1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

2020 US Election

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Lexicus, Nov 13, 2018.

  1. onejayhawk

    onejayhawk Afflicted with reason

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2002
    Messages:
    13,357
    Location:
    next to George Bush's parents
    Your last five words are correct.

    Law not gospel.

    In the private sector, it's like a letter of reprimand from the big boss, through legal, to a manager. Such letters are orders and constitute binding statements of policy. This one details when and how the manager's subordinates broke the rules and the manager is instructed to make sure it does not happen again.

    J
     
    Last edited: May 12, 2019
  2. Birdjaguar

    Birdjaguar Hanafubuki Retired Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Messages:
    35,508
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM
    I don't think it is law, just management. Trump told McGahn to do stuff and he ignored it. Management, not law.
     
  3. onejayhawk

    onejayhawk Afflicted with reason

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2002
    Messages:
    13,357
    Location:
    next to George Bush's parents
    Now you are making a distinction where there is no difference. In a company, the rules and procedures are subject to state and federal laws. That's not really true here. The letter is binding on the Justice Department. Trump's scuffle McGahn does not change that.

    J
     
  4. Birdjaguar

    Birdjaguar Hanafubuki Retired Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Messages:
    35,508
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM
    No. Laws are passed by legislators at some level. Management rules and policies are not laws at all. In a company, rules and policies cannot violate the law. Beyond that they can be whatever management wants. Does the WH counsel have legal authority over the DOJ? Certainly the president has executive authority and can fire DOJ staff in some circumstances. In McGahn's case the president's executive authority was ignored by McGahn on more than one occasion.

    Even if the letter is binding on DOJ, it would be not for legal reasons, but for management reasons because Trump asked for it to be sent not because the WH counsel wrote it. As we have seen, Executive branch staff frequently ignore and disobey presidential direction. And as we have seen, presidential staff break the law with impunity at Trump's direction.
     
    El_Machinae likes this.
  5. Birdjaguar

    Birdjaguar Hanafubuki Retired Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Messages:
    35,508
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM
    The DOJ has a policy of not indicting a sitting president. It is not a law and any AG could ignore it. They might be fired or reprimanded for doing so, but it is not illegal to do so. Ignoring Trump's wishes expressed by the WH counsel is similar unless those wishes are supported by actual laws passed by congress.
     
    MagisterCultuum and El_Machinae like this.
  6. Berzerker

    Berzerker Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    17,251
    Location:
    the golf course
    So Biden's son Hunter made a small fortune sitting on the board of a Ukrainian energy company while Dad lobbied the government to fire the prosecutor investigating the company for corruption because the prosecutor was corrupt. Now the new prosecutor has resumed the investigation and Hunter resigned his position recently, because, you know, that might be embarrassing to dear 'ol Dad's run for President. Ugh, sounds like the Trump family.

    I doubt Hunter was privy to the corruption, I assume he was mostly just collecting checks. But it is a problem for Joe, the Dems are running against Trump's corruption and they need a candidate who is relatively clean. But it draws another interesting tangent, why did the Trump people expose it now? Must be they dont want to run against Biden and want to knock him out before the primaries.

    But then they risk facing a 'reformer' riding a wave of people pissed off at Trump for putting the drain in the WH. Warren needs to find a surfboard but she just doesn't have the charisma for it and thats too bad cuz she wins on sincerity. Cant be somebody too young. Maybe Kamala Harris. She's old enough and was a prosecutor and both are capable of handling Trump.
     
    Hygro likes this.
  7. Estebonrober

    Estebonrober Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2017
    Messages:
    2,296
    Gender:
    Male
    Can you elaborate on the fabrications of the Steele Dossier? Other than Cohen not being in Prague I haven't heard that the whole work up was fabrication. Hell I still believe the Russian hooker part, that story is front and center who Donald Trump has been, is, and will continue to be as a human being. Go listen to this schmuck on Howard Stern back in the day.

    I agree that the DNC is corrupt within itself and its hierarchy, but it is not like Republicans are better, Republicans can't sell out their constituencies fast enough to satisfy their donors.
     
  8. Zkribbler

    Zkribbler Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Messages:
    6,400
    Location:
    Philippines
    An insurance company tells a doctor, "we're not going to pay you to treat that person's cancer." The doctor replies. "I don't care. I'll just work for free and pay for the meds out of my own pocket."

    What fairy tale is that from?
     
  9. Berzerker

    Berzerker Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    17,251
    Location:
    the golf course
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/19/us/politics/steele-dossier-mueller-report.html

     
  10. Estebonrober

    Estebonrober Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2017
    Messages:
    2,296
    Gender:
    Male
    Appeared to be false and impossible to prove are not proxies for falsification. I choose to believe Trump is the man he has purported himself to be for the last 40 years and he has never really changed. Most of the sensational stuff in that dossier fits his character to a tee. Except when mentioning tees there probably should have been more golfing in that dossier.
     
  11. onejayhawk

    onejayhawk Afflicted with reason

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2002
    Messages:
    13,357
    Location:
    next to George Bush's parents
    Again, you are making distinctions where there is no difference. Within the scope of its purview, this letter is the law. Judges, Arbiters, and Administrators will cite it as such.

    When the standard is true and accurate to best knowledge it is.

    J
     
    Last edited: May 13, 2019
  12. Birdjaguar

    Birdjaguar Hanafubuki Retired Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Messages:
    35,508
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM
    I'm sorry J but you are wrong. Presidents and their attorneys do NOTmake laws. It won't be in any case law books. It can be ignored and not break any laws. Opinions, policies and directives are not laws. Breaking them or ignoring them may have consequences, but not legal ones. If Barr were to ignore the letter, what are the consequences that could befall him?
     
    Last edited: May 13, 2019
  13. Takhisis

    Takhisis is it fall yet

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    44,438
    Location:
    up yours!
    Well, I for one am not sorry that he is wrong.
     
    Birdjaguar likes this.
  14. El_Machinae

    El_Machinae Colour vision since 2018 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    42,733
    Location:
    Pale Blue Dot youtube=wupToqz1e2g
    What's all this about, the Flood letter is an opinion piece. It's a paid opinion piece, because it's his job to propose an interpretation of the SCO report that defends the White House (though not necessarily Trump). It's a critique, that's all it is. He's also doing a good job, because he's critiquing how Mueller had a bit of an impossible task given his mandate and the optics forced upon the discussion by Trump.

    Mueller was never supposed to make a prosecutorial recommendation on Trump's obstruction. He spells out how it wasn't in his mandate, or his set of permissions. I think it's a nothingburger, because the electorate has shown they don't care if the King is improper, as long as he's Mighty. Some people want a king. Everyone is very aware that he obstructed. They just don't mind if powerful people do things that the poor cannot.

    If Trump or Barr want to give Meuller a new job, to make a prosecutorial recommendation, they should do so.
     
  15. Birdjaguar

    Birdjaguar Hanafubuki Retired Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Messages:
    35,508
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM
    J thinks it is some kind of law. I cannot figure out why he thinks that.
     
  16. onejayhawk

    onejayhawk Afflicted with reason

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2002
    Messages:
    13,357
    Location:
    next to George Bush's parents
    Not to the general population, but that is not the venue here. This is entirely within the Executive Branch.

    You are making light of something that is very official. If Barr were to ignore the letter he could be removed from office for cause. However, the real thrust of the letter is to unleash the hounds. This is an official go get 'em.

    J
     
    Last edited: May 13, 2019
  17. Birdjaguar

    Birdjaguar Hanafubuki Retired Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Messages:
    35,508
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM
    And neither of your replies makes it law. Barr could ignore it just like McGahn ignored Trumps orders to fire Mueller. To Trump tweets are "very official".
     
  18. Hygro

    Hygro soundcloud.com/hygro/

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2002
    Messages:
    22,458
    Location:
    Nicaragua
    Erm is that what you meant?
     
  19. Takhisis

    Takhisis is it fall yet

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    44,438
    Location:
    up yours!
    I think he could have meant they make law, rather than laws. At least that would be a true statement. They make norms, they can issue decrees, etc. which is making law (not in the plural).
     
  20. onejayhawk

    onejayhawk Afflicted with reason

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2002
    Messages:
    13,357
    Location:
    next to George Bush's parents
    McGahn didn't ignore any such order because Trump never gave one. They may have discussed it but that is as far as it went. The WH Counsel, acting for the President, has the authority to give the DoJ orders. Barr cannot ignore it any more than you could ignore directions from your boss. Further, Barr can likely will use the instructions as justification for orders he gives to DoJ and FBI. Judges would back it up. If that is not a law, it's more than close enough. As I said, a distinction with no difference.

    What this has to do with Trump tweets is unclear. Please illuminate.

    Perhaps a better distinction is that the Executive Branch does not make statutes. Law is a much broader term.

    J
     

Share This Page