Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Trump and his cabinet/buffoonery- Get your bunkers ready!


brandymac27

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Cooked Crack said:

Hopefully Trump blurts out the amount of abortions he's paid for over the years.

 

He hasn't paid for any.  

 

He had his attorney divert funds from some other entity.  Or he promised to pay, but then didn't.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I may be wrong, (first time for everything), but the impression I have is that the number of times the US has waived diplomatic immunity is very low.  Like zero.  

 

(In fact, I get the impression that what's newsworthy about this case is that they even asked.)  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

REAGAN'S SOLICITOR GENERAL SAYS 'ALL HONORABLE PEOPLE' HAVE LEFT TRUMP'S CABINET: 'HE IS CAPABLE OF DOING SERIOUS DAMAGE'

 

Charles Fried was a fervent, superior officer on the frontlines of the Reagan Revolution. As solicitor general of the United States from 1985 to 1989, he urged the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the reigning liberal orthodoxies of his day—on abortion, civil rights, executive power and constitutional interpretation.

 

But the Trump Revolution has proven a bridge too far. As he reveals in a scorching interview with Newsweek's Roger Parloff below, Fried has broken ranks. He denounces a president who is "perhaps the most dishonest person to ever sit in the White House." As disgusted as he is by President Donald Trump, Fried is, if possible, even more dismayed by William Barr, Trump's current attorney general, for having stepped up as Trump's chief apologist. Fried says of Barr. "His reputation is gone."

 

Fried was born in Czechoslovakia in 1935, a country soon overrun by fascists and, later, by communists. His family escaped to England in 1939 and came to the United States in 1941. Fried became a U.S. citizen in 1948, got his B.A. from Princeton in 1956, two jurisprudence degrees from Oxford, and then a law degree from Columbia in 1960. He took a faculty position at Harvard Law School in 1961, and has been affiliated there, on and off, ever since, authoring nine books on law and moral philosophy. He has argued more than two dozen cases in the U.S. Supreme Court, and served as an associate justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court from 1995 to 1999.

 

At the outset of this interview, at his office at Harvard on January 14 (pre-Senate trial), Fried asked if he could make a few prefatory observations about the fundamental errors in Trump's understanding of presidential power that have led to his impeachment. He provided Newsweek with a copy of the landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling in the Steel Seizure Case of 1952 (Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer), which he'd marked up with a yellow highlighter pen.

 

That case arose during the Korean War, when a labor strike threatened to hobble the nation's production of steel, which was indispensable to the war effort. President Harry Truman, "to avert a national catastrophe" and meet a "grave emergency," his lawyers argued at the time, issued an executive order commanding the secretary of commerce to seize control of the nation's steel production. The steel mills sued, claiming the president had exceeded his powers. Truman's solicitor general defended the president's order in the Supreme Court by arguing that Article 2 of the Constitution gave him "a grant of all executive powers of which the Government is capable." The Court rejected Truman's arguments, 6-3.

 

Fried then read to Newsweek key excerpts from the celebrated concurring opinion of Justice Robert Jackson. Though the Constitution did make the president the "Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy," Jackson wrote, it did not make him "Commander in Chief of the country, its industries and its inhabitants."

 

The Q&A then commenced, with Fried completing his introductory remarks about Trump's basic misunderstandings of presidential power. Edited excerpts:

 

Click on the link for the rest

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, China said:

Fried says of Barr. "His reputation is gone."

 

I get the impression that, prior to Trump, his reputation was "Guy who abused his position as Attorney General to engage in an attempted coverup of Iran-Contra, and who has stated his opinion that Nizon should have just covered up more."  

 

(And every single Republican who voted to confirm him, knew it, and knew that was the reason he was being nominated.)  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump realized he was Pro Life the moment he realized how stupid and pliable that side of the aisle has become.

 

To our resident pro-lifers..  you absolutely 100% know he's full of ****. You absolutely 100% know he's broken your firm belief numerous times..  and yet your group accepts this.

Never again tell me about your firm convictions and their sacred roots in the Word of your Sky Fairy.

 

~Bang

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bang said:

Trump realized he was Pro Life the moment he realized how stupid and pliable that side of the aisle has become.

 

To our resident pro-lifers..  you absolutely 100% know he's full of ****. You absolutely 100% know he's broken your firm belief numerous times..  and yet your group accepts this.

Never again tell me about your firm convictions and their sacred roots in the Word of your Sky Fairy.

 

~Bang

 

 

Not sure if we have any Pro-Life, anti-Trumpers here but assuming we do, do they deserve this scorn?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

Not sure if we have any Pro-Life, anti-Trumpers here but assuming we do, do they deserve this scorn?

Show me a member of the movement who rejected his being there as a disgusting insult to everything they believe.
Those who marched accepted it. The leaders who organized the march welcomed it.

A movement is as their leaders are, unless they change that.

?m=02&d=20200124&t=2&i=1480931223&w=640&

 

Let me see that anyone on that side of the aisle is unwilling to sell out even a SINGLE one of their principles for this guy.

I am sure there are some preachers or other devotees who don't accept it..  but their leaders don't care whether they do or not. He was invited, and he was welcomed.
If they are there, stand up. 

 

 

~Bang

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People try to split hairs to give themselves some tiny figleaf of cover between supporting Nazis and being Nazis, "I'm not one but I do like their judges/policies/racism/etc"

 

**** them, there is none.

 

They can ride that flaming dumpster of bull**** to oblivion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...