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: 6
22
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 01:37 PM
link   
a reply to: sligtlyskeptical

Your just wrong but i bet you won't admit it. But lets try anyway here is the law which you havnt read but trying to make an opinion about.

www.law.cornell.edu...

Now notice i quote:


If an officer of an Executive agency (including the Executive Office of the President, and other than the Government Accountability Office) whose appointment to office is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, dies, resigns, or is otherwise unable to perform the functions and duties of the office



(2)

notwithstanding paragraph (1), the President (and only the President) may direct a person who serves in an office for which appointment is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to perform the functions and duties of the vacant office temporarily in an acting capacity subject to the time limitations of section 3346;


edit on 11/8/18 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 01:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: BlackJackal


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.


To say CNN is the worst of the worst, is not also praising FOX. Can you quote anyone here saying FOX news is great? Also, as good or bad as FOX may be to everyone here that doesn't change the fact that CNN is really bad, so it is also funny you seem to defend CNN by saying FOX is bad...geez




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



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 01:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: sligtlyskeptical

Your just wrong but i bet you won't admit it. But lets try anyway here is the law which you havnt read but trying to make an opinion about.

www.law.cornell.edu...

Now notice i quote:


If an officer of an Executive agency (including the Executive Office of the President, and other than the Government Accountability Office) whose appointment to office is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, dies, resigns, or is otherwise unable to perform the functions and duties of the office



(2)

notwithstanding paragraph (1), the President (and only the President) may direct a person who serves in an office for which appointment is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to perform the functions and duties of the vacant office temporarily in an acting capacity subject to the time limitations of section 3346;



Oh and the president “may direct an officer or employee of [an] Executive agency to perform the functions and duties of [a] vacant office,” provided that the officer or employee has served, for at least 90 days during the year before the vacancy, in a position for which the pay is at least the level of GS-15—a criterion that Matthew Whitaker satisfies.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 01:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: pavil
a reply to: BlackJackal

Swing and a miss.

Fedreal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998



AG Sessions specifically stated that he didn’t resign, he was asked to resign which means he was fired and the PVA doesn’t apply



Requested or not, he resigned. If he refused to resign, then he would be fired, but the technicality is that letter of resignation. He resigned.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 01:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: pavil
a reply to: BlackJackal

Swing and a miss.

Fedreal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998



AG Sessions specifically stated that he didn’t resign, he was asked to resign which means he was fired and the PVA doesn’t apply




If Sessions refused to resign, he'd have been fired. It's not legally the same, even if in effect it is the same functionally. Trump fired Yates. I don't know if he asked her to resign first, but she did not resign. She was fired.

If you're asked to resign at work and do so, you lose many rights you might have if you were instead fired. It is legally distinct.
edit on 8-11-2018 by RadioRobert because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 01:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: BlackJackal
According to Fox News legal commentator Andrew Napolitano stated that Matt Whitiaker is not legally qualified to become the acting Attorney General.


Napolitano, on "Fox & Friends," said Whitaker is not "legally qualified" to become acting attorney general.

"There’s only three ways a person can become acting attorney general," Napolitano said. "One, if you are the deputy attorney general — Rod Rosenstein — the president signs an executive order and makes you acting."

"Two is if you are already in the Department of Justice and have a job that requires Senate confirmation and you have received confirmation," Napolitano added. "That is not the case with Matt Whitaker because he’s the chief of staff. That does not require Senate confirmation."

Whitaker's most recent post was chief of staff to Sessions at the Justice Department.

"Three is a recess appointment, which is not relevant here because the Senate is not in recess," Napolitano continued.

"So with deference and respect to what the president’s trying to do — he has every right to have whoever he wants run the Justice Department — he has chosen someone who does not qualify under the law to be the acting attorney general," Napolitano added.


So in addition to the bias Whitaker has shown toward the Mueller investigation, he isn't even legally qualified for the job Trump appointed him to. But who cares about laws?

LINK

uh
no
sorry that is incorrect
seems trump is smarter than you would like to give him credit for



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 01:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: sligtlyskeptical

Your just wrong but i bet you won't admit it. But lets try anyway here is the law which you havnt read but trying to make an opinion about.

www.law.cornell.edu...

Now notice i quote:


If an officer of an Executive agency (including the Executive Office of the President, and other than the Government Accountability Office) whose appointment to office is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, dies, resigns, or is otherwise unable to perform the functions and duties of the office



(2)

notwithstanding paragraph (1), the President (and only the President) may direct a person who serves in an office for which appointment is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to perform the functions and duties of the vacant office temporarily in an acting capacity subject to the time limitations of section 3346;



Let me highlight something you may have missed.


(2)

notwithstanding paragraph (1), the President (and only the President) may direct a person who serves in an office for which appointment is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to perform the functions and duties of the vacant office temporarily in an acting capacity subject to the time limitations of section 3346;




posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 01:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: RadioRobert

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: RadioRobert

My opinion is this is not in good faith. Which would bring up part two of Napolitano's recent interview.


The statutes are completely ambiguous as to supersedence of the statutes granting authority to POTUS in the matter. How see exactly are you going to demonstrate bad faith on the part of either party where both have a reasonable legal standing?


It's fairly easy if you can follow their own writing and statements



You think that the statements show they know they are breaking a law even though they cite applicable law granting them said authority? That's a novel legal argument...



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 01:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: BlackJackal
According to Fox News legal commentator Andrew Napolitano stated that Matt Whitiaker is not legally qualified to become the acting Attorney General.


Napolitano, on "Fox & Friends," said Whitaker is not "legally qualified" to become acting attorney general.

"There’s only three ways a person can become acting attorney general," Napolitano said. "One, if you are the deputy attorney general — Rod Rosenstein — the president signs an executive order and makes you acting."

"Two is if you are already in the Department of Justice and have a job that requires Senate confirmation and you have received confirmation," Napolitano added. "That is not the case with Matt Whitaker because he’s the chief of staff. That does not require Senate confirmation."

Whitaker's most recent post was chief of staff to Sessions at the Justice Department.

"Three is a recess appointment, which is not relevant here because the Senate is not in recess," Napolitano continued.

"So with deference and respect to what the president’s trying to do — he has every right to have whoever he wants run the Justice Department — he has chosen someone who does not qualify under the law to be the acting attorney general," Napolitano added.


So in addition to the bias Whitaker has shown toward the Mueller investigation, he isn't even legally qualified for the job Trump appointed him to. But who cares about laws?

LINK

uh
no
sorry that is incorrect
seems trump is smarter than you would like to give him credit for


AND, your proof? Or did Trump tell you I was wrong?



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 01:52 PM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert

It is not legally distinct in this case. Being forced to quit is still what the clause is talking about. They didnt wqnt the president to stack the justice dept like Nixon was trying.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 01:53 PM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert

Right because those are the only statements that would be considered.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 01:54 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Yet he has been smacked by courts regularly. Including scotus.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 01:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: BlackJackal

Fail.

Temporarily Filling Presidentially Appointed, Senate-Confirmed Positions 😃


*Cough* *Cough*

I was waiting for someone to blindly post this. The fact that it was you makes it all the sweeter!

From your link:


Notably, the Supreme Court of the United States has held that a provision of the Vacancies Act
limits the conditions under which an individual may serve in both an acting capacity and as the
nominee to the same position. The court’s opinion appears to allow an individual to serve on this
basis only if the individual has served as the first assistant to the vacant position for more than 90
of the preceding 365 days or if the individual is serving as first assistant, and that position itself
requires the advice and consent of the Senate.


Now you have not only confused two-year old news for a current event, you proved yourself wrong with your own damn link. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 01:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: sligtlyskeptical

Your just wrong but i bet you won't admit it. But lets try anyway here is the law which you havnt read but trying to make an opinion about.

www.law.cornell.edu...

Now notice i quote:


If an officer of an Executive agency (including the Executive Office of the President, and other than the Government Accountability Office) whose appointment to office is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, dies, resigns, or is otherwise unable to perform the functions and duties of the office



(2)

notwithstanding paragraph (1), the President (and only the President) may direct a person who serves in an office for which appointment is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to perform the functions and duties of the vacant office temporarily in an acting capacity subject to the time limitations of section 3346;



Pretty telling that you failed to post the entire statue.




(a) If an officer of an Executive agency (including the Executive Office of the President, and other than the Government Accountability Office) whose appointment to office is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, dies, resigns, or is otherwise unable to perform the functions and duties of the office— (1) the first assistant to the office of such officer shall perform the functions and duties of the office temporarily in an acting capacity subject to the time limitations of section 3346; (2) notwithstanding paragraph (1), the President (and only the President) may direct a person who serves in an office for which appointment is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to perform the functions and duties of the vacant office temporarily in an acting capacity subject to the time limitations of section 3346; or (3) notwithstanding paragraph (1), the President (and only the President) may direct an officer or employee of such Executive agency to perform the functions and duties of the vacant office temporarily in an acting capacity, subject to the time limitations of section 3346, if— (A) during the 365-day period preceding the date of death, resignation, or beginning of inability to serve of the applicable officer, the officer or employee served in a position in such agency for not less than 90 days; and (B) the rate of pay for the position described under subparagraph (A) is equal to or greater than the minimum rate of pay payable for a position at GS–15 of the General Schedule. (b) (1) Notwithstanding subsection (a)(1), a person may not serve as an acting officer for an office under this section, if— (A) during the 365-day period preceding the date of the death, resignation, or beginning of inability to serve, such person— (i) did not serve in the position of first assistant to the office of such officer; or (ii) served in the position of first assistant to the office of such officer for less than 90 days; and (B) the President submits a nomination of such person to the Senate for appointment to such office. (2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any person if— (A) such person is serving as the first assistant to the office of an officer described under subsection (a); (B) the office of such first assistant is an office for which appointment is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate; and (C) the Senate has approved the appointment of such person to such office. (c) (1) Notwithstanding subsection (a)(1), the President (and only the President) may direct an officer who is nominated by the President for reappointment for an additional term to the same office in an Executive department without a break in service, to continue to serve in that office subject to the time limitations in section 3346, until such time as the Senate has acted to confirm or reject the nomination, notwithstanding adjournment sine die. (2) For purposes of this section and sections 3346, 3347, 3348, 3349, 3349a, and 3349d, the expiration of a term of office is an inability to perform the functions and duties of such office.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 01:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: BlackJackal

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: sligtlyskeptical

Your just wrong but i bet you won't admit it. But lets try anyway here is the law which you havnt read but trying to make an opinion about.

www.law.cornell.edu...

Now notice i quote:


If an officer of an Executive agency (including the Executive Office of the President, and other than the Government Accountability Office) whose appointment to office is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, dies, resigns, or is otherwise unable to perform the functions and duties of the office



(2)

notwithstanding paragraph (1), the President (and only the President) may direct a person who serves in an office for which appointment is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to perform the functions and duties of the vacant office temporarily in an acting capacity subject to the time limitations of section 3346;



Let me highlight something you may have missed.


(2)

notwithstanding paragraph (1), the President (and only the President) may direct a person who serves in an office for which appointment is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to perform the functions and duties of the vacant office temporarily in an acting capacity subject to the time limitations of section 3346;




LoL

He didn't miss it. It is an additional way to fill the office temporarily. Read the third item. This is only confusing if you only read parts of the laws and ignore the context.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 01:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: BlackJackal

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: sligtlyskeptical

Your just wrong but i bet you won't admit it. But lets try anyway here is the law which you havnt read but trying to make an opinion about.

www.law.cornell.edu...

Now notice i quote:


If an officer of an Executive agency (including the Executive Office of the President, and other than the Government Accountability Office) whose appointment to office is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, dies, resigns, or is otherwise unable to perform the functions and duties of the office



(2)

notwithstanding paragraph (1), the President (and only the President) may direct a person who serves in an office for which appointment is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to perform the functions and duties of the vacant office temporarily in an acting capacity subject to the time limitations of section 3346;



Let me highlight something you may have missed.


(2)

notwithstanding paragraph (1), the President (and only the President) may direct a person who serves in an office for which appointment is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to perform the functions and duties of the vacant office temporarily in an acting capacity subject to the time limitations of section 3346;



You cant read can you? What it says is he can temporarily appoint someone to office in an acting capacity until the senate can fill position.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 02:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: RadioRobert

originally posted by: BlackJackal

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: sligtlyskeptical

Your just wrong but i bet you won't admit it. But lets try anyway here is the law which you havnt read but trying to make an opinion about.

www.law.cornell.edu...

Now notice i quote:


If an officer of an Executive agency (including the Executive Office of the President, and other than the Government Accountability Office) whose appointment to office is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, dies, resigns, or is otherwise unable to perform the functions and duties of the office



(2)

notwithstanding paragraph (1), the President (and only the President) may direct a person who serves in an office for which appointment is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to perform the functions and duties of the vacant office temporarily in an acting capacity subject to the time limitations of section 3346;



Let me highlight something you may have missed.


(2)

notwithstanding paragraph (1), the President (and only the President) may direct a person who serves in an office for which appointment is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to perform the functions and duties of the vacant office temporarily in an acting capacity subject to the time limitations of section 3346;




LoL

He didn't miss it. It is an additional way to fill the office temporarily. Read the third item. This is only confusing if you only read parts of the laws and ignore the context.


I could say the same for you,...it seems very obvious there was protocol for picking an AG which would assure its independance from the white house.

This is a legal trick, and it would fail most likely. It directly assaults the meaning of keeping the AG independent by having senate confirmarion of the management within the DOJ. Hence the line of succession and why nobody has tried this.

However, you may be right by that by that time there will be a new AG.


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



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 02:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: BlackJackal

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: sligtlyskeptical

Your just wrong but i bet you won't admit it. But lets try anyway here is the law which you havnt read but trying to make an opinion about.

www.law.cornell.edu...

Now notice i quote:


If an officer of an Executive agency (including the Executive Office of the President, and other than the Government Accountability Office) whose appointment to office is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, dies, resigns, or is otherwise unable to perform the functions and duties of the office



(2)

notwithstanding paragraph (1), the President (and only the President) may direct a person who serves in an office for which appointment is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to perform the functions and duties of the vacant office temporarily in an acting capacity subject to the time limitations of section 3346;



Let me highlight something you may have missed.


(2)

notwithstanding paragraph (1), the President (and only the President) may direct a person who serves in an office for which appointment is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to perform the functions and duties of the vacant office temporarily in an acting capacity subject to the time limitations of section 3346;



You cant read can you? What it says is he can temporarily appoint someone to office in an acting capacity until the senate can fill position.


Now that someone (our friend xuenchen) stumbled into the landmine. Here, this is why the Vacancy Act is not the loophole you are looking for.

LINK


Notably, the Supreme Court of the United States has held that a provision of the Vacancies Act limits the conditions under which an individual may serve in both an acting capacity and as the nominee to the same position. The court’s opinion appears to allow an individual to serve on this basis only if the individual has served as the first assistant to the vacant position for more than 90 of the preceding 365 days or if the individual is serving as first assistant, and that position itself requires the advice and consent of the Senate.


Are you ready to admit Trump is attempting to break the law yet?
edit on 8-11-2018 by BlackJackal because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 02:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: BlackJackal

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: BlackJackal
According to Fox News legal commentator Andrew Napolitano stated that Matt Whitiaker is not legally qualified to become the acting Attorney General.


Napolitano, on "Fox & Friends," said Whitaker is not "legally qualified" to become acting attorney general.

"There’s only three ways a person can become acting attorney general," Napolitano said. "One, if you are the deputy attorney general — Rod Rosenstein — the president signs an executive order and makes you acting."

"Two is if you are already in the Department of Justice and have a job that requires Senate confirmation and you have received confirmation," Napolitano added. "That is not the case with Matt Whitaker because he’s the chief of staff. That does not require Senate confirmation."

Whitaker's most recent post was chief of staff to Sessions at the Justice Department.

"Three is a recess appointment, which is not relevant here because the Senate is not in recess," Napolitano continued.

"So with deference and respect to what the president’s trying to do — he has every right to have whoever he wants run the Justice Department — he has chosen someone who does not qualify under the law to be the acting attorney general," Napolitano added.


So in addition to the bias Whitaker has shown toward the Mueller investigation, he isn't even legally qualified for the job Trump appointed him to. But who cares about laws?

LINK

uh
no
sorry that is incorrect
seems trump is smarter than you would like to give him credit for


AND, your proof? Or did Trump tell you I was wrong?


fas.org...


For at least three positions—U.S. Attorney, Solicitor of Labor, and Assistant Secretary of Labor
for Mine Safety and Health—combinations of the tools identified here have been used to fill
vacancies temporarily. By using more than one authority, the Administration has been able to
place unconfirmed individuals in these positions for longer periods of time than would have been
possible if only one authority had been used.
With regard to U.S. Attorneys, the Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of Justice determined, in 2003, that U.S. Attorney vacancies could be filled temporarily under specific provisions that allow for appointment by the Attorney General, 29 under the provisions of the Vacancies Act, or under a combination of these authorities in sequence.

and the footnote that accompanied such



A September 5, 2003, opinion by the Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of Justice stated that the Vacancies Act could be used singly or in combination with 28 U.S.C. §546 to temporarily fill U.S. Attorney positions. (This opinion may be found at www.justice.gov...)


I would wager the key term being "temporarily". Your mileage may vary.



posted on Nov, 8 2018 @ 02:09 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

I'm not saying the Court won't rule the AG succession law supersedes it. I'm saying there is nothing "illegal" about the current situation. It's ambiguous. That happens alot because we have a lot of stupid or poorly written laws in the country.

The President/DOJ are exercising power they believe is granted by the VRA for the next 210 days. Until someone on a bench says, "No, it doesn't" or issues a stay pending that ruling, they can/will continue to exercise that authority.




top topics



 
22
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join