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.
I am fascinated by how you constantly cheer on the mere idea that anyone is above the law. Its so unamerican. Its so....corrupt and slimy. And you seem so proud of the idea.
Perhaps you're finding it un-American because of the poster's actual pedigree?
If you had read some of Whitakers opeds you would know that he discussed how to shut down the mueller investigation. And honestly it was very much a blueprint for obstruction of justice.
The Dems are fine with a report, they know exactly what it encompasses, and that its limited in scope. And while it can expand here and there it mostly will stay on target. Know what wont? The House investigations are going to be bonkers. They will investigate everything Mueller wouldn't. The dems are going to get that despite your claims otherwise. And you are just going to have to accept that fact. That after watching Republicans do it to Obama and Clinton, they're about to return the favor. The Democrats are learning from Republicans.
The dems in the House can investigate government activities for oversight purposes, they cannot use the investigative powers to target Trump personally for political reasons.
1998 Vacancies Act, enacted by Bill Clinton for this very thing, bites the very Democrats that pushed it through, when the shoe was on the other foot.
Imagine that. Not thinking past the tip of their nose, to even see down the road.
You need to tell someone. They don't seem to be as up on the law as you do. Or maybe you are incorrect.
Sorry but even Fox doesn't even agree with you.
Mr. Whitaker has more than one ethical issue (and it is not that Ted Cruz is his political role model).
"'Unlawful': Napolitano Agrees With Legal Challenge to Whitaker Appointment..."
"...In his campaigns, Mr Whitaker positioned himself as a fiscally conservative opponent of the Affordable Care Act, and said his political role models were Republican Senators Rand Paul and Ted Cruz. He courted the anti-abortion, evangelical Christian vote, saying at one candidate's forum that he would scrutinise nominees for federal judge to ensure they had a "biblical view of justice"..."
The dems in the House can investigate government activities for oversight purposes, they cannot use the investigative powers to target Trump personally for political reasons.
The Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998,
SEC. 151. FEDERAL VACANCIES AND APPOINTMENTS.
Some folks provided some on point links to legal analysis. You? You replied with the title. Maybe you should try reading one of the earlier links. Even Fox news can teach you this one for a change.
If Rosenstein endorses Whitaker, then that gives me comfort. However, this appointment should still be challenged in the Courts as unlawful. Trump knew exactly what he was doing here, and it's completely transparent.
Bentbow, I'll add to the chorus of other posters here and ask that you provide link support or highlight the relevant sections that support your point. Doing otherwise is incredibly lazy.
The DOJ Office of Legal Counsel is expected shortly to issue an opinion in support of Matthew Whitaker's installation. This legal opinion will apparently be based on legal guidance previously offered by the DOJ back in 2003, in response to which nobody complained at the time.
The Justice Department is expected to publish a legal opinion in support of Matthew Whitaker’s installation as acting attorney general as early as Tuesday, a person familiar with the matter said, following questions about whether he can legally serve in the role.
The department’s Office of Legal Counsel is expected to say that President Trump had the ability to appoint Mr. Whitaker, the person said. Mr. Whitaker took over last week as an interim successor to former Attorney General Jeff Sessions when Mr. Sessions was ousted by Mr. Trump.
The opinion is expected to support the Trump administration’s position that the president’s authority to tap Mr. Whitaker is affirmed by guidance the office issued in 2003. At that time, the office concluded that President George W. Bush could name a non-confirmed employee of the Office of Management and Budget as the agency’s acting director.
{More at the link}
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.
).
