Destroying the Rule of Law to Get Trump

[SavannahMann]

Feel free to point to any other entity it empowers. Hers's a clue for ya commie, there ain't one. As your dear leader maobama stated :

“Generally, the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties, says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the federal government can’t do to you. But it doesn’t say what the state or federal government must do on your behalf.”​

— Barack Obama

Which means if the Constitution doesn't give you the power, you don't have it.

.

But, as the magistrate judge's opinion makes clear and we expressly reaffirm here, a state's legitimate interest in protecting the integrity and practical functioning of the political process permits it to exclude from the ballot candidates who are constitutionally prohibited from assuming office. See generally Munro v. Socialist Workers Party, 479 U.S. 189, 193-95 (1986); Bullock v. Carter, 405 U.S. 134, 145(1972).

The judgment of the district court is affirmed. Appellant's motion for publication is denied.

Entered for the Court

Neil M. Gorsuch

Circuit Judge

It’s a shame that Supreme Court Justice Gorsuch doesn’t agree with you.

Hassan v. Colorado, 495 F. App'x 947 | Casetext Search + Citator

Read Hassan v. Colorado, 495 F. App'x 947, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database

casetext.com

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

The LAW says so you lying lowlife filth vermin Dems.

The "LAW"?
WHAT law?

Teabaggers have been struggling for a year now, and have nothing.
Not even a charge filed, let alone an arrest, of anyone.

 

[OKTexas]

But, as the magistrate judge's opinion makes clear and we expressly reaffirm here, a state's legitimate interest in protecting the integrity and practical functioning of the political process permits it to exclude from the ballot candidates who are constitutionally prohibited from assuming office. See generally Munro v. Socialist Workers Party, 479 U.S. 189, 193-95 (1986); Bullock v. Carter, 405 U.S. 134, 145(1972).

The judgment of the district court is affirmed. Appellant's motion for publication is denied.

Entered for the Court

Neil M. Gorsuch

Circuit Judge

It’s a shame that Supreme Court Justice Gorsuch doesn’t agree with you.

Hassan v. Colorado, 495 F. App'x 947 | Casetext Search + Citator

Read Hassan v. Colorado, 495 F. App'x 947, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database

casetext.com

That remains to be seen.

.

 

[SavannahMann]

That remains to be seen.

.

So you are suggesting that Justice Gorsuch will not find the same way when the party involved or affected is Trump?

 

[hadit]

Did you feel the same way when Mike Flynn spoke with Russian ambassador Kislyak about undercutting Obama's policy before Trump took office?

Why wouldn't I? Our internal strife needs to stop at our borders, and once a president is elected, he's in charge of the military. Defying the president is not something that should be taken lightly, and especially not taken to foreign powers. IOW, this should not be a partisan thing.

 

[hadit]

How was the commander in chief undercut?

Any time you broadcast our military intentions to a foreign power without the Commander in Chief's knowledge and permission, you're undercutting him.

 

[Marener]

Any time you broadcast our military intentions to a foreign power without the Commander in Chief's knowledge and permission, you're undercutting him.

Broadcasting our intention to not start a war seems like a good thing. I don’t think we need permission to keep the peace.

 

[hadit]

Broadcasting our intention to not start a war seems like a good thing. I don’t think we need permission to keep the peace.

I am not a foreign policy strategist, nor do I play one on TV, but on strictly strategic grounds, it would seem to me advantageous at times for a foreign country to be at least a little afraid that we would take action. It worked for Reagan, they were terrified of him, and he used that to our advantage. At any rate, I do not agree that it's a general's call to make on his own. I would not, for example, support one of them now going behind Quid Pro Joe's back to a foreign power, even as obviously out of it as he is. Our divisions need to stop at our borders. Why would you support anything else?

 

[boevans]

A general's duty is to corral crazies like Trump.

 

[hadit]

A general's duty is to corral crazies like Trump.

No, no it is not. A general's duty is to follow orders from his Commander in Chief unless those orders are illegal or unconstitutional. Of course, you could prove me wrong and show me where it is written that is one of his duties.

 

[Marener]

I am not a foreign policy strategist, nor do I play one on TV, but on strictly strategic grounds, it would seem to me advantageous at times for a foreign country to be at least a little afraid that we would take action. It worked for Reagan, they were terrified of him, and he used that to our advantage. At any rate, I do not agree that it's a general's call to make on his own. I would not, for example, support one of them now going behind Quid Pro Joe's back to a foreign power, even as obviously out of it as he is. Our divisions need to stop at our borders. Why would you support anything else?

I support peace. Escalation and tension is bad for peace, especially when the tension is built upon lack of open communication and misinterpretation of intent.

 

[hadit]

I support peace. Escalation and tension is bad for peace, especially when the tension is built upon lack of open communication and misinterpretation of intent.

And the general's job then is to take that intel to the Commander in Chief along with his recommendations on whether to escalate or not. It's not his call to unilaterally conduct foreign policy on his own.

 

[Marener]

And the general's job then is to take that intel to the Commander in Chief along with his recommendations on whether to escalate or not. It's not his call to unilaterally conduct foreign policy on his own.

Thank you for your opinion on what the general's job is. He wasn't conducting foreign policy. We are at peace with China.

 

[hadit]

Thank you for your opinion on what the general's job is. He wasn't conducting foreign policy. We are at peace with China.

Thank you for your opinion on what the general was doing. Opinions can disagree.

 

[Marener]

Thank you for your opinion on what the general was doing. Opinions can disagree.

Sure. Calling him a traitor is absurd for a mere difference of opinion.

 

[hadit]

Sure. Calling him a traitor is absurd for a mere difference of opinion.

Note that I did not do that. I disagree with what he did, but I'm not jumping on that bandwagon. I don't throw the term "traitor" around lightly.

 

[Marener]

Note that I did not do that. I disagree with what he did, but I'm not jumping on that bandwagon. I don't throw the term "traitor" around lightly.

Good for you.

Milley was protecting the peace. That's all. If he was "undercutting" the president, then that means that the president was damaging the peace. That's bad.

 

[Flash]

The "LAW"?
WHAT law?

Teabaggers have been struggling for a year now, and have nothing.
Not even a charge filed, let alone an arrest, of anyone.

The reason The Tea Party never blossomed into a national political force is because the Queer Negro's administration illegally used the power of the Federal government to disenfranchise a grassroot liberty movement.

The same kind of oppressive shit we saw when the Democrats stole the 2020 election and then used the Federal Government to attack any political opposition. You know, Banana Republic type of oppression.

 

[hadit]

Good for you.

Milley was protecting the peace. That's all. If he was "undercutting" the president, then that means that the president was damaging the peace. That's bad.

In that case, Milley had a greater responsibility, correct? Surely he should have gone to Congress with this information and demanded that they take action, instead of going to a foreign power.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

The reason The Tea Party never blossomed into a national political force is because the Queer Negro's administration illegally used the power of the Federal government to disenfranchise a grassroot liberty movement.

The same kind of oppressive shit we saw when the Democrats stole the 2020 election and then used the Federal Government to attack any political opposition. You know, Banana Republic type of oppression.

Teabaggers blossomed into the gullible, lying, traitors of the Trump cult.