The Courts; This is Why I Trust Them

LDB

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Offline
Just can't trust anyone named Barrack (or any of its variants).
 

coalminer

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Offline
If he used a gmail account, thats bad but not as bad as the Clintons who used some homebrew server in their basement that nobody was monitoring. There are plenty of people who monitor gmail servers and keep them safe. Yes someone could have guessed his password, but that screwy setup Clinton used probably had more security holes that swiss cheese.
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Offline
8 months is excessive.

Nope.

Compare that with Kavanaugh protesters: - charges dropped.

Apparently being part of mob that violently attacked law enforcement and threatened violence toward our elected representatives made the difference.

The egregious part apparently was holding a Trump 2020 flag.

Some things answer to a higher calling than OrangeMan worship ...

Misuse of the statute in charging him too:

View attachment 20675

Highly doubtful.


While "signing statements" may modify the Executive's interpretation and implementation of a law, there is no part of the Constitution that grants them any legal value or weight. A President can veto a law in its entirety, sign it, or do nothing - his choice.

There is no provision in the Constitution for a President to cherry-pick a validly enacted Congressional law as to which parts he is going to obey and execute and which portions he is not.

GWB was (correctly IMO) accused of using signing statements to attempt to alter the original legislative intent of Congress.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: muttly

danthewolf00

Veteran Expediter
Offline
Nope.



Apparently being part of mob that violently attacked law enforcement and threatened violence toward our elected representatives made the difference.



Some things answer to a higher calling than OrangeMan worship ...



Highly doubtful.



While "signing statements" may modify the Executive's interpretation and implementation of a law, there is no part of the Constitution that grants them any legal value or weight. A President can veto a law in its entirety, sign it, or do nothing - his choice.

There is no provision in the Constitution for a President to cherry-pick a validly enacted Congressional law as to which parts he is going to obey and execute and which portions he is not.

GWB was (correctly IMO) accused of using signing statements to attempt to alter the original legislative intent of Congress.
Line item veto.....
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Owner/Operator
Offline
A line item veto, which nearly all governors have (43), would be nice for presidents, but Congress would have to legislate that authority. Yeah, no, that's not gonna happen.
 

Ragman

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Offline
I think Joe and Hunter did it before them, but ok.
Probably true, but my point is, this kind of garbage has been going on since before you or I were even a drip down our fathers leg.
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Owner/Operator
Offline
Probably true, but my point is, this kind of garbage has been going on since before you or I were even a drip down our fathers leg.
True, but in recent years they've suddenly started to get really picky and choosy about who they prosecute for it. It's weird.
 
  • Like
Reactions: muttly
Top