Attorney General Nominee Sessions: AG Must Be Able to Say "No" to the President - Page 4

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 99
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Right over there
    Posts
    11,218
    Rep Power
    16

    Default Attorney General Nominee Sessions: AG Must Be Able to Say "No" to the President

    President Trump's nominee for Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, during a confirmation hearing for a deputy attorney general post in 2015, made the following statements -


    "Sessions: You have to watch out, because people will be asking you to do things that you just need to say no about. Do you think the attorney general has a responsibility to say ‘No’ to the president if he asks for something that’s improper?... if the views a president wants to execute are unlawful, should the attorney general or the deputy attorney general say no?

    Sessions: Like any CEO with a law firm, sometimes the lawyers have to tell the CEO, ‘Mr. CEO you can’t do that. Don’t do that. You’ll get us sued. It’s going to be in violation of the law, you’ll regret it. Please.’ No matter how headstrong they might be. Do you feel like that’s the duty of the attorney general’s office?

    Sessions: I remember John Ashcroft as an attorney general for Bush. He’s been celebrated. When he was in the hospital they tried to get him to sign a document that dealt with terrorism that he thought went too far. He refused to do so. So I hope that you feel free to say ‘No’ in the character of John Ashcroft and others who said ‘No’ to President Nixon on certain issues."



    So Senator Sessions believes that the AG should not just be a rubber-stamp for the president's orders, but should take a prncipled stand when necessary.

    Oh, and by the way, the nominee for deputy attorney general who was the recipient of Sessions' advice - Sally Yates, who was fired by President Trump for saying she would refuse to enforce the immigrant ban.


    Last edited by JimmyC123; January 31st, 2017 at 1:07 pm.

  2. Sponsored Links


  3. #46
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    US of A - God's Country
    Posts
    17,376
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Who View Post
    The federal judges issued Court Orders.

    Why do you think they did that?


    The stay prevented those being detained from being deported. All 109 being detained have since been cleared and have been released? What exactly are you referring to by "The federal judges issued Court Orders."? What does that even mean???

  4. Sponsored Links


  5. #47
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    13,841
    Blog Entries
    4
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jezcoe View Post
    It is hilarious that this footage showed up.

    The whole thing was theatre anyway. Yates' time as AG was short to begin with.

    Good for her though.

    She is a martyr now.......
    plus the door swung and hit her in the back on her way out......
    All that in her new resume.....
    Support our FLAG, Military, Police, Fire fighters, St. Jude and Shriner's hospitals.
    Democrats didn't only fall into their own trap they set up for Trump...
    they brought their own cheese.

  6. Sponsored Links


  7. #48
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    13,841
    Blog Entries
    4
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peek-a-boo View Post


    The stay prevented those being detained from being deported. All 109 being detained have since been cleared and have been released? What exactly are you referring to by "The federal judges issued Court Orders."? What does that even mean???

    One Liberal activist judge, I think appointed by Obama,.........did his due.
    Any one surprised!
    Thank God most of the cases like that will end up in SCOTUS.
    Consensus is already growing that Trump was completely legal in what he did
    and there is nothing unconstitutional about it.
    In this case ACLU was pushing the issue.......more reason to get away with them
    once for all. De fund them....close their doors....they are a disgrace.
    People with Green Cards were cleared and allowed in.
    [It wasn't quite clear how to go about it, mistake was corrected].
    Those detained should be looked at on one by one case bases....ACLU has no or should have a role in it.
    Those coming in are not citizens and have no rights ACLU wants them to have.
    Last edited by SpadeMarlowe; January 31st, 2017 at 2:30 pm.
    Support our FLAG, Military, Police, Fire fighters, St. Jude and Shriner's hospitals.
    Democrats didn't only fall into their own trap they set up for Trump...
    they brought their own cheese.

  8. Sponsored Links


  9. #49

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SpadeMarlowe View Post
    She is a martyr now.......
    plus the door swung and hit her in the back on her way out......
    All that in her new resume.....
    And if Trump's administration is a failure she can brag about standing up to him early on. A win win for her.

  10. Sponsored Links


  11. #50
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    The road less travelled
    Posts
    109,159
    Blog Entries
    6
    Rep Power
    30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peek-a-boo View Post
    The stay prevented those being detained from being deported.
    You have no idea what you're talking about

    All 109 being detained have since been cleared and have been released? What exactly are you referring to by "The federal judges issued Court Orders."? What does that even mean???
    Ha! Silly peek-freen believes The Donald's bull ****.

    "The Trump White House’s figures on the scope of the travel ban are ludicrously low. The universe of people likely affected by the travel suspension is around 90,000 — not 109. The White House should also not use the overall daily number of travelers as a comparison."

    Four Pinocchios




    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...n-about-90000/
    .........................
    “The best defense against bull **** is vigilance - So if you smell something, say something." Jon Stewart

  12. Sponsored Links


  13. #51
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    13,841
    Blog Entries
    4
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CaughtInTheMiddle View Post
    And if Trump's administration is a failure she can brag about standing up to him early on. A win win for her.


    Guess we'll know soon.
    But remember....speculations of that sort are floating around now for over 18 months......
    and look where Trump is.
    Support our FLAG, Military, Police, Fire fighters, St. Jude and Shriner's hospitals.
    Democrats didn't only fall into their own trap they set up for Trump...
    they brought their own cheese.

  14. Sponsored Links


  15. #52
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    US of A - God's Country
    Posts
    17,376
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Who View Post
    You have no idea what you're talking about
    I actually do.


    Ha! Silly peek-freen believes The Donald's bull ****.

    "The Trump White House’s figures on the scope of the travel ban are ludicrously low. The universe of people likely affected by the travel suspension is around 90,000 — not 109. The White House should also not use the overall daily number of travelers as a comparison."

    Four Pinocchios




    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...n-about-90000/
    The 109 number reflects the number of passengers that were caught in terminals on American soil.

    That number was never meant to imply that only 109 people worldwide would be impacted.

    The 90,000 number of people affected worldwide is irrelevant. They have no rights to enter the U.S.

    For the next 90 to 120 days, the U.S. will do what it takes to ensure travelers from these regions can be fully vetted. The safety of American's trumps the inconvenience of those 90,000 foreign travelers.

  16. Sponsored Links


  17. Likes Dingo liked this post
  18. #53
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Somewhere in Amerexico
    Posts
    122,563
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JimmyC123 View Post
    President Trump's nominee for Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, during a confirmation hearing for a deputy attorney general post in 2015, made the following statements -


    "Sessions: You have to watch out, because people will be asking you to do things that you just need to say no about. Do you think the attorney general has a responsibility to say ‘No’ to the president if he asks for something that’s improper?... if the views a president wants to execute are unlawful, should the attorney general or the deputy attorney general say no?


    What exactly is improper about asking an AG to defend an executive order in court?

    Sessions: Like any CEO with a law firm, sometimes the lawyers have to tell the CEO, ‘Mr. CEO you can’t do that. Don’t do that. You’ll get us sued. It’s going to be in violation of the law, you’ll regret it. Please.’ No matter how headstrong they might be. Do you feel like that’s the duty of the attorney general’s office?
    What law is defending an executive order in court a violation of?

    [quote]Sessions: I remember John Ashcroft as an attorney general for Bush. He’s been celebrated. When he was in the hospital they tried to get him to sign a document that dealt with terrorism that he thought went too far. He refused to do so. So I hope that you feel free to say ‘No’ in the character of John Ashcroft and others who said ‘No’ to President Nixon on certain issues."


    Apples and oranges, she isn't being asked to sign off on anything, she is being asked to defend an executive order in court, where the determination of whether it is proper and legal can be made by the court.


    So Senator Sessions believes that the AG should not just be a rubber-stamp for the president's orders, but should take a prncipled stand when necessary.

    Oh, and by the way, the nominee for deputy attorney general who was the recipient of Sessions' advice - Sally Yates, who was fired by President Trump for saying she would refuse to enforce the immigrant ban.


    Save this for the low info's on the left.
    Self appointed forum Mark Zuckerberg, feel free to ask me if any news story is real or fake.

  19. Sponsored Links


  20. #54
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Somewhere in Amerexico
    Posts
    122,563
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Who View Post
    Didn't five federal judges who gave their opinions before the AG firing - rule against portions of the EO?
    No, they issued stays until a ruling could be made. In any case the administration backed off those portions of the EO and likely were not asking her to defend those portions.

    Oh and grr, forum won't let me edit my post just prior to this one.
    Self appointed forum Mark Zuckerberg, feel free to ask me if any news story is real or fake.

  21. Sponsored Links


  22. #55

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JayJay View Post
    Yates was gone anyway, so it was easy to go out swinging.

    Just one question, though...did she State her legal grounds for resisting Trump's EO?

    Because that's the key part of the advice...if you say no to the President, it must be a principled, legal stand.
    She said the ban was immoral and illegal.


  23. Sponsored Links


  24. #56
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Somewhere in Amerexico
    Posts
    122,563
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Semi-Sweet View Post
    She said the ban was immoral and illegal.
    And failed to give any hint of a legal argument why.
    Self appointed forum Mark Zuckerberg, feel free to ask me if any news story is real or fake.

  25. Sponsored Links


  26. #57

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zantax View Post
    No, they issued stays until a ruling could be made. In any case the administration backed off those portions of the EO and likely were not asking her to defend those portions.

    Oh and grr, forum won't let me edit my post just prior to this one.
    yes it comes and goes

    the tin foil hattedness in me thinks it happens in a pattern

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    ** seems to be ok for me right now
    Woo hoo hoo, my my, woo hoo hoo

  27. Sponsored Links


  28. #58
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    The State of Independence
    Posts
    18,577
    Blog Entries
    4
    Rep Power
    16

    Default

    I swear...the people trying to offer principled resistance to Donald Trump's policies could **** up a one car race.
    • The unexamined life is not worth living.
    • Wisdom is knowing how little we know.
    • The arguments stay the same...only the sides making those arguments change.


  29. Sponsored Links


  30. #59
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    City of Champions!
    Posts
    133,831
    Rep Power
    30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JimmyC123 View Post
    President Trump's nominee for Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, during a confirmation hearing for a deputy attorney general post in 2015, made the following statements -


    "Sessions: You have to watch out, because people will be asking you to do things that you just need to say no about. Do you think the attorney general has a responsibility to say ‘No’ to the president if he asks for something that’s improper?... if the views a president wants to execute are unlawful, should the attorney general or the deputy attorney general say no?

    Sessions: Like any CEO with a law firm, sometimes the lawyers have to tell the CEO, ‘Mr. CEO you can’t do that. Don’t do that. You’ll get us sued. It’s going to be in violation of the law, you’ll regret it. Please.’ No matter how headstrong they might be. Do you feel like that’s the duty of the attorney general’s office?

    Sessions: I remember John Ashcroft as an attorney general for Bush. He’s been celebrated. When he was in the hospital they tried to get him to sign a document that dealt with terrorism that he thought went too far. He refused to do so. So I hope that you feel free to say ‘No’ in the character of John Ashcroft and others who said ‘No’ to President Nixon on certain issues."



    So Senator Sessions believes that the AG should not just be a rubber-stamp for the president's orders, but should take a prncipled stand when necessary.

    Oh, and by the way, the nominee for deputy attorney general who was the recipient of Sessions' advice - Sally Yates, who was fired by President Trump for saying she would refuse to enforce the immigrant ban.


    Did Sessions really just reference the Saturday Night Massacre? Lol
    "If it's beef, it's whatever, I ain't never been sweet/
    And in a battle I ain't never been beat, I'm in a race/
    To try to take Hova's place and you ain't better than Bleek."

  31. Sponsored Links


  32. #60

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JayJay View Post
    I swear...the people trying to offer principled resistance to Donald Trump's policies could **** up a one car race.
    . It's hard to think clearly when you can't keep your emotions in check.

  33. Sponsored Links


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •