Zambroski Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 1 hour ago, f7ben said: All the fucking illegal shit that has happened in washington the last number of years and this stupid cunt draws her moral line here? Fuck her , pack your shit you stupid partisan cunt As usual, you "nail hammered" it with such calm and eloquence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revkevsdi Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 11 minutes ago, Kivalo said: The following is from Cornell Law Library. It would seem she owed her highest allegiance to the Constitution, not the President. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/3331 5 U.S. Code § 3331 - Oath of office Thanks 9 minutes ago, Zambroski said: You are poorly informed and educated about these matters. And your vigilant "Fake news" watching is contributing. Do we need to do an intervention for you, Lamar? Timing is everything dumbass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gold Member Kivalo Posted January 31, 2017 Gold Member Share Posted January 31, 2017 Just now, Zambroski said: It's all there between the constitution and her "other oaths by law". It was her political grandstanding that got her canned. She could have taken and advisory role to try and express her PERSONAL VIEWS but, instead, she tried to torpedo the administration. She was waiting for this moment to be a liberal "champion". ADIOS! Its quite clear, she MUST uphold the constitution first and obey Trump second. Still though, there could be disagreements between an AG and a Pres about what is and what is not constitutional, obviously because thats precisely what did happen. So her being fired is no surprise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 1 minute ago, Zambroski said: As usual, you "nail hammered" it with such calm and eloquence. No time for mincing words concerning people who deserve to be hung Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 5 minutes ago, f7ben said: No time for mincing words concerning people who deserve to be hung Let's do lunch tomorrow! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cold War Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 3 minutes ago, Kivalo said: Its quite clear, she MUST uphold the constitution first and obey Trump second. Still though, there could be disagreements between an AG and a Pres about what is and what is not constitutional, obviously because thats precisely what did happen. So her being fired is no surprise. Maybe I am missing something, but I thought it was a question of whether she would up hold and enforce current law? She said no...........So was fired? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gold Member Kivalo Posted January 31, 2017 Gold Member Share Posted January 31, 2017 Just now, Cold War said: Maybe I am missing something, but I thought it was a question of whether she would up hold and enforce current law? She said no...........So was fired? Right. But she did so because she thought it was unconstitutional. Given her duty to uphold the constitution first, I get why she refused Trumps order. Given the fact that it (Trump's order) hasn't yet been adjudicated unconstitutional I also get why Trump removed her from office. At least thats they way I read things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cold War Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 10 minutes ago, Kivalo said: Right. But she did so because she thought it was unconstitutional. Given her duty to uphold the constitution first, I get why she refused Trumps order. Given the fact that it (Trump's order) hasn't yet been adjudicated unconstitutional I also get why Trump removed her from office. At least thats they way I read things. The way I read it is the law is quite clear, and she had a personal disagreement with the law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gold Member Kivalo Posted January 31, 2017 Gold Member Share Posted January 31, 2017 7 minutes ago, Cold War said: The way I read it is the law is quite clear, and she had a personal disagreement with the law. We're splitting hairs. I agree with you, she did "disagree with" (I read that as she felt it was unconstitutional) the order and since she has a duty to uphold the constitution first, she attempted to do so. Since the order is not yet known to be constitutional or unconstitutional Trump fired her. I don't see the issue here, she did what she felt she had to do and so did Trump. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old indy Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 20 hours ago, revkevsdi said: Good for her. I'm sure a lot of Americans sat in School and wondered how the small percentage of Germany that supported the Nazi's were allowed to gain control. I bet they sat in school and thought that had they been there they wouldn't have sat back and let the Jews and Gypsies' be persecuted. Sure the rank and file Germans were cowards for letting the Nazi's away with it. But to be fair to them, they hadn't seen it happen before. What's your excuse USA? Because I'm pretty sure we all grew up knowing what happens. And what is it do you think the Dems have been doing since being seated? we have a country of sheeple! The level of deceit with our current government is absolutely crazy. there is no truth, forget justice. Not even for crimes of the highest order. you think Trumps going to top anything thats been done TD ? i think were in for a hell of a ride and im loving watching the heads explode,, least for now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cold War Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 10 minutes ago, Kivalo said: We're splitting hairs. I agree with you, she did "disagree with" (I read that as she felt it was unconstitutional) the order and since she has a duty to uphold the constitution first, she attempted to do so. Since the order is not yet known to be constitutional or unconstitutional Trump fired her. I don't see the issue here, she did what she felt she had to do and so did Trump. Fair enough. All that I would add is, it is not her job to decide what is and what isn't constitutional. Well within her rights to quit if she disagrees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gold Member Kivalo Posted February 1, 2017 Gold Member Share Posted February 1, 2017 Just now, Cold War said: Fair enough. All that I would add is, it is not her job to decide what is and what isn't constitutional. Well within her rights to quit if she disagrees. Nor is it Trump's but they each have to act as they think the constitution directs them. As far as I can tell, thats what happened here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02sled Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 1 hour ago, revkevsdi said: By your logic, you should just do what your boss says. Not at our whimsy, at the whimsy of someone who said she would uphold the constitution rather than obey the President. It was the answer the right wing wanted when she was hired. It's dangerous for the people who get returned to the middle east. In almost all cases yes. I do what my boss says. If I can be held personably liable for damages I wouldn't. But if my boss says I want you to do x and I don't agree with it over principle that's my problem. Do it or get fired Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.