What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

POTUS 45.2 - Same arguments, different sides

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: POTUS 45.2 - Same arguments, different sides

dxmnkd316 said:
Fine, don't like murder?

Should the attorney general and justice department round up the <strike>Japanese</strike> Muslims and send them to internment camps if the president issues an executive order?
Click to expand...

Oh ho, but would not that order be unconstitutional, at least if directed at citizens? Then the AG could easily make a case on legal grounds. That's the entire argument here...Yates wasn't making an argument on legal grounds. She was making one based on her personal feelings that the EO was unjust. That's fine, but unless she can make a legal argument, she can't just decide to not enforce the law.
 
Re: POTUS 45.2 - Same arguments, different sides

The Sicatoka said:
Don't get me wrong. There is "crazy". Normally it is an acute bout with delirium. I've seen it. (I was a Walsh Hall RA. :D )
Click to expand...
:eek:
Handyman said:
This is like a bad spy novel...where is Harrison Ford when you need him!

On another subject...dx, Brent and Dillo you guys need to stop coming at each other so hard. You are all ugly children with equally bad taste in beer ;) :p
Click to expand...
You're right about the ugly children part, but the bolded statement is ridiculous at best. They may be bumbling morons, but their taste in beer is excellent.
Handyman said:
Well I more met Dillo and his need to have Raspberry Frappacino Cosmopolitan Beer with a lime :D
Click to expand...
That is utter nonsense. Who the hell has a lime with Raspberry Frappacino Cosmopolitan beers?
 
Re: POTUS 45.2 - Same arguments, different sides

Drew S. said:
Does anyone else find it strange markets have held up so well in the last week? They're down a bit today but not anything beyond the normal volatility.
Click to expand...

Because he's doing his best to torch the rest of the world and money is looking for safety. And the markets can adjust very quickly. If Trump has his way, don't expect the markets to hold.
 
Re: POTUS 45.2 - Same arguments, different sides

Handyman said:
Whisky :D
Click to expand...

I haven't moved on from beer, but my taste in alcohol seems to be evolving. I much prefer a perfectly crafted cocktail, a fine whiskey, and I'm starting to prefer a good glass of wine with a good dinner.
 
Re: POTUS 45.2 - Same arguments, different sides

French Rage said:
Too bad Robert Bork is dead. It looks like another president needs an Attorney General with no professional integrity to do dirty work for him.
Click to expand...

You mispelled "Alberto Gonzales."

Bork (never an AG I don't think) actually had integrity, he was just bedbugs crazy. Gonzales was "I'll interpret the law any way you say, sir," right down to dignifying it with the farcical cognomen of "The Unitary Executive."

Bork was a fool but no charlatan. Gonzales was both charlatan and fool.

I hope Trump nominates Roy Moore tomorrow night. It's really the only thing he could do to continue raising the f-ckstick score of this administration.
 
Brenthoven said:
I'd be for that. Need that neutral, impartial branch. Checks and balances.
Click to expand...

Isn't that the function of the legislative and judicial branches?

If I'm working for the Executive, I give him/her my advice. The Executive then makes up his mind and I implement the policy. If I feel I can't, I resign. You don't backstab your boss.
 
Re: POTUS 45.2 - Same arguments, different sides

Armadillo said:
Oh ho, but would not that order be unconstitutional, at least if directed at citizens? Then the AG could easily make a case on legal grounds. That's the entire argument here...Yates wasn't making an argument on legal grounds. She was making one based on her personal feelings that the EO was unjust. That's fine, but unless she can make a legal argument, she can't just decide to not enforce the law.
Click to expand...

It would seem so but it is not. Korematsu is still law of the land. (Precisely why I picked this example :)) Even Scalia bristled at that.
 
Re: POTUS 45.2 - Same arguments, different sides

Kepler said:
You mispelled "Alberto Gonzales."

Bork (never an AG I don't think) actually had integrity, he was just bedbugs crazy. Gonzales was "I'll interpret the law any way you say, sir," right down to dignifying it with the farcical cognomen of "The Unitary Executive."

Bork was a fool but no charlatan. Gonzales was both charlatan and fool.

I hope Trump nominates Roy Moore tomorrow night. It's really the only thing he could do to continue raising the f-ckstick score of this administration.
Click to expand...

Bork was acting AG for two months. He was the one Nixon finally landed on after he Saturday Night Massacre.
 
Re: POTUS 45.2 - Same arguments, different sides

dxmnkd316 said:
It would seem so but it is not. Korematsu is still law of the land. (Precisely why I picked this example :)) Even Scalia bristled at that.
Click to expand...

Huh. I did not know that.

Upon further digging, in 2011 the Acting Solicitor General filed a formal "admission of error," which negates the case as precedent. So that's good.
 
Re: POTUS 45.2 - Same arguments, different sides

Armadillo said:
Huh. I did not know that.

Upon further digging, in 2011 the Acting Solicitor General filed a formal "admission of error," which negates the case as precedent. So that's good.
Click to expand...

I didn't either until Scalia died.

I'm still not sure that the solicitor general gets to overturn the Supreme Court.
 
Re: POTUS 45.2 - Same arguments, different sides

Kepler said:
You mispelled "Alberto Gonzales."

Bork (never an AG I don't think) actually had integrity, he was just bedbugs crazy. Gonzales was "I'll interpret the law any way you say, sir," right down to dignifying it with the farcical cognomen of "The Unitary Executive."

Bork was a fool but no charlatan. Gonzales was both charlatan and fool.

I hope Trump nominates Roy Moore tomorrow night. It's really the only thing he could do to continue raising the f-ckstick score of this administration.
Click to expand...

Bork had integrity? Remember the Saturday Night Massacre?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top