Posted on 06/16/2020 8:55:46 AM PDT by ransomnote
Federal courts have jurisdiction over these cases.
Haha. Good luck with that, gay Governor. I ain't wearing one.
#HeAintTheBossOfMe
You gonna pull the old “violation of privacy codified in the HIPPA laws” gambit?
It worked once for me.
Next time they had an off-duty cop at the door enforcing the policy.
I didn’t shop there.
self-reliant, safe enclave that doesn’t need police.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So they deny the thefts, assaults and rapes?
The SCOTUS decision and its reasoning are pure excrement.
I am just popping in here and there to the Q thread. I may not even attempt any twitter walkabouts. I can only handle so much atrocities and outrages; too much causes deleterious effects.
maybe they’re praying for his soul??..... /s
Prez 0bama can (unconstitutionally) pass legislation which Prez Trump subsequently does not have the power to override.
***********
Obma didn’t pass any legislation. He issued an Executive order. In this case an “Imperial Edict”, since Trump is unable to change it.
So Obama, think “Shadow Government,” gets away with not only pronouncing permanent Executive orders, and gets the SCOTUS to rule that Trump can’t cancel such.
Finding these again. You are on fire. Keep an extinquisher handy just in case!
You need to take care of LJ first. If you’re down, it doesn’t do you any good to torture yourself. Take a breather here and there.
But know that you’re highly appreciated on these threads.
That’s my read. Chuck U. Schumer will cry more tears of joy.
Thank you.
And I won’t be useful if I go stark staring mad so I think I’ll attack To Do list some more.
Oh, I ran out a loooong time ago.
I could say “Hmm, money, what’s that again?” but I do remember what it looks like.
Nixon enjoyed popularity ratings in the 60% range for much of his Presidency, so clearly many of what were Democrats then (which would be somewhere to the right of today’s Republicans) supported him.
Looks like the 2 ambassadors were appointed somewhere during the Obama admin.
Grassley lifts hold on Trump nominees after getting answers on firings of inspectors general
Without making comment regarding the veracity of the allegations made against Mr. Linick, I believe that these letters fulfill the Presidents requirement to provide Congress reasons for the removal of the IC IG and the State IG, as required by the Inspector General Reform Act, Grassley said.
With regard to the firing of Atkinson, the Friday letter included a transcript of President Trump providing his reasons for removing Mr. Atkinson to the press during a White House Coronavirus Task Force press conference in April. Grassley said the White House has informed me that those reasons represent the presidents official explanation of Mr. Atkinsons removal to Congress.” He also said, I believe that this transcript, and its transmittal to Congress, has fulfilled the statutory notice requirement of the Inspector General Reform Act.
It does seem staged. I hope you’re right.
Mark
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.