Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you know where I was going with that, then you also would agree with me that those who think that just because we're the United States that it can't happen here, then they're only fooling themselves.
In the history of the US only 10 people were charged with espionage.
7 of those 10 were charged under Obama and 6 of the 7 were whistleblowers.
"Don't rock the boat or else...."
That is an utterly shocking statistic.
Obama could go a long way redeeming himself, in my eyes at least, if he took this one stand and fully pardoned Snowden. But he's a coward, and the military industrial complex has had its talons in the legislature and west wing since Eisenhower warned us about it 60 years ago.
If you know where I was going with that, then you also would agree with me that those who think that just because we're the United States that it can't happen here, then they're only fooling themselves.
It doesnt take much for a society to devolve into chaos, look how readily we accepted war to whomever the media told us our enemies were post 9/11.
Do corporations have the right to vote at the ballot box? No, because, though "persons", they are not the same kind of person as you or I.
Neither are government employees the kind of persons as you or I.
Why CAN'T an American corporation be a citizen?
Where's the SC ruling on it?
I have no idea what your ramble is other than a ramble. Nowhere does the Constitution exclude you your protections just because you work for the government. But go ahead, point out where it does.
Only if you can prove the intent of Congress was to shield government personnel from the crimes they commit.
I have to prove nothing. That is for defense council during trial but I think we all know what is going to happen in the long run. Supermax in Colorado.
I proved you to be the laughing stock of the internet....and that you should never be permitted to vote or sit on a jury.
Um, legal genius....what does the part I highlighted say?
In rare cases where "the literal application of a statute will produce a result demonstrably at odds with the intention of its drafters," an exception should be made to the general plain language rule. United States v. Ron Pair Enters., 489 U.S. 235, 242, 103 L. Ed. 2d 290, 109 S. Ct. 1026 (1989).
Here....I'll emphasize the source....just for you...
In rare cases where "the literal application of a statute will produce a result demonstrably at odds with the intention of its drafters," an exception should be made to the general plain language rule. United States v. Ron Pair Enters., 489 U.S. 235, 242, 103 L. Ed. 2d 290, 109 S. Ct. 1026 (1989).
That is what the US Supreme Court said in a case styled United States versus Ron Pair Enterprises. The 9th Circuit was merely quoting the US Supreme Court from a case in which the US Supreme Court already said a statute cannot be interpreted in a manner that is contrary to the intent of Congress (or the legislative body that wrote the statute in the event the issue is State laws or municipal/county ordinances).
Again.....I'll emphasize the source....
When that meaning has led to absurd or futile results, however, this Court has looked beyond the words to the purpose of the act. Frequently, however, even when the plain meaning did not produce absurd results but merely an unreasonable one "plainly at variance with the policy of legislation as a whole" this Court has followed that purpose, rather than the literal words. When aid to construction of the meaning of words, as used in the statute, is available, there certainly can be no "rule of law" which forbids its use, however clear the words may appear on "superficial examination."
United States v. American Trucking Associations, 310 U.S. 534, 543-44, 84 L. Ed. 1345, 60 S. Ct. 1059 (1940)(footnotes omitted)
That is the US Supreme Court......the 9th Circuit was merely quoting the Supreme Court....something circuit and appellate courts often do.
I selected those cases for a reason....one is in 1940 and the other 1989, and that actually came from a 6th Circuit case in 2004.....who was quoting the several Circuit Courts, plus the US Supreme Court.
It also proves common sense obviously doesn't run in some families.
I guess it's a good thing that's case law and not a judge's instruction to a jury....because zealots like you ignore important things like that.....probably due to a lack of comprehension....and innocent people get convicted of crimes they did not commit.
Only if you can prove the intent of Congress was to shield government personnel from the crimes they commit.
You can surrender at any time....the 9th Circuit was quoting the US Supreme Court....those are Supreme Court decisions, not 9th Circuit Decisions.
Intent is irrelevant here.
The misguided moron is the one who would say nothing as Americans were secretly and illegally executed without a trial for crimes they never committed, because to tell anyone would violate 3 CFRs.
Exactly.
Yes, indeed.
No doubt.
That smells like a weak-kneed sycophant with no moral compass, which is typical of National Socialists.
The 9th and 10th Amendments of the US Constitution, along with the 1st, 4th, 5th and 6th Amendments.
Maybe the NSA and the Alphabet Agencies will think twice about violating the Constitution and the Natural Rights of Americans.
You would have had a great career in the Gestapo oder Schutzstaffel...
Mircea
You are totally and completely full of crap. I don't like what NSA has done. But two wrongs don't make a right. You can pontificate on how I could emulate Muller from the Geheime Staats Polizei but that doesn't alter the fact that your hero is going to go down.
Hard.
He knows it and despite your high handed way of talking, all of you will see a conviction of 30 to life without the possibility of parole. Snowden made Obama look like an idiot. Never mind Obama is an idiot but a narcissistic idiot at that and Snowden badly damaged his narcissism.
Federal law is federal law and you can convolute it and quote precedence all you want but the outcome is what I laid out above.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
