Posted on 06/06/2017 5:43:00 AM PDT by reaganaut1
+1
I’m sure Kelleyanne is having a great week in the WH, lol! It seems the president is not the only one who has trouble with his tweets. That was an unbelievable act of hubris and backstabbing by her stupid husband. Or perhaps they were in it together, who knows?
I think you are right. The President’s lawyers are the ones who are most concerned with winning the case, not anonymous Freepers. If the DOJ lawyers are unhappy with the tweets, Trump has clearly stepped over a line and jeopardized this case. Agree 100%....
‘I notice all the hand wringers have the same attribute - they abide by irrational tyrants, just because the tyrants are wearing black robes.
New rule of law, tweets control the constitutionality of statutory language.
Lawyers are the most chicken-shit risk averse people on the planet, and second only to the press (and the judiciary) in their dishonesty.’
On fire!
+1 x 1,000!
+1
Honestly, I wouldn’t want to be Kellyanne right now. Trump has enough to do just swatting down the moonbats; he doesn’t need flack from Mr. Kellyanne. I’m sure by now Kellyanne has had it all spelled out for her.
;)
Notice a common theme, "undermine Trump's lawyers' arguments." That phrase taken without mind of the underlying legal process, gives the impression that Trump's lawyers initiated these lines of argument. That these are the reasons the travel ban (just adopting the vernacular, I hate the term) should be viewed as constitutional.
The fact of the matter is, these are Trump's lawyers rebuttals to arguments raised by opponents to the travel ban.
Another fact of the matter is that the judges below have allowed ludicrous lines of argument to persist and even control the outcome, but that's obvious to anybody who reads the court's pronouncements.
Finally, in the real world, the hand wringing by the lawyers is justified only because courts are in fact arbitrary. If courts used logic, reason, sound judgment and the rule of law, the correct outcome of this case has been clear from the start. The only reason the case persists is that the federal courts are political, not judicial. And the lawyers and the public and Congress, all, tolerate it. Some even defend it as some sort of righteous institution that deserves respect and deference. Spit.
+1
I hope he wrings her neck!
And they say the president can’t keep his mouth shut???!
Clinton WH aides racked up hundreds of thousands of dollars in personal legal bills. White collar defense not cheap. https://t.co/FgfRpdY4bU https://t.co/q9qg8bvkLT— Alex Seitz-Wald (@aseitzwald) June 6, 2017
“The word “president” is a noun.”
If you say “the President” it’s clearly a noun. If you say “President Trump” it is a title - a discriptor, and may serve as an adjective.
For example the word “concrete” is a noun but when you say “a concrete pathway”, you are using “concrete” to discribing the pathway. Same with the color “black” - it’s the name of a color so it’s a noun but often used as an adjective.
Same with “feather pillow”, “square box”, “liquid gold”.
By the way, I have no idea what I’m talking about - if there are any grammar professors reading this and they tell me I’m wrong, I’ll concede.
But I’ll ask one question: in the phrase “grammar professor”, isn’t “grammar” a noun being used as an adjective to qualify “professor”?
Whether it is small claims court...or SCOTUS..you have to develop a strategy. It will be ..in part..based on the other side.. It will always be at the mercy of the whims of the Judge..who can overrule a crucial objection that can blow up your case...because he doesn’t like you...or some other whim
With all the variables..it doesnt help to have a client who undercuts you.
It’s difficult to fathom the logic on the Conways’ part. If it’s something they thought Trump should know, Kellyanne could have told him in person. But why undercut him publicly? I hope her neck’s intact, but I also hope her ears are burning.
I just don’t get it. He gave her a great job with, undoubtedly, a great salary - that benefits her husband as well as herself - and this is how it’s repaid?
Trump had great loyalty in NYC. He must be gobsmacked.
President Trump thinks he is going to win in the SC. He wants a “travel ban” upheld not some pablum.
Your comment makes no substantive point. It's a simple Appeal to Authority fallacy.
I started reading a couple of the article's points and I disagree with them. If you agree with the article's point, you should articulate those points here.
Conway tweeted DOJ lawyers were unhappy. Even without that tweet from conway it would be easy to see why they would be unhappy at their client undercutting them and their strategy.
I really hope you listen to the oral arguments on this..you will see he is right that trump should have kept his mouth shut
The lawyers, if they are any good, will deal with reality using strong argument and tempered rhetoric. The courts are going to do what they want, regardless.
From their reactions, I take it that Trump's critics find that his tweets affect the outcome in SCOTUS. But that doesn't bother them as much as the fact that he tweeted. Weak, pathetic defense. I'd fire them too. Pussies.
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.