Posted on 06/13/2017 5:42:45 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
In the wake of the Kathy Griffin severed-head fiasco, and the Central Park play depicting the assassination of President Trump, you’d think that pundits might have the good sense to lay off metaphors invoking the violent death of the president.
But today comes law prof Jonathan Turley with yet another sanguinary simile. Appearing on Morning Joe to discuss President Trump’s executive order on travel, Turley suggested that President Trump’s tweets on the subject are undermining his case.
Then Turley went there: “it’s like a presidential version of death by cop. Every time you seem to make advances, the president seems to stand up and say ‘shoot me, shoot me.'”
View the video here.
(Excerpt) Read more at legalinsurrection.com ...
Lay off the metaphors about President Trump’s violent death.
Ping to Liberal Media Criticism list.
I seriously do not see what Turly is so worked up about, Trumps tweets are rather sober and direct. He has not made any recently that are cringe worthy. In fact, President Trump needs to be very explicit that this is blood on the courts hands for interfering with his constitutional presidential authority.
Turley’s article is worth reading on his website. Res Ipsa Loquitur. And as kellyanne conway’s husband warned..the courts will use his tweets.
Use them for what? To try and stop his agenda in any way possible, as they have been doing since November 9, 2016?
All this caterwauling is nothing more than the Deep State whining in desperation to stop him from setting the narrative. They have had total reign for so many decades that now they see it slipping away when our President talks directly to us whenever he wants.
Purty friggin’ sad is this whole “ban” thing. I suppose receiving a law degree comes with some sort of decoder ring or something to make invisible ink visible? Maybe a higher plain in the comprehension department? As a NON lawer, my reading of the law that is being used, basically says the President can refuse entry to anybody at anytime for any reason. Period, end of story. His discretion. Guess that doesn’t cut it anymore huh? I really don’t like these people.
So, Turley concludes, the problem is Trump. The Courts are fine.
Turley thinks there is a good legal team that stands a chance of seeing Mandel upheld.
Kellyanne’s husband..and Turley...and several people here...including myself think he is jeopardizing it.
Turley know Constitutional law.
Just because you want Trump to tweet doesnt mean he should act like a witness against himself.
But I get that most of the people here do not understand the folly of unvetted tweets
Maybe you should actually go read his articles about the subject.
Trump is just stirring the pot to keep the opposition occupied. Taking 10 seconds out of his day to keep them this preoccupied is time well spent.
Hey, I just woke up. Only on cup 2 of the coffee urn. ;-) Besides which, my comments were directed at the appeals court ruling than Turley’s articles on the subject. Turley agrees with me on the subject. (I only say it like that since I’m older than he is.)
LOL
What the law SHOULD be and what it ends up being is often influenced by things that should have no bearing.
9th circuit shows that over and over and over
I hate to defend anyone at MSNBC but it’s clear the metaphor was to political suicide, not a discussion of a literal violent death.
Unfortunately this tripe analysis will only change when the inevitable terrorist strike occurs. It’s too bad the anti-Trumpers are allowing our country to be infiltrated by potential terrorists, one will likely strike.
True. But even so, as my mother used to say, “not even in a joke.”
In this overheated environment, we can do without such metaphors, even be they political.
I am very well aware of Turley’s history, but the bottom line is he is still part of the Swamp when the rubber hits the road. He was an early critic of Trump during the primaries. The Swamp is pulling everything they have to limit or end the tweeting so they can again control the template and therefor, the agendas.
Maybe more like what the law ‘IS’ and how it’s misinterpreted by ultra brilliant judges at lower court levels. And again, how come the SCOTUS can stay an execution in hours yet things like this take months. In any case, still a sad dang situation. I volunteer these judges to pony up and take in some of the refugees. And, WE get to pick ‘em. ;-)
I read that tweet. He didn’t not say anything that he has stated over and over from behind a lectern.
Just because he said the same thing with a tweet and the tweet itself is a game changer is laughable.
If a judge cites a tweet in a ruling, then that means the judge has no legal basis for his decision, and is trolling.
It’s like a senator mentioned to Comey: What Trump thinks about the investigation over a supposed Russian collusion is no secret, as he has voiced his thoughts on it over and over in public.
I will defer to people who actually deal with Constitutional law on a daily basis.
His tweet is indicative of the problem with Trump.
His people were making it very clear it wasn’t a travel ban. Spicer, lawyers, Conway -IIRC, etc. His lawyers formulated a strategy. Trump blew it up...and when he did it..he knocked his legal team in the process.
He flips it and calls it a travel ban
Same with why Comey was fired. His people saying one thing..Trump flips it with Trump saying in an interview it was because of Russia
Trump’s lawyer saying one thing about conversation with Comey..Jr coming out and indicating his father said something different.
It plays out this was over and over again.
The words Travel Ban in that tweet are important.
I urge you to listen to the the recording of the oral argument before SCOTUS when it comes out. He gave them ammunition.
‘His tweet is indicative of the problem with Trump.’
Somebody once posted that you make positive as well as negative comments about Trump. I’m still waiting for someone, anyone, to direct me to your Trump-praising posts. All I ever see is nonstop criticism.
So far your gloom and doom hasn’t panned out. Do you have any kind of timetable, indicating when Trump—if he continues to be unaware of your incessant nagging—crashes and burns? It’s no use prophesying Trump’s self-destruction if it never happens. By what point in his term do you foresee the cataclysm?
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.