A new low for the AG. (Boston, Clinton: crime, lawyers, buy)

[massnative71]

I expect nothing less from grandstanding opportunistic buffoons like Liz Warren, or Marty Walsh. I also realize that we no longer hold our elected officials to even the same moral standards as are required from most of us on the job, as various actions from BOTH recent presidential candidates would get most of us fired. But this is the attorney general we are talking about. She is not only here to serve and represent us, but to also uphold the law of the commonwealth. That position carries with it the highest of moral and ethical standards, and the person holding it should certainly not suffer from a loose tongue or be putting on a political show.


But this is of course Maura Healy, who has already demonstrated that pushing a political agenda is a higher priority than enforcing the law itself (which the legislature decides, not her).


Police: 100,000 attend Boston Common Women


Healey vowed to challenge the Trump administration.

"We're going to stand up to bullies," Healey said. "We're going to protect the vulnerable ... I have a message for President Trump. The message from people of Massachusetts is, 'we'll see you in court.'"


What???


What bullies? Protect what vulnerable from what? Have credible threats been made? The "People of Massachusetts" will see Trump in court??? Has Trump committed/or shown intent to commit a crime against the "People of Massachusetts"? He hadn't even taken office yet when she said this!


Healy could clearly use a refresher course on her position's responsibilities. She is there to uphold the law and protect ALL (legal) residents of Massachusetts, not just those not supporting Trump (and before you nail me to the cross, I did not vote for Trump). She is not doing this, and she does NOT speak for the "people of Massachusetts". The woman is a disgrace, and needs to step down before she makes an even bigger mockery of the office (and the law).

[Amontillado]

In a state with our sorry history of political corruption, I'm not inclined to get too worked up over someone who merely talks. Let her do it, maybe it'll help her stay out of trouble.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by Amontillado

In a state with our sorry history of political corruption, I'm not inclined to get too worked up over someone who merely talks. Let her do it, maybe it'll help her stay out of trouble.

My point is that she is the attorney general. Her job is to uphold the law, and keep her personal views to herself.

[BostonMike7]

I'm still waiting for the lawsuits from last July's interpretation to play out.

[Bruins_Fan]

Nothing new here. She's a grandstanding political hack...a complete embarrassment to the rule of law. IMO, she was looking for a big position in a Clinton administration, that didn't happen, and now she'll continue pandering to the left and run for governor. Unfortunately, that crap plays really well here.

[Shrewsburried]

Originally Posted by BostonMike7

I'm still waiting for the lawsuits from last July's interpretation to play out.

While I don't agree with her politically driven agenda, I do believe she is within her legal bounds on the assault rifle issue ... at least according to what I have read and heard from lawyers regarding the matter.

This said, I wish democrats would focus on the acquisition standards of weapons, and not whether they should exist. I.e., let people buy what they want, but enforce the traceability/accountability which the NRA opposes. But this would be wishing for a middle ground during a political cycle which doesn't tolerate things like "compromise".

12:41pm and I already could use a glass wine or joint (hey, it's legal)

[tysmith95]

I think she might be referring to Trumps threats that he will cut all funding to sanctuary cities. Many Massachusetts cities are sanctuary cities. I could see some state rights court cases coming out of this. To be fair though many liberals take Trump too literally, I think he will be more of a rank and file republican than people realize.

[Shrewsburried]

Originally Posted by tysmith95

I think she might be referring to Trumps threats that he will cut all funding to sanctuary cities. Many Massachusetts cities are sanctuary cities. I could see some state rights court cases coming out of this. To be fair though many liberals take Trump too literally, I think he will be more of a rank and file republican than people realize.

If he wants the support of congress, yes.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by tysmith95

I think she might be referring to Trumps threats that he will cut all funding to sanctuary cities. Many Massachusetts cities are sanctuary cities. I could see some state rights court cases coming out of this.

He wants to cut DOJ grants to these cities, don't see any grounds where a state could sue on this.

[Partial Observer]

Originally Posted by massnative71

He wants to cut DOJ grants to these cities, don't see any grounds where a state could sue on this.

Obama administration: ‘Give up privacy or give up funding,’ NC families, students sue


Do you still see no possible avenue for states to sue over the strings attached to federal funding?