem to be answering my question.

    • @scottmaltby4511
      @scottmaltby4511 Месяц назад

      @ericlipps9459 Read carefully;
      Constitution for the united states of America. 1777
      Constitution of the United States of America. 1871.
      It gets much worse.
      🖤😎🇺🇸

  • @natesquestyouknowthatsrigh8269
    @natesquestyouknowthatsrigh8269 Месяц назад +68

    Who are these horrible host ? 😂👎🏼

  • @introvertmusing5466
    @introvertmusing5466 Месяц назад +10

    I understand showing both sides of an argument, but how many times does a person have to be wrong before you stop inviting them on Forbes? I believe this person has surpassed her limit. I look to you for facts not opinions. Do better.

  • @howdiedoodie8587
    @howdiedoodie8587 Месяц назад +66

    Appeal all you want. He was illegally appointed by Garland and not by Congress, the Senate or whoever was legally required to appoint him.

    • @nullentry6032
      @nullentry6032 Месяц назад +16

      illegally appointed and given a blank cheque by Garlandberg

    • @Lacey_Face
      @Lacey_Face Месяц назад

      He wasnt appointed by Congress.he was appointed by Garland that did not have that authority. DOJ also stole tax dollars to pay the Jerk Jack. They violated he Appintments clause and the Appropriations clause. WE WANT OUR MONEY BACK NOW!!!

    • @jamesdouthat3999
      @jamesdouthat3999 Месяц назад +10

      CONGRESS DIDNT APPOINT HIM GARLAND DID . WHICH IS THE PROBLEM

    • @patrickkirby9265
      @patrickkirby9265 Месяц назад +7

      NOT by congress! He was appointed by the Justice Department who failed to obtain the "advise and consent" of Congress required by the statute.

    • @Lacey_Face
      @Lacey_Face Месяц назад +4

      @@patrickkirby9265 And he used appropriations he was not allowed to use.

  • @no42arak-st-floor44
    @no42arak-st-floor44 Месяц назад +3

    Many of us, including myself left our countries, as to where a monarch would spontaneously waked up the very next day, and he would countrary to all common knowledge, experience, precedence would make an unusual ruling to everyone's surprise, as he had the last word! Now it is sad to say that this is the case in our country!

  • @SteeleHand
    @SteeleHand Месяц назад +40

    Good.....let it go to SCOTUS.

    • @cosmicmegafauna
      @cosmicmegafauna Месяц назад +10

      He was literally selling our secrets to our adversaries and you guys are so eager to get him off the hook. You're in a cult.

    • @heathswinson6506
      @heathswinson6506 Месяц назад

      Or what you hear on your fake news channels is fake. He isn't guilty of anything every other president isn't guilty of. ​@@cosmicmegafauna

    • @johnrobi0
      @johnrobi0 Месяц назад

      @@cosmicmegafauna The FBI admitted they brought in classified document cover sheets, and staged them. You're in a misinformation bubble.

    • @John-zs4iz
      @John-zs4iz Месяц назад +2

      It'll definitely be upheld. You're unbelievably naive.

    • @robertrubey6594
      @robertrubey6594 Месяц назад +3

      ​@@cosmicmegafaunawhat secerets?? What proof do you have??

  • @GuitarGears4544
    @GuitarGears4544 Месяц назад +1

    Strange how the Forbes Senior Legal Editor seen unaware of the substance of Judge Cannon's ruling. She did NOT say that all Special Counsels were illegal.

  • @user-xz5vg6tc3j
    @user-xz5vg6tc3j Месяц назад +3

    This guy was wrong so far..why is he getting airtime....

    • @Lonewanderer30
      @Lonewanderer30 Месяц назад +2

      Because he tells them what they want to hear.

    • @mark98115
      @mark98115 Месяц назад

      He polished the right knobs.

  • @ytrrs
    @ytrrs Месяц назад +2

    Since when Forbes started telling a legal matter as it is, without drumming up for the GOP/Trump? 🤣

  • @svencejohanson9051
    @svencejohanson9051 Месяц назад +3

    DEI. Period.

  • @BradBeago
    @BradBeago Месяц назад +24

    How can it be a fringe argument? She said a special counsel by law had to be approved by congress, and there was no law on the books that allowed the justice department to sidestep this requirement and just appoint one. There was a law and it expired in 1999. I would expect that if any rational reporter that interviews a "legal expert" they would ask that expert to address the legalities cited in the Judges Order? How we "feel" about the order or the nature or facts surrounding the charges is not in any way relevant.

    • @jamesdouthat3999
      @jamesdouthat3999 Месяц назад

      THE ONLY WAY THEY CAN OVER RULE HER IS USING 1 OF THE STATUTES THEY SITED THAT THEY THINK GIVE GARLAND THE RIGHT TO APPOINT ANYONE,, ITS LANGUAGE IS MESSED UP THOUGH

    • @simsimma7052
      @simsimma7052 Месяц назад +2

      The appointment of Special Counsel has been affirmed four times by different Federal judges even including one appointed by Trump so I don't know what the heck you are talking about. This is not the first time this has been challenged in court and on every occasion it has been rejected. The only reason she did this was because corrupt Clarence Thomas sent her a message questioning the legality of the appointment of a Special Counsel hence she used that as her off-ramp. She will be reversed by the 11th Circuit court and be thrown off the case. There is no law that supports her position. Clarence Thomas does not make the law. It was his opinion only and that doesn't mean that the majority of the justices support his weird and corrupt opinion.

    • @imgoing2stayonyourmind654
      @imgoing2stayonyourmind654 Месяц назад

      ​@@simsimma7052I agree with you based on irrefutable fact that "Clarence Thomas does not make the law", but George H. Bush did appoint him (confirmed by our Senate) to interpret the law (no matter how fringe or corrupt that interpretation may be) and that might be enough.
      As long as "trumpism" lives in and infest our nation, that may profide a majority corrupt SCOTUS all the cover it needs.
      Look how long Plessy v. Ferguson lasted.
      Longer than Donald J. Trump has left on Earth.
      The only recourse, is for the 11th Circuit to issue a unanimous vehement posthaste decision and a dismissal of Cannon.

    • @ytrrs
      @ytrrs Месяц назад +1

      "there was no law on the books" - So, now you're a "legal expert" who graduated from the university of (un)TruthSocial? 🤣

    • @jamesdouthat3999
      @jamesdouthat3999 Месяц назад +1

      ​@simsimma7052 again all the other cases the special counsel was already a us attorney established by law how hard is that to under stand

  • @leepage5
    @leepage5 Месяц назад +13

    This guy ignores the fact that smith wasn’t appointed by the senate
    ag garland appointed him nor was he ever a us attorney

    • @ericlipps9459
      @ericlipps9459 Месяц назад +6

      I don't know how many times I'll have to say this: _special prosecutors don't have to be named by the president or signed off on by the Senate._ The entire point of having a special prosecutor in the Watergate case was to avoid having a prosecutor who owed his job to the man he'd be investigating, or, potentially, to that president's loyalists in the Senate. The same applies here.

    • @ytrrs
      @ytrrs Месяц назад +3

      @@ericlipps9459 Bingo! You've to say this infinite times because, there are infinite American fools in youtube. Once upon a time, I too was doing "educational replies" and I gave up! 😀

    • @dguarino6586
      @dguarino6586 Месяц назад

      @@ytrrs wow! You must be the smartest guy in the world!

  • @janetramon7087
    @janetramon7087 Месяц назад +13

    Her ruling was accordance with constitutional law. Get over it. Let it go to scotus.

  • @dguarino6586
    @dguarino6586 Месяц назад +33

    False charges are not felonies! All of them must be dismissed! 🙏☮️💖

    • @dguarino6586
      @dguarino6586 Месяц назад

      @@jameswheeler-gr8wd You are the cupcake and you should be investigated.

    • @jorgecarrejo7562
      @jorgecarrejo7562 Месяц назад

      @@dguarino6586 it's illegal to obstruct justice and to refuse to return national defense information

    • @dguarino6586
      @dguarino6586 Месяц назад

      @@jorgecarrejo7562 you just don't get it that he was allowed to have what he took and everything was checked and recorded. All of those boxes that they brought in had personal property in it that the frauds stole from him. That was recorded and pictures taken and the courts would not accept it.

    • @dguarino6586
      @dguarino6586 Месяц назад

      @@jorgecarrejo7562 everything they do to him is a setup.

    • @chrisclarkson6232
      @chrisclarkson6232 Месяц назад

      ​@@jorgecarrejo7562 Like biden did when he wasn't even president? 🤡

  • @Dan-sc7us
    @Dan-sc7us Месяц назад +13

    Cannon finally gave Jack Smith the "gift" he's been waiting for!!

    • @jamesdouthat3999
      @jamesdouthat3999 Месяц назад

      WHAT GIFT?

    • @Dan-sc7us
      @Dan-sc7us Месяц назад +2

      @@jamesdouthat3999 The gift of incompetence! The 11th Circuit will more than likely reverse her decision, which will open the door to her being removed from the case!

    • @slamdunk406
      @slamdunk406 Месяц назад

      @@Dan-sc7usYep!

    • @davidclemens1578
      @davidclemens1578 Месяц назад

      ​@@Dan-sc7usthen it just goes to the supreme Court Merrick Garland did not follow the law when he selected Jack Smith for the job. Members of Congress brought this into the limelight by stating laws that, he can only nominate and it is congress's power to select or reject his nomination and it is also their decision to fund the investigation period. He never went through the process so Jack Smith is illegitimate. People say Cannon has had her decisions rejected but Jack Smith has a horrible record of success also

    • @jorgecarrejo7562
      @jorgecarrejo7562 Месяц назад

      @@davidclemens1578 yeah cuz Garland and Smith know nothing about the law... Sure

  • @Lonewanderer30
    @Lonewanderer30 Месяц назад +32

    "Expert" 🤣🤣 Yes, and if the liberal 11th circuit overrules, Scotus will overrule them. Not to mention, Smith and Garland will be out of a job long before then.

    • @jonhenry8268
      @jonhenry8268 Месяц назад +3

      Why did the SC NOT overturn the circuits that ruled the opposite ?

    • @nullentry6032
      @nullentry6032 Месяц назад

      @@jonhenry8268 looks like SCOTUS and Justice Roberts are ready to end the unconstitutional use of 'free agent' prosecutions

    • @Lonewanderer30
      @Lonewanderer30 Месяц назад

      @@jonhenry8268 Because they didn't go before the SCOTUS. Trump will. And he'll fire those two on day one anyway. So, win, win!

    • @Lonewanderer30
      @Lonewanderer30 Месяц назад

      @@jonhenry8268 Because they didn't go before the SCOTUS. Trump will.

    • @Lonewanderer30
      @Lonewanderer30 Месяц назад +7

      @@jonhenry8268 And he'll fire those two on day one anyway. So, win, win!

  • @anim8torfiddler871
    @anim8torfiddler871 Месяц назад +1

    Yes, the Attorney General appointed Smith. The point of the dismissal was that the appointment of Jack Smith was not considered and approved by the Senate, as the Constitution specifies.

    • @bisbeekid
      @bisbeekid Месяц назад

      The U.S. Constitution specifies no such thing.

  • @Reellron
    @Reellron Месяц назад +6

    Well, what does the law and constitution say? Since you don't mention that, I can only assume it goes against what this expert is saying.

    • @jamesdouthat3999
      @jamesdouthat3999 Месяц назад

      IGNORE THE SLIGHTLY CONFUSING LANGUAGE OF THE APPOINTMENT CLAUSE ,, JUST USE HER SECOND REASON FOR DISMISSING....Appropriations Clause. Article I, Section 9, Clause 7: No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; {CONGRESS} IT DOESNT GET ANY PLAINER THAN THAT. NOT ONLY DIDNT CONGRESS EVER APPROVE THE RELEASE OF FUNDS FROM THE TREASURY SMITH NEVER EVEN ASKED. CANNON F;LAT OUT SAID THEY HAVE STOLEN ALMOST 40 MILLION DOLLARS OFF THE GOVERNMENT IN THIS CASE ALONE

  • @wmsollenberger8706
    @wmsollenberger8706 Месяц назад +11

    The head of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals is Justice Thomas... who wrote part of what Judge Cannon provided as part of her dismissal!!! He already agrees with her!! Too bad, so sad, you lose!!

  • @jackseery1654
    @jackseery1654 Месяц назад +1

    So you accept the ruling of one case but deny the other? The system works but it is not perfect. Accept the courts for its rulings that goes for both parties not just one

  • @natesquestyouknowthatsrigh8269
    @natesquestyouknowthatsrigh8269 Месяц назад +34

    Her ruling reflects the law.

    • @Dan-sc7us
      @Dan-sc7us Месяц назад +11

      No it doesn't! It's an arcane legal opinion which is straight out of the Federalist Society!

    • @natesquestyouknowthatsrigh8269
      @natesquestyouknowthatsrigh8269 Месяц назад +8

      Nope, do some research. 😉

    • @jonhenry8268
      @jonhenry8268 Месяц назад +7

      Many other judges with far more experience and knowlege have ruled differently.

    • @urbugnmetoday3183
      @urbugnmetoday3183 Месяц назад +3

      @@jonhenry8268says another TDS victim…

    • @Normal6755
      @Normal6755 Месяц назад +5

      ​@@jonhenry8268There has never been a special counsel that had never been confirmed by the Senate before. Jack Smith is the first.

  • @dstorm7752
    @dstorm7752 Месяц назад +7

    This "expert" makes no sense. There was no authority to appoint Smith, and that is a threshold issue, and the dismissal was proper.

    • @simsimma7052
      @simsimma7052 Месяц назад +2

      You have no clue what you are talking about. Go back to Trump University and get a law degree.

  • @Normal6755
    @Normal6755 Месяц назад +10

    SCOTUS will side with Cannon. 😄🤘

  • @SteveG-wq8jo
    @SteveG-wq8jo Месяц назад +7

    You're both wrong. Hacks

  • @danielmahon2432
    @danielmahon2432 Месяц назад +7

    Then the Supreme Court will overturn them, you’ve been trumped. 🇺🇸

    • @ericlipps9459
      @ericlipps9459 Месяц назад

      If the Supreme Court rules to uphold Cannon, it will be because of their loyalty to DJT and the GOP, notto the law and the Constitution.

  • @rays4824
    @rays4824 Месяц назад +1

    Two pumpkins discussing issues they have limited understanding of and have no idea…SCOTUS of the US Encouraged judge Cannon to explore JS appointment…that’s the constitution!!!

  • @patrickkirby9265
    @patrickkirby9265 Месяц назад +2

    "Legal Expert?" Not so much.

  • @michaelmurphy5221
    @michaelmurphy5221 Месяц назад +2

    Legal expert😂. Liberal talking head.

    • @Lonewanderer30
      @Lonewanderer30 Месяц назад +1

      Yep, Diversity hires agreeing with each other.

  • @TimChaney-lr8qu
    @TimChaney-lr8qu Месяц назад +4

    It won't be reversed-it was ridiculous to start with.

  • @judyjones5065
    @judyjones5065 Месяц назад +4

    What about Biden

    • @samstewart9249
      @samstewart9249 Месяц назад

      And what about Elvis?

    • @jamesdouthat3999
      @jamesdouthat3999 Месяц назад

      @@samstewart9249 HES DEAD

    • @judyjones5065
      @judyjones5065 Месяц назад

      @@samstewart9249
      In case you haven’t heard Elvis is no longer alive 😊

  • @danechristmas6570
    @danechristmas6570 Месяц назад

    Jack Smith will get embarrassed in the SCOTUS yet AGAIN.

  • @ThePiratemachine
    @ThePiratemachine Месяц назад

    Smith wasn't appointed properly. The technical rules were not complied with. Why don't they just appoint someone properly and bring the case again. Delegation was not properly done. No power delegated to Smith.

  • @anaelena2104
    @anaelena2104 Месяц назад

    In the end a clause will added to the final decision stating Smith has to return to the Treasury all monies paid

  • @PantoPhobe-dm2fd
    @PantoPhobe-dm2fd Месяц назад

    Is she as big a legal expert as Judge Cannon? No.

  • @CaseyGreen-jc5jv
    @CaseyGreen-jc5jv Месяц назад +1

    Who are you bro ? No one cares

    • @jjlepepe5875
      @jjlepepe5875 Месяц назад

      They got him from 1-800-BudgetLawyers

  • @jasonsimmons1179
    @jasonsimmons1179 Месяц назад

    How about f your feelings and go with the constitution whether you agree or not

  • @ddmcpaisley6299
    @ddmcpaisley6299 Месяц назад

    These 2 people need to get off the air, they are both hard to listen to and look at.

  • @kristamccracken4119
    @kristamccracken4119 Месяц назад

    It's about time!!

  • @Lonewanderer30
    @Lonewanderer30 Месяц назад +1

    @jameswheeler-gr8wd The 'intellectual' speaks.....🙄🙄

  • @waynewallace585
    @waynewallace585 Месяц назад

    But it will go to supreme courts and be overturned lol

  • @Bill-vo1wn
    @Bill-vo1wn Месяц назад

    I've lost all faith in the JUSTICE SYSTEM and media. WAKE up AMERICA 🇺🇸

  • @user-ft1xf8wk9m
    @user-ft1xf8wk9m Месяц назад +1

    APPEAL, APPEAL

  • @BobTheBuilder-ny5wj
    @BobTheBuilder-ny5wj Месяц назад +3

    Sure are a lot of "legal experts" these days. We will see

    • @samstewart9249
      @samstewart9249 Месяц назад +1

      Gradiates of Trump University School of Law!

  • @jatodd3746
    @jatodd3746 Месяц назад

    We'll see you all after the reversal.

  • @josetoro1428
    @josetoro1428 Месяц назад +2

    Oh now legal experts comes out of the woodwork…

  • @davidclemens1578
    @davidclemens1578 Месяц назад

    She's just reading the rule of law not making law. She only needed one of the two cases to dismiss. If I were Trump I would just ignore any further trial demands.

    • @davidclemens1578
      @davidclemens1578 Месяц назад

      These people are just repeating what everybody else in the media repeats. Trump was working with the library of Congress with the documents in June before the raid. He understood that he was following the rule of law and all they requested was that he put another lock on the secure room. People say that the papers were found all over in other rooms which Trump is a neat freak so I find that unbelievable. The documents found that are in question that were only 104 pages which if you stack them together is about an inch and a quarter thick. All those pictures of the documents laying all over the floor was by the FBI's own admission staged with folders they had brought and laid out on the floor to make it look like there was a lot of documents. If I can find these from reliable sources they certainly could have found them if they didn't have a little bit of TDS. I thought these people were supposed to find facts and not just take stories from others that have similar narratives. Sad and very unprofessional.

    • @ericlipps9459
      @ericlipps9459 Месяц назад

      No, she's deliberately (or perhaps incompetently) misreading the law to keep this case from going to trial.

  • @harryminamiji8033
    @harryminamiji8033 Месяц назад

    The other special counsel have been senate confirmed

  • @doomedbirth
    @doomedbirth Месяц назад

    Is cannon a real person? I've only seen two photos of her and no video's of her

  • @imdoneguessing
    @imdoneguessing 7 дней назад

    No it won't.

  • @lilyb9554
    @lilyb9554 Месяц назад

    Trump 2024 the best is yet to come

  • @harryminamiji8033
    @harryminamiji8033 Месяц назад

    Why the Supreme Court will hear the case

  • @jeanallison5784
    @jeanallison5784 Месяц назад

    Pity those who have pipe dreams. SMH

  • @bbaarneyy
    @bbaarneyy Месяц назад

    WTF are they talking about?

  • @Because223
    @Because223 Месяц назад

    The 11th circuit court is a joke

  • @lonnyfuller
    @lonnyfuller Месяц назад

    Of course it will. It's democrats.

  • @dwaynevarnell9157
    @dwaynevarnell9157 Месяц назад

    K it didn’t stop Biden

  • @Doug_Hefernen
    @Doug_Hefernen Месяц назад +1

    Liberal tears

  • @harryminamiji8033
    @harryminamiji8033 Месяц назад +3

    The 11th circuit will upheld her decision

    • @ytrrs
      @ytrrs Месяц назад

      "will upheld" - That tells a lot about you and your education! 🤣

  • @doubleooh7337
    @doubleooh7337 Месяц назад +1

    Legal experts😂 you have NEVER met a expert of anything! Is someone you bring on a expert when they always predict the opposite to what always actually happens , you know loads of EXPERT CLOWNS!

    • @warrenash5370
      @warrenash5370 Месяц назад

      Like CNN, MSDNC, ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS?

  • @crunchymemeproductions3352
    @crunchymemeproductions3352 Месяц назад

    Clarence Thomas presiding. 🤭🤗

  • @mariafelix310
    @mariafelix310 Месяц назад +2

    🙏💙😇🌎👍

  • @jamesstepp8420
    @jamesstepp8420 Месяц назад +2

    I always wondered what happened to mush mouth from the Cosby kids……well, here he is

  • @cruelladevil1001
    @cruelladevil1001 Месяц назад +1

    Of course they will. They'll get a democratic judge and continue their nonsense

  • @greyroad
    @greyroad Месяц назад +2

    What a shame. Special counsel Mr. Jack Smith seems to be an honest person, and he seems to be ready to appeal this kind of arbitrary verdict..

  • @user-vi5kr7rf3w
    @user-vi5kr7rf3w Месяц назад

    Yeah yeah yeah

  • @user-ft1xf8wk9m
    @user-ft1xf8wk9m Месяц назад +2

    TRUMP, TRUMP, TRUMP, 2024 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • @Insertednmatrix
    @Insertednmatrix Месяц назад

    Bullshit

  • @sampicchiett9356
    @sampicchiett9356 Месяц назад

    Get a new face

  • @SandraWinkleman
    @SandraWinkleman Месяц назад

    We never had a judge who was smart enough to do this job and I also believe Thomas was down her throat about dropping the case because they’re going to stop it anyway. How does it look like to you that Thomas was out of work that day when Cannon decided on it. He was with Cannon that day and or night 🥰😘🥰😍😘😍😛🤪🎉🎉🎉🎉❤❤❤❤😂😂😂😂😂

  • @Christian-jx3nx
    @Christian-jx3nx Месяц назад

    Please let it go to the Supreme Court. Then no more of this nonsense

  • @thejuiced1_
    @thejuiced1_ Месяц назад

    🐑

  • @Chloe-nh6oj
    @Chloe-nh6oj Месяц назад

    Yes they will, and then the Supreme Court will reverse the 11th Circuit.

    • @ericlipps9459
      @ericlipps9459 Месяц назад

      If and when the Supreme Court upholds Cannon's ruling, it won't be on the merits; it will be because it's Trump on the hot seat.

  • @andybeckett4340
    @andybeckett4340 Месяц назад

    If they reverse it, Trumps judge will throw a triple reverse and a “take four” card down

  • @pfil.odendron2036
    @pfil.odendron2036 Месяц назад

    ‘Dismissed by Trump Appointed / Maga Judge’. There. I fixed it for you.

    • @TimChaney-lr8qu
      @TimChaney-lr8qu Месяц назад +2

      You acted like that's a bad thing 😂!!!

  • @MS-_-4891
    @MS-_-4891 Месяц назад

    😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

  • @daniellemarie7471
    @daniellemarie7471 Месяц назад

    Lol and the supreme court will reverse the 11th circuit

  • @ahthisisgood
    @ahthisisgood Месяц назад

    I expect higher quality videos from Forbes. The hosts, camera work, etc... Are just crap... SMH

  • @jamesdouthat3999
    @jamesdouthat3999 Месяц назад

    HOW DMB IS THIS GUY OR HIS HE PURPOSELY LYING

  • @RumbleCo
    @RumbleCo Месяц назад

    😂😂 ...keep telling yourselves that. Maybe itll come true.
    🇺🇸TRUMP 2024🇺🇸
    ...cuz Joe missed.

    • @thewalcottfamily.7136
      @thewalcottfamily.7136 Месяц назад

      If Smith was illegally appointed it means that the special counsel who Bill Bar appointed before he walked away from Trump to see if he could come up with something was also illegal.