Fired Sally Yates: ‘Firing Rosenstein Would Be an Unconscionable Assault on the Rule of Law’

[radical right]

She was not wrong then....she was right. What Trump asked her to defend was unconstitutional and was stopped, almost immediately, Ban number 2 was completely re-written and was also stopped for being unconstitutional, but ban number 3 which modified ban number 2, was then approved.

Ban number 1 was clearly, with no doubt, unconstitutional.... she stood up for what she swore by God, she would do.

So the interpretation of the first ban you say was seen as an assault on the Constitution ? Otherwise, this was figured to be the case by someone like you or your co-horts, but doesn't it all depend on the majority interpretation of the ban in respect to the Constitution ???

What are you people having trouble with. Ban number one was ruled unconstitutional flat out, and an injunction was issued to stop it. They modified it, and the second ban was also held to be unconstitutional, but with only partial injuncitve relief. Number three was the twice modified version that squeeked by federal review.

Anybody trying to implement the first ban, would have later been stopped from implementing it. Sally Yates made the right call.

She wasn't going to enforce a clearly illegal order.. She wasn't going to utilize the Nazi defense of "I was only following orders"

 

[JGalt]

.
Legally, Trump can fire any of them. Politically, he might regret firing some of them.

No guts, no glory. Trump should fire anyone who's standing in the way of his agenda.

 

[Care4all]

dummy, Sally KNEW it was unconstitutional and refused to argue for it.... and she swore under oath in her confirmation hearing that if a president asked her to do something unconstitutional, what would she do? and her answer was, I WOULD NOT DO IT....

AND guess what silly one?

IT WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL! And ruled as such....and Trump's E/O was shut down....

It wasn't completely shut down. The ban is still in place if you're traveling from Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Syria, Venezuela and Yemen.

it was ban NUMBER 3 that finally made it through....Ban Number 1 proposal was knocked flat out on day 1, and that one was the one she refused to defend.

And she was wrong then, and she's still wrong now.

She was not wrong then....she was right. What Trump asked her to defend was unconstitutional and was stopped, almost immediately, Ban number 2 was completely re-written and was also stopped for being unconstitutional, but ban number 3 which modified ban number 2, was then approved.

Ban number 1 was clearly, with no doubt, unconstitutional.... she stood up for what she swore by God, she would do.

So the interpretation of the first ban you say was seen as an assault on the Constitution ? Otherwise, this was figured to be the case by someone like you or your co-horts, but doesn't it all depend on the majority interpretation of the ban in respect to the Constitution ??? Sadly for you the majority in this country don't agree with much that the left has to say anymore, much less in the way that the left interprets the law aside from the Constitution.

it was unconstitutional, for religious aspects, for those who lived here but traveled that would not be able to get back in, for foreign students living and going to school here not being able to come back and finish, for HB1 workers hired, and a gazillion other reasons....

 

[OKTexas]

What does a person who refused to uphold a Presidential travel-ban EO know about the "rule of law"?

She richly deserved to be shitcanned.

dummy, Sally KNEW it was unconstitutional and refused to argue for it.... and she swore under oath in her confirmation hearing that if a president asked her to do something unconstitutional, what would she do? and her answer was, I WOULD NOT DO IT....

AND guess what silly one?

IT WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL! And ruled as such....and Trump's E/O was shut down....

You keep telling yourself that, right to the point SCOTUS reverses the lower courts, probably 9-0.


.

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

she is right...if trump gets rosenstein fired that would be the last straw in trump's slow mo Saturday night massacre, and it would be impeachment hearings beginning....

there are 43 republican retiring in the house with no worries of Trump's Wrath...added to the dems and impeachment would happen if Rosenstein goes by the wayside and it would seal the deal on Trump's OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE charge.

It won't be Trump's fault he's impeached by congress. It will be Rosensteins'

congress can impeach him? If so, for what? he's the president's appointment....if the president has legal reasons to fire him, that ha nothing to do with Mueller, the special counsel, or Cohen's search warrant signed off on then he could....

the problem is, Trump has been mouthing off about Rosenstein for a year now on the Mueller investigation and Rosenstein's firing or impeachment (which won't happen), would be known BY EVERYONE, that it was to obstruct the mueller investigation.....

many liberals are hoping he has it done or does it....they are ready to impeach!

if you do not want him to be impeached, then you all need to tell him NOT to do it!!!!

You do know Rosenstein already has impeachment papers drawn up on him? It was announced yesterday. I made a thread on it.

 

[radical right]

No guts, no glory. Trump should fire anyone who's standing in the way of his agenda.

Trump tried to put a muslim ban in place. It was stuck down, the entire federal court system was standing in his way. And Trump can't fire a single one of them.

 

[radical right]

IT WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL! And ruled as such....and Trump's E/O was shut down....

You keep telling yourself that, right to the point SCOTUS reverses the lower courts, probably 9-0.


.

The USSC is never going to see the appeal of the first two travel bans because they gave up trying to defend them. They kept modifying them until they were no longer clearly unconstitutional.

 

[beagle9]

she is right...if trump gets rosenstein fired that would be the last straw in trump's slow mo Saturday night massacre, and it would be impeachment hearings beginning....

there are 43 republican retiring in the house with no worries of Trump's Wrath...added to the dems and impeachment would happen if Rosenstein goes by the wayside and it would seal the deal on Trump's OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE charge.

It won't be Trump's fault he's impeached by congress. It will be Rosensteins'

congress can impeach him? If so, for what? he's the president's appointment....if the president has legal reasons to fire him, that ha nothing to do with Mueller, the special counsel, or Cohen's search warrant signed off on then he could....

the problem is, Trump has been mouthing off about Rosenstein for a year now on the Mueller investigation and Rosenstein's firing or impeachment (which won't happen), would be known BY EVERYONE, that it was to obstruct the mueller investigation.....

many liberals are hoping he has it done or does it....they are ready to impeach!

if you do not want him to be impeached, then you all need to tell him NOT to do it!!!!

If I was Trump, I wouldn't worry about the Mueller investigation any longer, and I would (if have the goods on these cats) fire them regardless of their so called ties to Mueller. If crimes and/or conflicts exist that forbids these cats from serving in their positions any longer, then fire them yesterday is what I think. This blackmail talk in which the left loves to spew in keeping Trump and the DOJ from doing it's job needs to end.

 

[radical right]

You do know Rosenstein already has impeachment papers drawn up on him? It was announced yesterday. I made a thread on it.

People drew up articles of impeachment against Trump before he was even inaugurated. It means nothing until the congressional committee votes articles out of committee and onto the house floor.

 

[radical right]

If I was Trump, I wouldn't worry about the Mueller investigation any longer,

Good point. Trump has more to fear from the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York to worry about. He's got Trumps lawyer by the short hairs.

 

[beagle9]

IT WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL! And ruled as such....and Trump's E/O was shut down....

You keep telling yourself that, right to the point SCOTUS reverses the lower courts, probably 9-0.


.

The USSC is never going to see the appeal of the first two travel bans because they gave up trying to defend them. They kept modifying them until they were no longer clearly unconstitutional.

. Otherwise they kept on until the ban became a silly gesture that gave the green light for idiots to keep trying us, and to keep sticking it to us as the Obama minions do while they just laugh and giggle, and laugh and giggle. Pathetic.

 

[radical right]

IT WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL! And ruled as such....and Trump's E/O was shut down....

You keep telling yourself that, right to the point SCOTUS reverses the lower courts, probably 9-0.


.

The USSC is never going to see the appeal of the first two travel bans because they gave up trying to defend them. They kept modifying them until they were no longer clearly unconstitutional.

. Otherwise they kept on until the ban became a silly gesture that gave the green light for idiots to keep trying us, and to keep sticking it to us as the Obama minions do while they just laugh and giggle, and laugh and giggle. Pathetic.

I can't decipher what that response even means.

 

[OKTexas]

she is right...if trump gets rosenstein fired that would be the last straw in trump's slow mo Saturday night massacre, and it would be impeachment hearings beginning....

there are 43 republican retiring in the house with no worries of Trump's Wrath...added to the dems and impeachment would happen if Rosenstein goes by the wayside and it would seal the deal on Trump's OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE charge.

It won't be Trump's fault he's impeached by congress. It will be Rosensteins'

congress can impeach him? If so, for what? he's the president's appointment....if the president has legal reasons to fire him, that ha nothing to do with Mueller, the special counsel, or Cohen's search warrant signed off on then he could....

the problem is, Trump has been mouthing off about Rosenstein for a year now on the Mueller investigation and Rosenstein's firing or impeachment (which won't happen), would be known BY EVERYONE, that it was to obstruct the mueller investigation.....

many liberals are hoping he has it done or does it....they are ready to impeach!

if you do not want him to be impeached, then you all need to tell him NOT to do it!!!!

They'll start with contempt of congress for not providing subpoenaed material and work their way up form there. Rosenstein isn't immune form oversight.


.

 

[beagle9]

If I was Trump, I wouldn't worry about the Mueller investigation any longer,

Good point. Trump has more to fear from the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York to worry about. He's got Trumps lawyer by the short hairs.

.Over an alledged affair ??? LOL

The rest outside the search warrant is attorney client privilege material that can't be touched. Now what we're they looking for again ? Oh that's right it was the $130,000 dollar payment to Stormy Daniels.

 

[radical right]

They'll start with contempt of congress for not providing subpoenaed material and work their way up form there. Rosenstein isn't immune form oversight.
.

Do you think the senate is really going to waste their time holding a trial?

 

[radical right]

The rest outside the search warrant is attorney client privilege material that can't be touched. Now what we're they looking for again ? Oh that's right it was the $130,000 dollar payment to Stormy Daniels.

Cohen said the whole Stormy Daniels affair wasn't being handled as Trumps attorney, he did it all on his own. Which means there is no attorney client privilege covering any of that.

Judge Wood ordered Cohens lawyers to produce a client list by 10AM monday.

 

[OKTexas]

IT WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL! And ruled as such....and Trump's E/O was shut down....

You keep telling yourself that, right to the point SCOTUS reverses the lower courts, probably 9-0.


.

The USSC is never going to see the appeal of the first two travel bans because they gave up trying to defend them. They kept modifying them until they were no longer clearly unconstitutional.

Then explain what is being appealed. The president has the law and Constitution on his side and SCOTUS will tell the lower courts they have no jurisdiction on the matter and it will be settled once and for all. I'll be very surprised if that decision isn't 9-0, the law is too clear.


.

 

[radical right]

The USSC is never going to see the appeal of the first two travel bans because they gave up trying to defend them. They kept modifying them until they were no longer clearly unconstitutional.

Then explain what is being appealed. The president has the law and Constitution on his side and SCOTUS will tell the lower courts they have no jurisdiction on the matter and it will be settled once and for all. I'll be very surprised if that decision isn't 9-0, the law is too clear.


.

The only thing the USSC can possibly rule on is the 3rd and final version of the travel ban. And that has already been allowed by the lower courts, so the USSC isn't going to grant cert on a decision they agree with.

 

[OKTexas]

They'll start with contempt of congress for not providing subpoenaed material and work their way up form there. Rosenstein isn't immune form oversight.
.

Do you think the senate is really going to waste their time holding a trial?

Constitutionally they have no choice, if the house impeaches.


.

 

[radical right]

Do you think the senate is really going to waste their time holding a trial?

Constitutionally they have no choice, if the house impeaches.
.

They have to hold a trial, which they can dismiss on day one.

All in favor say aye, the motion passes, all charges are dismissed.