Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Undocumented Immigrant Thread (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter timschochet
- Start date
Mile High
Footballguy
Nancy Pelosi: "We have a problem" if Trump doesn't care about governance
"Well, let me first say that our purpose in the meeting at the White House was to open up government," said Pelosi. "The impression you get from the president [is] that he would like to not only close government, build a wall, but also abolish Congress so the only voice that mattered was his own."
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/nancy-pelosi-we-have-a-problem-if-trump-doesnt-care-about-governance/
"Well, let me first say that our purpose in the meeting at the White House was to open up government," said Pelosi. "The impression you get from the president [is] that he would like to not only close government, build a wall, but also abolish Congress so the only voice that mattered was his own."
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/nancy-pelosi-we-have-a-problem-if-trump-doesnt-care-about-governance/
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Yes there have been at least 3-4 challenges. Almost all are pending, still, but one basically pushed the issue and denied it because they said there wasn’t enough evidence of Trump’s intentions.
bigbottom
Footballguy
What would be interesting is what isn’t there, namely donations to charity. Might also be interesting to see what his effective tax rate is.I don't think they will be.
Now, if you said you were going to look into the tax returns of Trump Org - then, I think I might get some
But, Trump's personal returns
I would bet there is nothing interesting there.
bigbottom
Footballguy
What sets us apart from every other country is that we value life. It’s what makes us unique.
What the holy hell?
I don't really care about that. Sure, it would make for some headlines. But I don't care what he donates, or how low his tax rate is... I would care if he was indebted to someone in a way that could influence his decisions - but I don't think you would find that in his personal returns. Maybe in the Trump Org returns, but even then, I think it would be difficult to find.
Insomniac
Footballguy
You're assuming that the GOP judges on the Supreme Court won't back Trump. The GOP Congress hasn't stood up to him, the base is completely behind anything he does. Why should anyone expect this Court to be anything except blatantly partisan? I'm not even sure what the standard is for a President declaring a state of emergency. Maybe he can do it. The only remedy for a President abusing power is impeachment and the Senate is never going to go along with that no matter what he does.
BigJim®
Footballguy
I wouldn't assume either way with the Supreme Court, or any federal judges. Note the hearing for Flynn for an example. While politicians are slaves to election cycles with unfettered freedom to be hypocritical at any time, I think judges, in their nature, appreciate the power of legal precedent. I.e., if we ok this, then we're basically nullifying any scrutiny of the power ever. JMHO, There's a distinction between leaning conservative on social issues and being a willing co-conspirator in party politics.
Apple Jack
Footballguy
SCOTUS isn't beholden to anybody. Why would any of them feel obligated to get behind Trump? Even Kavanaugh.
Johnnymac
Footballguy
Insomniac
Footballguy
BigJim®
Footballguy
I get the fear, but the Supreme Court is well aware that the Legal conclusions they draw are going to be dissected and scrutinized in the most public way well into the future. No one cares what some blowhard legislator said 3 years later. I don't think Kavanaugh, or any other Supreme Court Justice, wants to go down in infamy having a laughable Legal conclusion on the record.
BigJim®
Footballguy
It's an excellent counter point. I don't know the answer, but have also not read the dissenting opinions.
Apple Jack
Footballguy
While I agree it was the goal, in legal terms it was not a ban on Muslims. And I don't know, maybe they will. But these are different things.
GoBirds
Footballguy
Insomniac
Footballguy
That's what it was meant to be and putting in a few phrases to give themselves some cover doesn't change it from the moral abomination that it is. I think that's a worse decision than letting Trump use "national security" as an excuse to build his stupid wall without congressional approval would be. He used national security as an excuse to put tarriffs on some of our allies which was completely absurd but the courts didn't (couldn't?) stop him. The current Attorney General apparently is an illegal, unconstitutional appointment but there's no sign of the courts doing anything about it.
I hope you are correct and our system's checcks and balances will win out, I'm just not very optimistic that it's going to be true.
Sheriff Bart
Footballguy
The victors write history...
I get the fear, but the Supreme Court is well aware that the Legal conclusions they draw are going to be dissected and scrutinized in the most public way well into the future. No one cares what some blowhard legislator said 3 years later. I don't think Kavanaugh, or any other Supreme Court Justice, wants to go down in infamy having a laughable Legal conclusion on the record.
Hilts
Footballguy
This was fantastic. We need a lot more reporters prepared to challenge the lies being spewed by this administration. Here's hoping this is a sign of things to come for 2019.
belljr
Footballguy
Insomniac
Footballguy
I wonder if Justice Taney ever reflects on his Dred Scott decision while he's burning in hell.
I get the fear, but the Supreme Court is well aware that the Legal conclusions they draw are going to be dissected and scrutinized in the most public way well into the future. No one cares what some blowhard legislator said 3 years later. I don't think Kavanaugh, or any other Supreme Court Justice, wants to go down in infamy having a laughable Legal conclusion on the record.
Kavanaugh would just have a few more beers and forget about any wretched decisions he's a part of.
Franknbeans
Footballguy
and he gets rapey
the rover
Footballguy
Scalia would beg to differ
I get the fear, but the Supreme Court is well aware that the Legal conclusions they draw are going to be dissected and scrutinized in the most public way well into the future. No one cares what some blowhard legislator said 3 years later. I don't think Kavanaugh, or any other Supreme Court Justice, wants to go down in infamy having a laughable Legal conclusion on the record.
Dedfin
Footballguy
bostonfred
Footballguy
cosjobs
Footballguy
Dedfin
Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Ever hear of Henry Brown? He wrote Plessy.Insomniac said:
Joe Summer
Footballguy
Looking forward to Fox News spending the next 24 hour cycle blaming Snoop and rap music for the lowered standards in our society.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
They backed him on the massively revised travel ban and I think several lawyers on this board predicted they would. The original would never have stood.Insomniac said:
Last edited by a moderator:
Sheriff Bart
Footballguy
Mile High
Footballguy
I don't understand why they aren't making this a bigger issue. 5 billion is only enough money to build less then 200 miles of wall. How is 5 billion going to help in the long run ,so what are you going to spend it on ?
5-ish Finkle
Footballguy
parasaurolophus
Footballguy
Why would they need to make it an issue?
Trump: Here is a detailed proposal for a wall.
Pelosi: no wall.
Or......
Trump: i want money for a wall. We will figure it out after.
Pelosi: no wall.
Its a silly talking point or a lame stall tactic.
Shula-holic
Footballguy
Sheriff Bart
Footballguy
Stolen from the internet:
urbanhack
Fight The Power!
Aside from the shutdown, don't forget...
Trump's government has no confirmed:
Secretary of Defense
Secretary of the Interior
Attorney General
White House Chief of Staff
Environmental Protection Agency Administrator
UN Ambassador
plus vacancies in hundreds of other critical positions
Trump's government has no confirmed:
Secretary of Defense
Secretary of the Interior
Attorney General
White House Chief of Staff
Environmental Protection Agency Administrator
UN Ambassador
plus vacancies in hundreds of other critical positions
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Former Fox newshead, then State spokesgal, and to avoid confirmatiom they merely declare the position to be non-cabinet. How?
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
![[scooter]](/data/avatars/m/22/22287.jpg?1659477690){kind=avatar}
[scooter]
Footballguy
[scooter]
Footballguy
Because it was never an official cabinet position in the first place. The President has the authority to invite any senior staffer into his Cabinet meetings, and he can describe them as "Cabinet members", but it's more of a symbolic designation.
Insomniac
Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
"We take the land... which goes, actually, fairly quickly."
- The way I recall it Trump lost a seizure case to an old lady in Atlantic City surrounded by previously sold property.
- The way I recall it Trump lost a seizure case to an old lady in Atlantic City surrounded by previously sold property.
Insomniac
Footballguy
I didn't go to law school so I don't pretend to argue legal points with you but itseems obvious what the purpose of this was and I find it to be nothing more than outright bigotry. I understand the law is about fine distinction but some of the Justices agreed with me.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Insomniac
Footballguy
Do you think the conservatives on the Supreme Court will decide against the Trump administration on any of these subpeonas? I'll believe it when I see it.
Similar threads
