Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'Who Appointed You To The Supreme Court?' Senator Asks Sally Yates
wnd.com ^ | 05/08/2017

Posted on 05/08/2017 9:16:55 PM PDT by Helicondelta

“Who appointed you to the United States Supreme Court?” pointedly asked Sen. John Kennedy, R-La.

He was grilling former acting attorney general Sally Yates about her refusal to enforce President Trump’s first executive order temporarily banning people from seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States until vetting procedures could be improved.

The senator pressed on, noting that it is the courts that determine what is constitutional, adding, “In fact, aren’t most acts of Congress presumed to be constitutional?”

Yates hesitantly responded, “They are presumed but they’re not always constitutional, and of course, I was not on the Supreme Court. And I can tell you, Senator, look, we really wrestled over this decision. I personally wrestled over this decision and it was not one that I took lightly at all. But it was because I took my responsibilities seriously.”

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, asked Yates why she had refused to enforce that executive order when her own Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel had deemed it lawful, and a federal statute clearly gave the president the authority to implement the measure.

Yates replied she did not think the order was lawful because, citing a 1965 law prohibiting discrimination against immigrants based on race, religion or country of national origin, even though that law has never been used to overrule the statute giving the president broad authority to determine immigration policy.

Because she was not convinced that the order was lawful, Yates claimed, “It was appropriate for us to look at the intent behind the president’s actions.”

On the subject of political surveillance, Yates refused to say under oath if she knew of any person in the Obama administration who had requested the unmasking of anyone on President Trump’s campaign or transition team.

(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: intent; mindreader; searchworks; surveillance; trump; unmasking; yates
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-31 next last

1 posted on 05/08/2017 9:16:55 PM PDT by Helicondelta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Helicondelta

Related...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3551264/posts


2 posted on 05/08/2017 9:18:52 PM PDT by ButThreeLeftsDo (MAGA!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All



Click The Pic To Donate

3 posted on 05/08/2017 9:20:10 PM PDT by ButThreeLeftsDo (MAGA!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Helicondelta

Finally a Republican senator with an edge......


4 posted on 05/08/2017 9:22:52 PM PDT by Intolerant in NJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

>> Yates claimed, “It was appropriate for us to look at the intent behind the president’s actions.”

That is one cunning stunt.


5 posted on 05/08/2017 9:23:22 PM PDT by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gene Eric

She sure is. And she is getting paid well to lie about her own ‘intent’ and try to go after Trump on a ‘technical’ issue which has never been used by the Justice Department in our nation before, and for good reason. It was good enough for the Supreme Court, but she thinks she knows better.

As far as Trump’s intent... he made his intent clear. We agree with his intent. It’s the law. We want it enforced.


6 posted on 05/08/2017 9:43:48 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (Lost my tagline on Flight MH370. Sorry for the inconvenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Helicondelta

The BIG THING to take away from this incident(testimony) is....

She is the best they have. She was to deliver the torpedo that would take down Trump today.

She has admitted they were all spying on Trump, and that they really have only a legal question that has been part of accepted practice for generations. In other words, they got nothing.


7 posted on 05/08/2017 9:49:16 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (Lost my tagline on Flight MH370. Sorry for the inconvenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gene Eric

Maybe she is a Trekky who fantasizes that she is Counsellor Troi


8 posted on 05/08/2017 9:52:34 PM PDT by piasa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Helicondelta

Sally go round the roses, they won’t tell your secret.


9 posted on 05/08/2017 10:07:12 PM PDT by MUDDOG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ButThreeLeftsDo
the MSM radio "NEWS" propaganda machine was well oiled today and the headline was to repeat Yate's answer to Cruz about how she intended to defend the constitution from the evil Trump, which in the ears of the average listener sounded like she had an excellent defense, NOTHING AT ALL was mentioned about her dereliction of duty or blatant misinterpretation of the executive order with extreme predjudice and intent to harm the Trump presidency, not a peep

the MSM merely defended Yates by obfuscation

10 posted on 05/08/2017 10:33:29 PM PDT by KTM rider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Helicondelta

A Republican Congresscritter with balls? Nothing ever ever comes of these hearings - all wind and blather.


11 posted on 05/08/2017 10:42:51 PM PDT by Cheerio (#44, The unknown President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Helicondelta

On the subject of political surveillance, Yates refused to say under oath if she knew of any person in the Obama administration who had requested the unmasking of anyone on President Trump’s campaign or transition team.


She knows,


12 posted on 05/08/2017 10:48:47 PM PDT by Flick Lives
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Helicondelta

She’s running for Senate.


13 posted on 05/09/2017 12:26:24 AM PDT by ifinnegan (Democrats kill babies and harvest their organs to sell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Helicondelta

Isn’t it about time that everybody wake up and realize that this Russia-Trump conspiracy is simply Democrats projecting? It is either what THEY have already done or are planning to do.


14 posted on 05/09/2017 12:30:59 AM PDT by NTHockey (Rules of engagement #1: Take no prisoners. And to the NSA trolls, FU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Helicondelta

LOOK AT THE INTENT BEHIND THE PRESIDENT’S ACTIONS?

HOW ABOUT PROTECTING AMERICANS YOU DUMB UNEMPLOYABLE HOOOOR.


15 posted on 05/09/2017 12:58:56 AM PDT by FreedomStar3028 (Somebody has to step forward and do what is right because it is right, otherwise no one will follow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ifinnegan

Yup , the second coming of ‘Rat Jesus ...


16 posted on 05/09/2017 1:28:40 AM PDT by VRWC For Truth (Taglines now subject to management approval)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: VRWC For Truth

Yeah. Everything she is saying is with her senate run in mind.

She is a “folk hero” to the crazy anti-Trump crowd.


17 posted on 05/09/2017 1:35:56 AM PDT by ifinnegan (Democrats kill babies and harvest their organs to sell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Helicondelta

Bummer that they got their headline soundbite in an exchange with Cruz. I’ll bet that’s gnawing at Cruz.

I’d like to see an analysis of the 1965 statute that she claims supersedes the earlier one that gives the president nearly unlimited latitude in setting immigration policy.


18 posted on 05/09/2017 2:05:53 AM PDT by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Helicondelta

Okay, I hate to say it but it looks like she has a leg to stand on WRT the 1965 law superseding the 1952 law that gives the pres broad authority on immigration. The 1965 law does seem to create a limit or exception to the powers expressed in the 1952 law.

This is according to a guy named Biers at the Cato Institute who seems to have been the main right wing critic of Andrew McCarthy’s reasoning on the subject.

https://www.cato.org/blog/trumps-exclusion-immigrants-specific-countries-not-legal

It appears to me that the 1965 law is terribly irresponsible and needs to be changed legislatively, but unfortunately it is on the books and gives leftists like Yates an excuse to stymie Trump’s reasonable, responsible orders.


19 posted on 05/09/2017 2:57:02 AM PDT by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NTHockey
Isn’t it about time that everybody wake up and realize that this Russia-Trump conspiracy is simply Democrats projecting? It is either what THEY have already done or are planning to do.

Much of this mess started out as a misdirection by Hillary to distract us from her activities selling uranium to Russia for very substantial personal profit. Like any Democrat caught in a crime, she had to accuse others of what she is guilty of. Unfortunately, Hillary's self-serving accusations have grown and morphed and are costing taxpayers millions of dollars for the politicians to run around chasing squirrels.

I would like to see the taxpayers get their money back. Trump and Congress should recoup the costs from the Clinton foundation.

20 posted on 05/09/2017 3:21:18 AM PDT by exDemMom (Current visual of the hole the US continues to dig itself into: http://www.usdebtclock.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-31 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson