- 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
re: Mueller's Lieutenant’ Applauded Official For Defying Trump (another Giglio V)
Posted on 12/6/17 at 11:12 am to VOLhalla
Posted on 12/6/17 at 11:12 am to VOLhalla
quote:
He sent her a kind email after she was fired.
You dumb frick, he sent the email from his .gov address to her .gov address, which just automatically tells us that he sent it BEFORE she was fired, as she wouldn't have had access to the .gov email after being fired.
And of course,it is beyond obvious that someone who so despises everything a person stands for shouldn't be investigating that person.
1
Posted on 12/6/17 at 11:47 am to zunic
That is not how it works. An attorney either represents his/her client or withdraws from representation. The ABA rules of professional conduct is clear that there is no third choice. Yates either represented the US in defending the Executive Orders or she resigns. Refusal to do either is an ethics violation. Weissman congratulated Yates for violating the Code of Professional Responsibility. Yates deserved to be fired and Weissman should be terminated for thinking it okay to act in an unethical manner.
Posted on 12/6/17 at 1:01 pm to cajunandy
That's right.
Posted on 12/6/17 at 1:15 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
You dumb frick, he sent the email from his .gov address to her .gov address, which just automatically tells us that he sent it BEFORE she was fired, as she wouldn't have had access to the .gov email after being fired.
Calm down, the timeline isn’t in question.
She was fired before 9:30 on the 30th
LINK
The email was sent at 9:50 the same day
LINK
Plus plenty of articles mention that his email was sent after her firing. If you’re going to get all worked up you should at least make sure you get your facts straight.
Posted on 12/6/17 at 1:16 pm to zunic
quote:
Well she was obeying the constitution.
At the moment the Supreme Court disagrees with you 7-2
Posted on 12/6/17 at 4:23 pm to RobbBobb
and the courts supported her position (or conscience) that the first ban wasn't legal. that's just the truth, junior. deal with it.
Trump had no choice but to admit this. because law stuff. That's why he didnt appeal to the Supreme Court for the first ban, even though he threatened to. After that, Trump changed the ban dramatically, rewriting it along the lines of the court's objections, and THAT version is what is now being allowed to function. legally.
Yates wasn't in office when the updated (and legal) version of the ban was rolled out.
Trump had no choice but to admit this. because law stuff. That's why he didnt appeal to the Supreme Court for the first ban, even though he threatened to. After that, Trump changed the ban dramatically, rewriting it along the lines of the court's objections, and THAT version is what is now being allowed to function. legally.
Yates wasn't in office when the updated (and legal) version of the ban was rolled out.
Posted on 12/6/17 at 6:03 pm to Woody Glazer
quote:
and the courts supported her position (or conscience) that the first ban wasn't legal. that's just the truth, junior. deal with it.
Like I said, idiot
LINK
The only major difference was he removed Iraq
The Supremes even allowed him to exclude family members, by saying Full Enforcement was to proceed
Posted on 12/6/17 at 7:29 pm to RobbBobb
quote:
She knew what she was doing, and so did that idiot Weissmann.
Why don't you post a link to the whole article so we all can share in your self-anointed genius?
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News