- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Andrew Weissmann's intentional ignorance on checks and balances.
Posted on 4/29/24 at 7:48 am
Posted on 4/29/24 at 7:48 am
quote:
I mean, I know it sounds like hyperbole, but I think your opening is so correct that we are essentially, as Neil put it, one vote away from sort of the end of democracy as we know it with checks and balances. And to say it’s an imperial presidency that would be created is, it’s frankly saying it would be a king, he would be criminally immune. And that that is what is so shocking is how close we are.
He is framing this like the DOJ and state prosecutors are the check against the executive. They are not.
The people and the legislative branch are the first check against the executive in terms of presidential immunity.
In all these arguments for or against presidential immunity I never hear the legislative branch's role in checking the executive. Why is that? They have the most power to check the president and his office.
I really hope SOTUS returns with a judgment basically stating, "congress get off your arse and make the determination of what is an official act and a private act"...congress has that authority through the impeachment clause in the constitution.
I think Andrew Weissmann's frustration is that congress moves too slow or never moves to check the executive. He want's the power to check the executive coming from the DOJ.
LINK
14
Posted on 4/29/24 at 7:49 am to GumboPot
His problem is he wants to be a king who subverts democracy.
Weissmann that is
Weissmann that is
This post was edited on 4/29/24 at 7:50 am
Posted on 4/29/24 at 7:51 am to GumboPot
quote:
In all these arguments for or against presidential immunity I never hear the legislative branch's role in checking the executive. Why is that?
In a criminal case, they have none.
Well, I guess other than writing the criminal laws, but nobody is talking about that as a check, I hope, due to the universality.
quote:
I really hope SOTUS returns with a judgment basically stating, "congress get off your arse and make the determination of what is an official act and a private act".
Not their job. That's a role courts have been in for a long time. Immunity is a judicially-created rule, so the parameters are also judicial in nature.
The President isn't the first position to have this debate.
quote:
.congress has that authority through the impeachment clause in the constitution.
No they don't.
Posted on 4/29/24 at 7:52 am to GumboPot
quote:
Andrew Weissmann
Is whatever scum is to scum.
Posted on 4/29/24 at 7:52 am to GumboPot
quote:
I really hope SOTUS returns with a judgment basically stating, "congress get off your arse and make the determination of what is an official act and a private act".
I believe that is what will occur, but SCOTUS will send back to appeals court and direct them to make that distinction (which the appeals court should've already done).
Posted on 4/29/24 at 7:59 am to GumboPot
Weissmann is the most corrupt lawyer in America. He let people die in prison, knowing they were innocent. He is a true POS.
He wants to be King, along with other un-elected goons at DOJ.
DOJ's arguments in this case are pretty bad.
SCOTUS: How do we know you wouldn't abuse prosecution of a president for partisan purposes?
DOJ: We're great people, you can trust us.
In one of the exchanges DOJ was asked about Obama being criminally accountable for droning Americans. DOJ was like "well it was deemed legal" - of course it was, primarily because of the labels and status that Obama, as President, was able to attach to these people. He was able to write his own get out of jail free card. Greenwald destroyed the DOJ's position on that and you can rest assured that no one at the DOJ would ever try to challenge that and go after Obama, if they prevail at SCOTUS, because all of this is political.
He wants to be King, along with other un-elected goons at DOJ.
DOJ's arguments in this case are pretty bad.
SCOTUS: How do we know you wouldn't abuse prosecution of a president for partisan purposes?
DOJ: We're great people, you can trust us.
In one of the exchanges DOJ was asked about Obama being criminally accountable for droning Americans. DOJ was like "well it was deemed legal" - of course it was, primarily because of the labels and status that Obama, as President, was able to attach to these people. He was able to write his own get out of jail free card. Greenwald destroyed the DOJ's position on that and you can rest assured that no one at the DOJ would ever try to challenge that and go after Obama, if they prevail at SCOTUS, because all of this is political.
Posted on 4/29/24 at 8:13 am to GumboPot
quote:
congress has that authority through the impeachment clause in the constitution.
When are you going to stop bringing up impeachment in criminal proceedings?
Posted on 4/29/24 at 8:17 am to GumboPot
Tom Clancy laid out the Deep State, albeit not by that name, in Executive Orders.
He called them “official Washington” and a big part of the problems in the book was that the new politicians were not kowtowing to these groups and they were getting pissed about it.
Civil servants and those on the periphery are there to keep things running regardless of who the executive is. When they see themselves as bigger than the executive, that is where the Pendleton Civil Service Act needs to be overhauled and these frickers frog marched out.
He called them “official Washington” and a big part of the problems in the book was that the new politicians were not kowtowing to these groups and they were getting pissed about it.
Civil servants and those on the periphery are there to keep things running regardless of who the executive is. When they see themselves as bigger than the executive, that is where the Pendleton Civil Service Act needs to be overhauled and these frickers frog marched out.
Posted on 4/29/24 at 8:22 am to GumboPot
quote:
one vote away from sort of the end of democracy
Makes you wonder how long they can beat this dead horse.
Posted on 4/29/24 at 8:27 am to GumboPot
Andrew is a Facist, progressive commie who needs to lose his right to practice law in the U.S.
Let him move to China where they would eliminate him on day one.
Let him move to China where they would eliminate him on day one.
Posted on 4/29/24 at 9:16 am to GumboPot
quote:
I think Andrew Weissmann's frustration is that congress moves too slow or never moves to check the executive. He want's the power to check the executive coming from the DOJ.
Considering DOJ falls within the executive branch, he's effectively advocating for a 4th branch of government.
The intelligence community and the media are the 4th and 5th branches, so DOJ would have to be #6.
Posted on 4/29/24 at 10:02 am to GumboPot
I agree the legislative branch has the ability to end a presidency.
The judicial branch isn’t supposed to have that authority.
The judicial branch isn’t supposed to have that authority.
Posted on 4/29/24 at 11:10 am to GumboPot
quote:
He is framing this like the DOJ and state prosecutors are the check against the executive. They are not.
The DOJ is part of the executive branch, thus not a part of his theory of "checks-and-balances." That job falls squarely on the legislative and judicial branches, the former of which has failed miserably in that task.
Posted on 4/29/24 at 11:18 am to GumboPot
quote:
the end of democracy as we know it
When they say this, they're not meaning our Constitutional Republic where we conduct democratic elections. They mean the rigged system of the illusion of choice that the unelected and installed have developed to enrich themselves at the cost of the American taxpayer.
Posted on 4/29/24 at 8:56 pm to GumboPot
quote:
He want's the power to check the executive coming from the DOJ.
He wants unelected bureaucrats in the executive branch to check the executive.
He’s advocating for a soft coup and admitting the deep state is a thing.
Who is the real threat to democracy?
This post was edited on 4/29/24 at 8:57 pm
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News