ClimateSanity
New member
Delete
Last edited:
Is Russia Our Enemy?
- Thread starter ok doser
- Start date
I saw the interview and Susan Rice admitted to no such thing!
As National Security Advisor, any request that an American name be unmasked must go back to the agency that conducted the surveillance which must conduct a review before submitting the name.
What these accusations that Rice spied on the President would have required a vast, elaborate conspiracy amongst the different intelligence agencies!
ClimateSanity
New member
ClimateSanity
New member
Putin is not to blame. It's the US instigated insurrection against Assad that responsible.
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
ClimateSanity
New member
ClimateSanity
New member
Executive orders are in the Constitution. Use of them is not fascist. As the district judge overruling of them show, they are not the final word.
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
dodge
New member
I saw the interview last night and you are 100% wrong. She made a case for UN-masking Americans caught up in surveillance and after saying she knew nothing about the survelience of President Trump she changed her whole story.
The last administration was a crime wave as time will PROVE.
I'll quote you a passage regarding the rise of Mussolini in Italy:
| Mussolini’s obvious pride in his achievement at becoming (October 31, 1922) the youngest prime minister in Italian history was not misplaced. He had certainly been aided by a favourable combination of circumstances, both political and economic; but his remarkable and sudden success also owed something to his own personality, to native instinct and shrewd calculation, to astute opportunism, and to his unique gifts as an agitator. Anxious to demonstrate that he was not merely the leader of fascism but also the head of a united Italy, he presented to the king a list of ministers, a majority of whom were not members of his party. He made it clear, however, that he intended to govern authoritatively. He obtained full dictatorial powers for a year; and in that year he pushed through a law that enabled the Fascists to cement a majority in the parliament. The elections in 1924, though undoubtedly fraudulent, secured his personal power. Many Italians, especially among the middle class, welcomed his authority. They were tired of strikes and riots, responsive to the flamboyant techniques and medieval trappings of fascism, and ready to submit to dictatorship, provided the national economy was stabilized and their country restored to its dignity. Mussolini seemed to them the one man capable of bringing order out of chaos. Soon a kind of order had been restored, and the Fascists inaugurated ambitious programs of public works. The costs of this order were, however, enormous. Italy’s fragile democratic system was abolished in favour of a one-party state. Opposition parties, trade unions, and the free press were outlawed. Free speech was crushed. A network of spies and secret policemen watched over the population. This repression hit moderate Liberals and Catholics as well as Socialists. In 1924 Mussolini’s henchmen kidnapped and murdered the Socialist deputy Giacomo Matteotti, who had become one of fascism’s most effective critics in parliament. The Matteotti crisis shook Mussolini, but he managed to maintain his hold on power. |
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Benito-Mussolini - Emphasis added.
To me, there's something awfully close to the mark about that bolded portion regarding a lot of Trump's followers. Many of them called themselves the Tea Party recently, which is a bit rich, given that rather than identifying themselves with the victims of unjustified official violence, they identify with the police, the forces of established and entitled power. And this demand for absolute order, even in the face of unredressed injustice, even when the acts of property destruction and violence against officials are few and far between on balance, is what makes me call it a fascist movement. They are scared, and they want the jackboots to kick in the teeth they see as disrupting their order. And the fact that many Republican legislatures in many states are pushing laws to criminalize otherwise lawful protest movements adds to that narrative.
The Constitution doesn't envision anything like executive orders as a form of legislation. They are a byproduct of the
Constitution's unitary exectutive. But the term doesn't exist in the Constitution at all. It's true that the President isn't the final say, and that the courts have their turn, but it's also true that the courts rely on the executive to implement their orders. So when he seems to dismiss the authority of the courts, when he calls the judges "so-called" judges, it raises the spectre that he may chose to ignore them...especially when he is fond of appearing in front of a portrait of Andrew Jackson.
ClimateSanity
New member
The only reason he has done that is because issues of immigration are the president's prerogative. I also didn't say it was a legislative function. He is issuing orders.
The U.S. president has*broad authorityto bar individuals or groups, based on the United States Code and the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952.
The code*says the president, by issuing a proclamation, can restrict or suspend "the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens [who] would be detrimental to the interests of the United States."
voanews.com
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
Not exclusively, and it isn't beyond judicial review. The law does give the President discretion, but it also sets quite a number of limits, which invites the courts to interpret what the law that Congress passed actually means.
Well, fair enough. You did say that it's in the Constitution, when it's not, in so many words.
And that authority is bounded by a number of other laws, as well as the US Constitution.
If that passage constituted all of immigration law, there wouldn't be a lot of controversy.
ClimateSanity
New member
Congress, by their explicit clarification (passing laws that specify priorities), and then the courts, by their interpretations.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
lots of countries have dropped bombs on us - germany, italy, japan, england, spain
far as I can tell, russia's never dropped a bomb on us :idunno:
And here we are. Wonder if the nuclear fallout will be bad.
ClimateSanity
New member
Schumer and his boys should have thought of that when they suspended the filibuster in order to fill Obamas circuit and district court positions.
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
It's just dandy for Republicans !!!
Yes. Those positions aren't on the same level of the SCOTUS but it did get the ball rolling. But I hope you're not suggesting that the Dems doing that made this inevitable, or that somehow this is all the fault of the Dems.
They are a disgrace.