Posted on 05/09/2017 11:02:53 AM PDT by ForYourChildren
On Monday, in a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) exposed former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates’s ignorance of the law, and the partisan nature of her decision to refuse to enforce President Donald Trump’s executive order suspending travel from several terror-prone countries.
One would not know that from the liberal media, which thinks Yates won the exchange, but Cruz proved his case decisively.
Here’s why — in short: Cruz brought up the law that authorized the executive order, and Yates did not recognize it. She then answered by referring to another law, which does not supersede the first. She then tried to argue that the order was unconstitutional, but Cruz pointed out that her argument was a partisan one, driven by her own policy views. She then claimed no court would enforce the order — which is contradicted by the fact that one actually did.
The left thinks Yates won the exchange because she was well-prepared with a set of talking points, and offered a snappy response. That shows how desperate Democrats are to salvage something out of the hearing — which failed to produce any new evidence to back up their Russian conspiracy theories — and also how urgently they need to find new champions.
It does not change the fact that Cruz was completely correct, and Yates was completely wrong.
Here is a more detailed explanation, ...
{..snip..}
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
A good breakdown on the Cruz questioning of Yates.
Gotta love this..
Cruz: “Well, it is the binding statutory authority for the executive order that you refused to implement, and that led to your termination.”
Over here..
;)
Ping.
Yates is a traitor to the United states which seems to be the norm today for the left. She knew damn well the order wasn’t a Muslim ban, but a precaution to prevent radical Islamic terrorists from entering the country. So why would she go against it? Because she’s a traitor: She decided to provide aid and comfort for our enemies - radical Islamic terrorists, rather than listen to the President of the United states AND the people.
Kabuki folks. Get back to me when some of them are in prision orange.
I thought he almost nailed it, but not quite.
Wasn’t prepared for her answer quoting some other law, which she claimed superseded the first.
I doubt it seriously, but I got the feeling he wasn’t going to challenge her until he looked it up.
John Kennedy’s was better when he asked - Who appointed her to the Supreme Court?
I said from the beginning, that the President should have gone before the people and quoted chapter and verse of the relevant sections of the Law and the Constitution, in this matter.
He should have fought this in the court of public opinion - not within the compromised, seditious legal system.
At least Senator Cruz is now doing so in a public venue.
I think Kennedy stuffed her better with the “When were you appointed to the Supreme Court?”
But but but ... Cruz is a scheming liar, whose dad conspired to kill JFK! He’s a no-good friend of Goldman Sachs! May he rot in pieces. FR hates Cruz, and we can trust nothing he says or does.
.
Trump doesn’t have a legal adviser on staff of Cruz’ caliber.
Not particularly surprising, since there are only a few of such counselors available.
.
bfl
.
I’ve come to the conclusion that it is unlikely that this will end well.
.
It was good to see Cruz doing his actual job, and using the legal intellect he is so famous for.
The excerpts I’ve seen do not tell what he replied after her “snappy comeback” but who among us could NOT have said “That’s NOT YOUR JOB, bitch!” ?
She has laid down the outline the left will follow - simply say there are two laws in conflict and they are obligated not to follow illegal orders.
Cruz did a good job as far as he went but he failed to close the deal.
.
The senate lacks a means of “closing the deal.”
In the end, it is all just words in the senate.
An example of :”How fake news is created”
They present a false premiss and only present that side of the story!
I was wishing he was acting Solicitor General yesterday at the hearing yesterday as I was listening to it.
[[Cruz: “Well, it is the binding statutory authority for the executive order that you refused to implement, and that led to your termination.”]]
Awe3some- don’t let her forget for one minute that the reason she was terminated was for refusing to do her duty- being a traitor to this country and president
I knew Cruz nailed Ms Smart Ass.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.