re: The elephant in the room regarding boasberg/venezuelan gangs.

quote:

---

The judge's daughter is an advocate for these exact kind of groups.

---

Almost assuredly not a conflict, but, more importantly, not one the judge would have to do on his own.

28 U.S. Code § 455

quote:

---

(a)Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.
(b)He shall also disqualify himself in the following circumstances:
(1)Where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding;
(2)Where in private practice he served as lawyer in the matter in controversy, or a lawyer with whom he previously practiced law served during such association as a lawyer concerning the matter, or the judge or such lawyer has been a material witness concerning it;
(3)Where he has served in governmental employment and in such capacity participated as counsel, adviser or material witness concerning the proceeding or expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy;
(4)He knows that he, individually or as a fiduciary, or his spouse or minor child residing in his household, has a financial interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or any other interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding;
(5)He or his spouse, or a person within the third degree of relationship to either of them, or the spouse of such a person:
(i)Is a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director, or trustee of a party;
(ii)Is acting as a lawyer in the proceeding;
(iii)Is known by the judge to have an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding;
(iv)Is to the judge’s knowledge likely to be a material witness in the proceeding.

---

Your closest shot would be (b)(5), but his daughter isn't a part of the groups that are parties to the litigation, so that dog won't hunt. That would remove her from having an interest in the litigation or being associated with a party/being a potential witness in the litigation.

quote:

---

is that you what truly think you provide here?

---

I've been giving political analysis on here for going on 20 years now

quote:

---

Are you now going to argue that it is not reasonable to question his impartiality, upon the knowledge that his daughter works for a group that advocates for just such illegals? I

---

That's a retarded argument

Stretch Armstrong level reaching involved in that "logic"

quote:

---

Constitutional authority when justifying actions with "national security".

---

Is it within the President's Constitutional authority to designate a gang as a terrorist organization?

quote:

---

Is it within the President's Constitutional authority to designate a gang as a terrorist organization?

---

That is a question being litigated.

The elephant in the room is that some unelected DC judge, who is a dem appointee and total lackey, gets to unilaterally undo presidential actions that are constitutionally granted to the executive, and tie that up in court indefinitely.

Dems, who can't stomach DOGE staff merely identifying potential waste and corruption in government, sure are fighting like hell to keep unelected political appointees acting as DeFacto national security czars who can lawfare everything the commander in chief does.

quote:

---

That is a question being litigated.

---

This is amazing to me and should be to you as well, If the President doesn't have that authority, then who does? Just in case another sect of the Muslims want to set up shop here are start laying IED's all over the place.

quote:

---

If the President doesn't have that authority, then who does?

---

If the President is improperly labeling people/groups "terrorists", outside of the specific authority granted to him by Congress, then nobody has that authority.

quote:

---

Just in case another sect of the Muslims want to set up shop here are start laying IED's all over the place.

---

You'd have a much easier argument labeling them terrorists.

quote:

---

If the President is improperly labeling people/groups "terrorists",

---

Mind you, they are here ILLEGALLY!! They should not be afforded the PROTECTION of the very laws they broke to get here.

quote:

---

Alien Enemies act is only for Wartime, so that is not the law on the side of DJT and the DOJ

---

No its not. How many times must we go through this?