It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump's pick to be acting Attorney General does not qualify under the law

page: 4
23
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 12:18 PM
link   
a reply to: PurpleFox


why because he posts things you don't like? seems you're the baby. lol


anyway, looks like Whitaker is good friends with sam clovis. all roads lead to Russia..




posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 12:19 PM
link   
If this is true that he cannot be appointed, than he should not be appointed to the job even temporarily. The guy reporting this may not know all the facts though, I am sure that the regulations governing this job have about fifty pages of crap to weed through that basically have loopholes galore.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 12:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
Heh, True Pundit is reporting today that Trump is floating Louis Freeh to replace Jess Sessions.
Freeh is a former FBI director who effing hates the Clintons.


May he get ready for the s hitload of rape accusations against him.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 12:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: notsure1

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: notsure1

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: luthier
Be nice to have a libertarian like Napolitano who loves America and the constitution for a change of pace.


I wish he'd run for President.

He's one of the only people on Fox that I don't want to smash their skull in with a sledge hammer.

Yeah they should be more like CNN.


The only difference between the two is where their bias lays, and who they're willing to sell out/bolster.


Its not even close . CNN is a joke of fake news. I dont like FOX much but man CNN is so bad.

Hell, even Larry King is dissing CNN these days. (Yesterday, he said "CNN stopped doing news a long time ago.") That's how pathetic they are.


It's funny, everyone here criticizes CNN but praises Fox. That's super rich. You know the News Organization that called Obama's 50th birthday the "Hip Hop BBQ". Or that Obama attended Muslim School in Indonesia.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 12:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: gimcrackery
a reply to: BlackJackal

Talk is cheap and there are plenty of liberals out there willing to listen. Napolitano has been wrong many times in the past. Liberals are very worried they are about to be exposed


Damn, it took until the second page but the predictable happened. If anyone criticizes Trump, they MUST be wrong.

MUST PROTECT TRUMP, TRUMP IS GOD

You people are sad sad people, incapable of thinking for yourself.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 12:26 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

An at best ambiguous argument based on a law which has never had it's constitutionality challenged and has no precedent? An argument therefore dependant on a complaint from someone with grounds which will take months to even appear before a bench (nevermind the SCOTUS) for an appointment that for well-established and unambiguous reasons can last no longer than 210 days? Do you see why this argument will have zero impact on whatever the administration plans yet?

I mean, I'm sure some Senator with a D by his name will probably file a complaint. But it is just more political entertainment.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 12:29 PM
link   
As Sara says, this is interesting:


edit on 8-11-2018 by The GUT because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 12:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: BlackJackal

originally posted by: xuenchen
Whitaker was confirmed a few years ago as a U.S. Attorney.

Wonder if that "qualifies" per Judge Nap ?

😎


Nope, he resigned from that post in 2009. He would need to be a currently appointed member of the DOJ.

Damn, the sky is falling. I actually agree with you for once.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 12:33 PM
link   
a reply to: BlackJackal


You people are sad sad people, incapable of thinking for yourself

Says the guy that parrots the media every single day.


It's funny, everyone here criticizes CNN but praises Fox.

You're the new hyperbolic king.

I bet you can't even quote 2 members praising fox.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 12:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: RadioRobert
a reply to: luthier

An at best ambiguous argument based on a law which has never had it's constitutionality challenged and has no precedent? An argument therefore dependant on a complaint from someone with grounds which will take months to even appear before a bench (nevermind the SCOTUS) for an appointment that for well-established and unambiguous reasons can last no longer than 210 days? Do you see why this argument will have zero impact on whatever the administration plans yet?

I mean, I'm sure some Senator with a D by his name will probably file a complaint. But it is just more political entertainment.


Could be but the laws were structured after Nixon...to prevent a pawn being placed in the AG office.

Again you could be right, but I think it's going to be far more complicated than you think. In particular what witaker can do without taking the oath, and what happens to him if he does.

And we can see there is some opinion already.

In a recent concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas argued that such a temporary appointment would violate the Appointments Clause of Article II of the Constitution, Art. II., § 2, cl. 2, which provides that such principal officers must be appointed by the President by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
edit on 8-11-2018 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 12:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: BlackJackal

Interesting...both if this is accurate (and I have general faith in Judge Nappy to be correct), and that you still think that pointing out that the Mueller investigation is overstepping its original intent is a "bias."

Thanks for the heads up on the former, though--gives me something to look into. Of course, if Whitaker can't be acting, then he shouldn't be acting.

ETA: I especially like the Nancy Pelosi quote at the end of that article--using her logic, she should recuse herself from being a Representative, since she has actively sought to destroy the integrity and functionality of the House.



See, the thing is the overstepping is a figment of the conservative media. I have already posted this in another thread, but it's worth posting again for education purposes.

I would like to know how you know he has overstepped the bounds of his investigation. Because he had full authority to investigate any crimes he uncovered during the course of his Russia investigation:

This is taken directly from the appointment letter authorizing the investigation:


The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the investigation confirmed by then-FBI Director James 8. Comey in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on March 20, 2017, including:


  • any links and/or coordination bet ween the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and
  • any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and
  • any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a).


If the Special Counsel believes it is necessary and appropriate, the Special Counsel is authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters.


Special Counsel Appointment

For completeness sake, here is the text of Title 28 Chapter 6 Section 600.4 outlined above:


(a)Original jurisdiction. The jurisdiction of a Special Counsel shall be established by the Attorney General. The Special Counsel will be provided with a specific factual statement of the matter to be investigated. The jurisdiction of a Special Counsel shall also include the authority to investigate and prosecute federal crimes committed in the course of, and with intent to interfere with, the Special Counsel's investigation, such as perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses; and to conduct appeals arising out of the matter being investigated and/or prosecuted.


As you can see, the mandate for the special council specifically allows him to investigate any crimes that he discovers during his investigation. This is standard practice for any investigation. So, if Mueller was investigating Trump’s finances that means he found evidence of crimes and was following those leads. He was doing his job.

So how has Mueller overstepped his mandate?
edit on 8-11-2018 by BlackJackal because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 12:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: knowledgehunter0986
a reply to: BlackJackal

Says the guy that parrots the media every single day.


The Jim Acosta of ATS.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 12:38 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

The intent of the law means zilch without an interpretation from the bench. The statute is just what the words are. And you have two competing processes and an ambiguous wording that leaves a hole until then.

So. What will happen?

Someone(s) in the Senate will hold a press conference, stamp their feet, declare the appointment "dangerous for our democracy", call Trump a dictator, and file a complaint. And Whitaker will perform the duties of acting AG until there is an actual nominee or until April 2019.

That's what will happen.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 12:38 PM
link   
a reply to: knowledgehunter0986

You know you do the exact same thing in every single one of my threads. You pop in, say something along the lines of "You are saying things that Fox News didn't tell me" therefore your dumb.

If you have something constructive to say great, otherwise I have no time for you.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 12:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: RadioRobert
a reply to: luthier

The intent of the law means zilch without an interpretation from the bench. The statute is just what the words are. And you have two competing processes and an ambiguous wording that leaves a hole until then.

So. What will happen?

Someone(s) in the Senate will hold a press conference, stamp their feet, declare the appointment "dangerous for our democracy", call Trump a dictator, and file a complaint. And Whitaker will perform the duties of acting AG until there is an actual nominee or until April 2019.

That's what will happen.


Did you not see that he provided you with an interpretation from the bench?


In a recent concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas argued that such a temporary appointment would violate the Appointments Clause of Article II of the Constitution, Art. II., § 2, cl. 2, which provides that such principal officers must be appointed by the President by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 12:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa
You are going to have a long 2 years.


So are you.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 12:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: BlackJackal


The Judge will obviously be called a sell out now.


I always knew he was a Deep Stater.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 12:42 PM
link   
a reply to: BlackJackal

The only person I've seen mention Fox news is you...



Take a break, Captain Strawman.

Also, noone has called you dumb that I've seen, but you're putting it all out there on display, too, so I'm conflicted on whether to chime in on that account.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 12:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: RadioRobert
a reply to: luthier

The intent of the law means zilch without an interpretation from the bench. The statute is just what the words are. And you have two competing processes and an ambiguous wording that leaves a hole until then.

So. What will happen?

Someone(s) in the Senate will hold a press conference, stamp their feet, declare the appointment "dangerous for our democracy", call Trump a dictator, and file a complaint. And Whitaker will perform the duties of acting AG until there is an actual nominee or until April 2019.

That's what will happen.


That would be illegal however, so I guess he is just cannon fodder.

I assume a law group has already started the process as it's been discussed.

And no it will be brought to the front of the line, we already have scotus opinions on the subject..

And then we have the changes from watergate..



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 12:42 PM
link   
Here comes the ground crew !!😆




new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join