Understanding Politics

[dreamaker]

You guys left me in the dust!!  I apologize to you all; I didn’t mean to kick a bee hive. I was just trying to understand both branches of Gov. logic.  Myself I thought Trump’s action made sense, to step back and evaluate the consequences of the future. People argue about humans constitutional rights, but when someone has a gun to your head, constitution don’t mean chit.  When in reality people put pressure cookers full of explosives, in the public mass, the constitution doesn’t matter. The constitution works if all people play by the rules. These people that want to take us down couldn’t care less about the constitution, unless they use it against us.  So while people that suppose to protect are battling about who is right, some undesirable people are walking in our front door. Document and rules are made for the people that will follow them, these people have one rule, kill the infidel, if I understand correctly.  So unusual; circumstances needs unusual actions. Feel free to correct me, I am just trying to understand it all.

[Bighead]

Well your first post you said Travel BAN, which it isn't it was a delay for 90 days. ( media threw the ban bit in there to make it sound BAD)
The Judges that blocked it said it was Unconstitutional. Who was the constitution written for? US citizens not people with green cards or visas but citizens.
Obama did the same thing but for 6 months for Irainians. Every president has probably done the same but what you didn't or don't hear is/was the media bitching about it. No matter what he says or does they will try to undermine and put a black mark on his administration.

[Jess from VA]

The liberal judges did not say the exec order was unconstitutional; that was too big a lie for even them to write.  They just waved the constitution over their rambling order and suggested that it might be, as applied to a few.  Then granted a TRO obstructing the entire order.  

These judges ought to be subpoenaed before a congressional judiciary committee, and given an order to show cause why they should not be censured (or impeached) for routinely making things up.  And a US Attorney (or 10) who knows what he is doing should help them with the process.

I cannot think of a better evening's entertainment than watching some of these elitist, above-the-law judges squirming in their seats as the tables are turned and they are grilled for hours on end about their knowledge of the constitution and law and past opinions (reversed at an 80% rate) on C-span.  

With nearly complete unaccountability for their actions, they are rogue enemies of the people and should be brought to heel like any other bad dog.

And speaking of bad dogs and enemies of the people.  http://nypost.com/2017/02/11/how-obama-is-scheming-to-sabotage-trumps-presidency/  

[The emperor has no clothes]

It's interesting how some view an opposing decision as deserving impeachment from "so called" judges. I vehemently disagree with the "Citizens United" case. But have never thought the solution was to impeach them.

[Jess from VA]

It's not just one decision, it's hundreds (and maybe thousands) of them.  

[Bighead]

The liberal judges did not say the exec order was unconstitutional; that was too big a lie for even them to write.  They just waved the constitution over their rambling order and suggested that it might be, as applied to a few.  Then granted a TRO obstructing the entire order.  

These judges ought to be subpoenaed before a congressional judiciary committee, and given an order to show cause why they should not be censured (or impeached) for routinely making things up.  And a US Attorney (or 10) who knows what he is doing should help them with the process.

I cannot think of a better evening's entertainment than watching some of these elitist, above-the-law judges squirming in their seats as the tables are turned and they are grilled for hours on end about their knowledge of the constitution and law and past opinions (reversed at an 80% rate) on C-span.  

With nearly complete unaccountability for their actions, they are rogue enemies of the people and should be brought to heel like any other bad dog.

And speaking of bad dogs and enemies of the people.  http://nypost.com/2017/02/11/how-obama-is-scheming-to-sabotage-trumps-presidency/  

Well Jess I have heard the words unconstitutional so many times about this on the news maybe I threw it in, in the wrong context or understanding. If so my bad.

[Moonshot_1]

It's interesting how some view an opposing decision as deserving impeachment from "so called" judges. I vehemently disagree with the "Citizens United" case. But have never thought the solution was to impeach them.

I agree. I'm not into impeaching judges. Many times the general public simply doesn't understand the actual question before the court and their decisions can at times seem off the wall.

There would have to be gross misconduct on the part of a judge to go down the road of impeachment.

Then along comes the 9th circuit court. Most overturned court in the country. Over 80% I believe.
That is plain just not doing your job. It's disrespecting your job, the law and the Constitution.
No court in this country should have the reputation as a joke. I don't care if they make liberal decisions if they can back it up. At 80% overturn rate they obviously can't. 50% overturn is a joke. 80% is an abomination.

[The emperor has no clothes]

It's interesting how some view an opposing decision as deserving impeachment from "so called" judges. I vehemently disagree with the "Citizens United" case. But have never thought the solution was to impeach them.

I agree. I'm not into impeaching judges. Many times the general public simply doesn't understand the actual question before the court and their decisions can at times seem off the wall.

There would have to be gross misconduct on the part of a judge to go down the road of impeachment.

Then along comes the 9th circuit court. Most overturned court in the country. Over 80% I believe.
That is plain just not doing your job. It's disrespecting your job, the law and the Constitution.
No court in this country should have the reputation as a joke. I don't care if they make liberal decisions if they can back it up. At 80% overturn rate they obviously can't. 50% overturn is a joke. 80% is an abomination.

I agree to a point. But think of this ; with the Supreme Court in its current configuration, one judge appointed either way would make a huge difference. We could very well be saying that the previous 20 years are going to be overturned. Would that make them an abomination ? I doubt it. If a liberal justice were appointed, the 9th Circuit could have a 10% overturn rate. It's all a matter of perspective .

[Moonshot_1]

If they made rulings that were backed up and respected but overturned on narrow issues 80% of the time we could possibly cut them some slack. But the reputation doesn't back that up. Even the liberal legal guys do a WTF with this court on a regular basis.

[3fan4life]

If a liberal justice were appointed, the 9th Circuit could have a 10% overturn rate. It's all a matter of perspective .

And from my perspective, I'm glad that Donald trump is the President and that isn't going to happen.

[Jess from VA]

This is no simple matter of interpretation or difference of opinion.

This is simply right and wrong.

And not just wrong, but dead wrong.

Impeachment is the least they deserve for a documented intentional history of dead wrong.

(If you want to change the law or constitution, give up judging and run for congress and try to change laws legally, not through lies and deceit and misdirection from the bench)

[Oss]

I was out of this thread but guess I am back in

Since Marbury v Madison in 1803 we have had judicial review of congress. Now granted the President would have had to sign the law unless his veto was over ridden but clearly the judiciary can review
both congress and the executive branch. No one branch supposed to be above the other 2.

The slippery slope of attempting to circumvent the executive powers leads me to believe that Jess' outrage comes from this little known part of the article III

The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

good Behavior


Article IV Section 4 says
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion

To me it is clear, because Trump campaigned on that basis and his Executive Order clearly mirrors Section 4 that a temporary ban is in the furtherance of protecting the USA from Enemies of the United States before they can get in  This is from way before US code 8

Its like where would we be without our skin, it is our personal border keeping out germs and viruses.  Our country's skin is its borders and the process by which we let people into the USA. The party I still am registered with, the democrats, controlled by the far left globalists, would have osmosis where anyone could cross and vest rights where none exist.

Inconvenience to anyone with a visa? With all due respect, kiss my ass being upset with a temporary delay?  Havent we have been inconvenienced flying since 9-11 as have hundred million citizens of our country? The Order does not say you can never come in, just not yet.

These jurists are playing with fire as the Constitution clearly has a path for judicial removal in  peace and war. Hope it does not come to that as our personal freedoms will surely suffer as a result, but we ARE at war and we are losing badly as is the rest of the free world

Perhaps we need another Ellis Island to park these folks who are in never never land??   Question 1 should be do you believe Sharia law supercedes the law of the USA? If yes, lifetime ban

YMMV

[Serk]

[rocketray]

google "John Roberts 1 billion in Vatican bank"  B.O. has a billion , "W" 300 million,daddy 500 million.....,google "All wars are Bankers wars"

[phideux]

This is all just stupid now. Trump is the boss, just tell all the ICE/TSA/CBP/DHS folks to do their job and F-that Judge.
The judge isn't doing his job. A judge should not be allowed to be a "liberal" or a "conservative" on the bench, should not be allowed to bring any personal feelings into a decision. Personally, I think he is overstepping his authority, if he wants these people here so bad we should ship his ass over to Syria or Iran or something, so he can go live among these fine folks, go around checking references and helping to vett these people he so wants to bring here.

[The emperor has no clothes]

This is all just stupid now. Trump is the boss, just tell all the ICE/TSA/CBP/DHS folks to do their job and F-that Judge.
The judge isn't doing his job. A judge should not be allowed to be a "liberal" or a "conservative" on the bench, should not be allowed to bring any personal feelings into a decision. Personally, I think he is overstepping his authority, if he wants these people here so bad we should ship his ass over to Syria or Iran or something, so he can go live among these fine folks, go around checking references and helping to vett these people he so wants to bring here.

I believe the Judge was appointed by "W". Hardly liberal. I haven't seen or heard anything that said he wanted anyone to come over here. You would have the government employees ignore a judges ruling ?

[Moonshot_1]

Perhaps we need another Ellis Island to park these folks who are in never never land?? 

How about a US National Immigration facility on Kodiak Island in Alaska?

[Pete]

Judges on the bench should NEVER be liberal or conservative, they should be judges.
If they are liberal or conservative on the bench they should be ex- judges, immediately.

As for understanding politics: No can not say I do.

[Robert]

Ninth Circuit Court Now Demands It Be Protected From Itself…
Posted on February 10, 2017   by sundance

Oh, the winning… it’s often too funny. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is now independently, on its own impetus, requesting an internal vote on a full panel en banc hearing to review its own decision.

Additionally, the full ninth are asking the Trump administration to file an additional brief telling the court why the three member original appeals ruling authority was wrong.   In essence, the smart judges know what wasn’t considered, and are now looking for an out.

You just can’t make this stuff up.

June 26, 2002 ********************
Ninth Circuit rules that both the words
“under God” and the teacher-led
recitation of the Pledge
violate the Establishment Clause
The court also denied requests
for  a  rehearing  and  a  rehearing en banc of  the  original  decision. 

The courts have always been a way to shape and turn society as a whole. Judicial activism is nothing new although frustrating. I have written many times about Judge Hugo Black. Franklin Delano Roosevelt appointed Justice Hugo Black to the Supreme Court, it was revealed that he was a member of the Ku Klux Klan and a member of the Masons. He and many other justices were appointed to hear church related cases and turn society into a more secular society.

One curriculum for fourth graders, for example, refers students to a book that concludes that “Black’s joining of the KKK was politically progressive and personally ethical…”
The scandal eventually was overshadowed by World War II, and Hugo Black went on to reintroduce America to the long-dormant phrase “separation of church and state,” twisting it’s meaning. Black also wrote the majority opinion that deemed internment camps in the United States constitutional in 1944.

[scooperhsd]

NO ONE - President - Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, any member of Congress - is above the law and, as officers of the US, ARE subject to impeachment proceedings in the event of misconduct.
Such impeachment charges are brought by the House, with the Senate serving as the jury.

It's also worth noting that no branch of our govenrment is above any of the others - Executive, legislative, and Judicial - all have their jobs to perform. Now "politics" can spur on, or supress some of this. but in general - our Founding Fathers did a pretty good job in crafting a Constitution that has had the flexibility to still be our governing document over 200 years after it's inception (with amendments and laws steming from the Constitution). I can say this even if I disagree with the modern necessity of some parts (in my case - the Electoral College).