Rocci Stucci Media

Allegations of Procedural Missteps Could Bounce Jack Smith and Throw Out All of His Indictments

It might be a reach, but constitutional scholars are accusing Merrick Garland of playing fast and loose with the law. garland appointed Smith, but never had the Senate confirm him and former Attorney Ed Meese and Professors Gary Lawson and Steven Calabresi, have now presented a petition to the Supreme Court demanding that Smith  be removed as the Special Counsel and all of his work be counted as null and void. How ironic is that?

The argument is that department heads can make appointments, but that is not the case for the attorney general. They claim that Smith would need confirmation from the Senate. By time he or someone else is confirmed, the indictments against President Trump would need to be brought before the grand jury again. And any investigation materials may not be used if it is found that Smith did not have the authority. That would set the cases back so far it could carry 0over until after the election.

It was deemed that a special prosecutor was needed to indict Trump on phony charges in order to aid the Democrats, who appear to be stuck with Joe Biden. Even so, you must follow the olaw in doing it. The Supreme Court would need to rule the appointment was legal, but if they don’t they would also have to determine if all of the “evidence” is considered poison fruit from the tree and whether Smith or someone else would need to start over.

The petition reads in part:

The illegality addressed in this brief started on November 18, 2022, when Attorney General Merrick Garland exceeded his statutory and constitutional authority by purporting to appoint Smith to serve as Special Counsel for the Department of Justice

But none of those statutes, nor any other statutory or constitutional provisions, remotely authorized the appointment by the Attorney General of a private citizen to receive extraordinary criminal law enforcement power under the title of Special Counsel.

What federal statutes and the Constitution do not allow, however, is for the Attorney General to appoint a private citizen, who has never been confirmed by the Senate, as a substitute United States Attorney under the title “Special Counsel.”

From: U.S. Department of Justice/ Justice Management Division/ Human Resources:


SUBJECT: Oath of Office, John L. Smith

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This memorandum serves as record that an appointment affidavit (SF 61) has been signed and executed for the appointment of John L. Smith, Special Counsel. On November 18, 2022, John L. Smith was appointed by Attorney General Merrick B. Garland to serve as the Special Counsel by Order No. 5559-2022.

DISCUSSION: Mr. Smith signed an SF 61 on November 20, 2022. Upon reviewing documentation, it was discovered that a witness signature was missing (more than likely as Mr. Smith was on boarded while overseas). JMD/Human Resources consulted with the JMD/Office of General Counsel (OGC) to ensure proper corrective action. OGC’s recommendation and advice was to readminister the oath of office and execute a new SF 61 to ensure procedural compliance.

A. Attorney General Order 5559-2022
B. SF 61, signed and executed on 9/14/2023
C. SF 61, signed on 11/20/2022



  • Decide Right

  • On Key

    Related Posts