- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
re: Judge Beryl Howell goes all in blocks another Trump EO - Perkins Coie
Posted on 5/3/25 at 9:15 am to Jbird
Posted on 5/3/25 at 9:15 am to Jbird
quote:
So once a security clearance is issued does it stay forever?
Only Democrat law firm security clearance have to remain forever. It is written in the constitution somewhere.
Biden removing Thump's is okay.
Trump removing Biden's is also okay because Democrats know that Biden doesn't GAF and probably doesn't know what a security clearance is.
But removing security clearances from deep state lawyers against Trump is a bridge too far for the judiciary and they can read the words in the constitution under the Trump-Can't-Do-This clause.
2
Posted on 5/3/25 at 9:18 am to LSU2ALA
quote:
No, I understand how the first amendment works.
I don't think you do. The 1st does not give you the right to have security clearances.
Posted on 5/3/25 at 9:19 am to GumboPot
quote:
Only Democrat law firm security clearance have to remain forever. It is written in the constitution somewhere.
I guess this counts as a white flag
quote:
Biden removing Thump's is okay.
Trump removing Biden's is also okay because Democrats know that Biden doesn't GAF and probably doesn't know what a security clearance is.
What a pivot
quote:
But removing security clearances from deep state lawyers
And there is the manufactured crisis for NPCs to promote
Posted on 5/3/25 at 9:19 am to BCreed1
quote:
The 1st does not give you the right to have security clearances.
Literally nobody is arguing that it does.
The 1st Amendment does, however, prohibit the denial of a security clearance due to viewpoint discrimination.
Posted on 5/3/25 at 9:21 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:If I had communist viewpoints in my past I never would have attained a top secret security clearance.
The 1st Amendment does, however, prohibit the denial of a security clearance due to viewpoint discrimination.
Posted on 5/3/25 at 9:22 am to Wednesday
quote:
Using the powers of the federal government to target lawyers for their representation of clients and avowed progressive employment policies in an overt attempt to suppress and punish certain viewpoints, however, is contrary to the Constitution
First, their viewpoints are irrelevant and not pertinent. Perkins Coke is a domestic security risk for the United States and the Constitution because its actions were a coordinated attack to overthrow the elected government of the United States through false, subversive, and overt acts.
Posted on 5/3/25 at 9:24 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:speaking of pro bono contribution
quote: I don't see security clearance anywhere in the 1st Amendment.
Don't be retarded
Posted on 5/3/25 at 9:25 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
If those denied can prove they were denied for viewpoint discrimination, then the EO is unconstitutional.
Was biden not nominating a conservative judge to SCOTUS also viewpoint discrimination?
Posted on 5/3/25 at 9:25 am to GumboPot
If these esteemed judges can't control security clearances they may just go on unhinged tirades in court at the tops of their voices.
Their words, their thoughts, their bowel movements are sacrosanct.
Who cares if years are wasted before someone with common sense (who somehow got on a bench) points out how idiotic the ruling is. The "process" was brought down from a mountain by a prophet.
and irony of ironies, some of the same assholes who support this call Trump supporters a "cult"
The very same type of arguments gave the a-hole who was executed in Florida this week for killing 3 kids execution style another 26 years of life. Stretch it out. Get more billable hours.
Only the process matters. Well, that and lawyers getting paid.
Their words, their thoughts, their bowel movements are sacrosanct.
Who cares if years are wasted before someone with common sense (who somehow got on a bench) points out how idiotic the ruling is. The "process" was brought down from a mountain by a prophet.
and irony of ironies, some of the same assholes who support this call Trump supporters a "cult"
The very same type of arguments gave the a-hole who was executed in Florida this week for killing 3 kids execution style another 26 years of life. Stretch it out. Get more billable hours.
Only the process matters. Well, that and lawyers getting paid.
Posted on 5/3/25 at 9:25 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Literally nobody is arguing that it does.
Literally, your alter was!
Posted on 5/3/25 at 9:26 am to VOR
quote:
Would you feel the same if a Democrat did the same thing?
Absolutely. If that private law firm was engaged in overthrowing a duly elected government through known false and subservient actions, I would hope their security clearance would be revoked.
Posted on 5/3/25 at 9:26 am to G2160
quote:
Was biden not nominating a conservative judge to SCOTUS also viewpoint discrimination?
This may be the most irrelevant comment on this board in 2025 so far, which is saying something
Posted on 5/3/25 at 9:27 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
This may be the most irrelevant comment on this board in 2025 so far, which is saying something
another post to extend the thread, just like court, right? cha-ching!
Posted on 5/3/25 at 9:27 am to LuckyTiger
quote:
First, their viewpoints are irrelevant and not pertinent. Perkins Coke is a domestic security risk for the United States and the Constitution because its actions were a coordinated attack to overthrow the elected government of the United States through false, subversive, and overt acts.
Worth repeating. I believe it’s all provable as well.
The judge just casually overlooked this.
Same thing with the invasion and two judges blocking deportation.
Lawfare is real.
Posted on 5/3/25 at 9:28 am to Jbird
quote:
If I had communist viewpoints in my past I never would have attained a top secret security clearance.
The more apt comparison would be stripping the security clearance of a law firm defending someone accused of being a Communist.
Posted on 5/3/25 at 9:28 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
This may be the most irrelevant comment on this board in 2025 so far, which is saying something
I could’ve picked any number of partisan actions taken by the party in control, but I picked this one.
Now, please tell me how viewpoint discrimination was not involved in this nomination.
Posted on 5/3/25 at 9:29 am to loogaroo
quote:
The judge just casually overlooked this.
Naw. The problem is that's just histrionics for the echo chamber crowd. It's not really based in reality.
Based on that argument, any political campaigning for the losing side is now "attempting to overthrow an elected government", which is patently absurd.
Posted on 5/3/25 at 9:30 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:Irrelevant to my point.
The more apt comparison would be stripping the security clearance of a law firm defending someone accused of being a Communist.
Posted on 5/3/25 at 9:30 am to Strannix
quote:
FYI Perkins worked with Russian intelligence assets to try and frame the president.
Good. Tell Trump to quit being a bitch and charge someone then.
You can’t unilaterally single out one entity because you don’t like them or they hurt your feels.
Posted on 5/3/25 at 9:30 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The more apt comparison would be stripping the security clearance of a law firm defending someone accused of being a Communist.
Once again, as pointed out already:
Perkins Coke is a domestic security risk for the United States and the Constitution because its actions were a coordinated attack to overthrow the elected government of the United States through false, subversive, and overt acts.
Page 3 of 22
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News