Obama sending US Marshalls to ARREST those who owe federal student loans! Dang libs...

[theDoctorisIn]

They werent. Read your damn OP.

They are being taken into custody. Otherwise....why send Marshals?
U.S. Marshals Service Sending SWAT Teams Out to Arrest People for Unpaid Student Loans

The guy in your OP was not "taken into custody", he was brought into court to respond to a bench warrent. He was not put in jail.

Ummmm...any LEO "taking" someone to court on a Bench Warrant is an arrest.

You are correct.

Nevertheless, bucs' wording implies that this man was put in jail and charged with a crime, neither of which occurred.

I don't know if the man spent any time in jail, but there cannot be an arrest without a charge of a crime. The crime in this case was a capais for failure to appear on something for which he was never served.

The problem which is MY concern (in addition to the poor "investment" choices of the government with our money on toxic assets) is the DoJ has contracted out collections on education debts to private debt collectors. That's an annoying bunch, at best.

However, because these are federal debts, the debt collectors are now federal contractors. As such, they are not obliged to following debt collection laws - laws enacted to protect consumers. Pretty slick in a sick sort of way. And, now...folks are getting arrested for debts. Unheard of in modern times (except for dead beat dads).

This is a policy unique to this administration. Personally, I see it as a problem which needs to be addressed. Then again, I'm no doe-eyed groupie who thinks nothing ever bad happens under this administration.

I do not disagree with anything in this post.

Nevertheless, the OP is still wrong.

 

[bucs90]

The guy in your OP was not "taken into custody", he was brought into court to respond to a bench warrent. He was not put in jail.

Ummmm...any LEO "taking" someone to court on a Bench Warrant is an arrest.

You are correct.

Nevertheless, bucs' wording implies that this man was put in jail and charged with a crime, neither of which occurred.

I don't know if the man spent any time in jail, but there cannot be an arrest without a charge of a crime. The crime in this case was a capais for failure to appear on something for which he was never served.

The problem which is MY concern (in addition to the poor "investment" choices of the government with our money on toxic assets) is the DoJ has contracted out collections on debts to private debt collectors. That's fine an annoying bunch, at best.

However, because these are federal debts, the debt collectors are now federal contractors. As such, they are not obliged to following debt collection laws - laws enacted to protect consumers. Pretty slickin a sick sort of way. And, now...folks are getting arrested for debts. Unheard of in modern times (except for dead beat dads).

This is a policy unique to this administration. Personally, I see it as a problem which needs to be addressed. Then again, I'm no doe-eyed groupie who thinks nothing ever bad happens under this administration.

Yep its a disturbing turn of events. And apparently their boss Obama was just fine with it.

So a local cops boss is the governor of the state...

Nope. That's a mayor. A local cop works for a city government. A STATE cop...yes...the governor is his boss.

A federal cop? The President.

 

[bodecea]

The Judiciary can't send them. All they can do is issue a warrant and ask for them to serve it. Judges aren't in the Marshals chain of command. Marshals are Executive Branch under DOJ. Judges are Judicial Branch.

So you now admit that its the judge that issued the warrant and directed the marshals to arrest the guy.

So much for your pseudo-legal horseshit that "Obama sent the marshals'. Even you've abandoned that nonsense.

Never said a judge didn't.

Sure you did. When you said it was Obama that sent the Marshals. Obama didn't send anyone. The judge did. Which you didn't know as you didn't read the article in the OP.

The judge issued the warrant. The judge directed the marshals to execute the warrant. And your 'Obama sent the marshals' narrative falls apart yet again.

Remember, you don't know a fucking thing about how the law works.

Maybe that's why he got shitcanned from law enforcement.

Bodecea....was that crow good? Do you understand the difference in the executive and judicial branches now? Do you now know which branch the Marshals are under? You're welcome.

I totally do. You? Not so much. I like how you said that a Marshal (congrats on finally spelling it right) doesn't have to serve a bench warrant.

I can see it now. "Sorry judge...not in the mood to serve that warrant for you today."

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The federal marshals, created as the enforcement arm of the judiciary were issued a bench warrant for the arrest of the guy in the OP by the federal judiciary....and the judge directed the marshals to arrest him.

So much for your claim that 'Obama send the marshals'. As usual, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about, bucky.

For the final time.....the judge cannot DIRECT them to do shit. He can request it. He is not in their chain of command.

For a person saying I don't know what I'm talking about, you sure don't grasp chain of command or separation of powers.

Hint. Law enforcement is under the Executive Branch. Judges are under the Judicial Branch.

Police chiefs cannot give orders to a judge. And a judge cannot give orders to a law enforcement officer. Different branches. Different chains of command.

It is quite amazing to me how staggeringly wrong you are about what you claimed to do for a living.

Then explain.

I already have.

No you havent.

Explain where in the chain of command of law enforcement....does a judge sit?

The US Marshals are Officers of the Court.

 

[Moonglow]

Ummmm...any LEO "taking" someone to court on a Bench Warrant is an arrest.

You are correct.

Nevertheless, bucs' wording implies that this man was put in jail and charged with a crime, neither of which occurred.

I don't know if the man spent any time in jail, but there cannot be an arrest without a charge of a crime. The crime in this case was a capais for failure to appear on something for which he was never served.

The problem which is MY concern (in addition to the poor "investment" choices of the government with our money on toxic assets) is the DoJ has contracted out collections on debts to private debt collectors. That's fine an annoying bunch, at best.

However, because these are federal debts, the debt collectors are now federal contractors. As such, they are not obliged to following debt collection laws - laws enacted to protect consumers. Pretty slickin a sick sort of way. And, now...folks are getting arrested for debts. Unheard of in modern times (except for dead beat dads).

This is a policy unique to this administration. Personally, I see it as a problem which needs to be addressed. Then again, I'm no doe-eyed groupie who thinks nothing ever bad happens under this administration.

Yep its a disturbing turn of events. And apparently their boss Obama was just fine with it.

So a local cops boss is the governor of the state...

Nope. That's a mayor. A local cop works for a city government. A STATE cop...yes...the governor is his boss.

A federal cop? The President.

The superior for Federal Marshals is what a GL-12?..

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Ummmm...any LEO "taking" someone to court on a Bench Warrant is an arrest.

You are correct.

Nevertheless, bucs' wording implies that this man was put in jail and charged with a crime, neither of which occurred.

I don't know if the man spent any time in jail, but there cannot be an arrest without a charge of a crime. The crime in this case was a capais for failure to appear on something for which he was never served.

The problem which is MY concern (in addition to the poor "investment" choices of the government with our money on toxic assets) is the DoJ has contracted out collections on debts to private debt collectors. That's fine an annoying bunch, at best.

However, because these are federal debts, the debt collectors are now federal contractors. As such, they are not obliged to following debt collection laws - laws enacted to protect consumers. Pretty slickin a sick sort of way. And, now...folks are getting arrested for debts. Unheard of in modern times (except for dead beat dads).

This is a policy unique to this administration. Personally, I see it as a problem which needs to be addressed. Then again, I'm no doe-eyed groupie who thinks nothing ever bad happens under this administration.

Yep its a disturbing turn of events. And apparently their boss Obama was just fine with it.

So a local cops boss is the governor of the state...

Nope. That's a mayor. A local cop works for a city government. A STATE cop...yes...the governor is his boss.

A federal cop? The President.

The US Marshals are not "Federal Cops". They do not investigate crimes, nor do they enforce any laws other than those pertaining to the Judiciary.

 

[Si modo]

They are being taken into custody. Otherwise....why send Marshals?
U.S. Marshals Service Sending SWAT Teams Out to Arrest People for Unpaid Student Loans

The guy in your OP was not "taken into custody", he was brought into court to respond to a bench warrent. He was not put in jail.

Ummmm...any LEO "taking" someone to court on a Bench Warrant is an arrest.

You are correct.

Nevertheless, bucs' wording implies that this man was put in jail and charged with a crime, neither of which occurred.

I don't know if the man spent any time in jail, but there cannot be an arrest without a charge of a crime. The crime in this case was a capais for failure to appear on something for which he was never served.

The problem which is MY concern (in addition to the poor "investment" choices of the government with our money on toxic assets) is the DoJ has contracted out collections on debts to private debt collectors. That's fine an annoying bunch, at best.

However, because these are federal debts, the debt collectors are now federal contractors. As such, they are not obliged to following debt collection laws - laws enacted to protect consumers. Pretty slickin a sick sort of way. And, now...folks are getting arrested for debts. Unheard of in modern times (except for dead beat dads).

This is a policy unique to this administration. Personally, I see it as a problem which needs to be addressed. Then again, I'm no doe-eyed groupie who thinks nothing ever bad happens under this administration.

Yep its a disturbing turn of events. And apparently their boss Obama was just fine with it.

He may not know about it - scary in and of itself - so that's not good.

Or, he may very well be aware of it and is just fine in the slick manner we are bringing back debtors' prisons, in a skirting the intent of laws protecting consumers.

Dunno.

DO know, it's his administration. Either he gets a grip or lets it continue status quo, but that's on him.

Accountability.

 

[bucs90]

So you now admit that its the judge that issued the warrant and directed the marshals to arrest the guy.

So much for your pseudo-legal horseshit that "Obama sent the marshals'. Even you've abandoned that nonsense.

Never said a judge didn't.

Sure you did. When you said it was Obama that sent the Marshals. Obama didn't send anyone. The judge did. Which you didn't know as you didn't read the article in the OP.

The judge issued the warrant. The judge directed the marshals to execute the warrant. And your 'Obama sent the marshals' narrative falls apart yet again.

Remember, you don't know a fucking thing about how the law works.

Maybe that's why he got shitcanned from law enforcement.

Bodecea....was that crow good? Do you understand the difference in the executive and judicial branches now? Do you now know which branch the Marshals are under? You're welcome.

I totally do. You? Not so much. I like how you said that a Marshal (congrats on finally spelling it right) doesn't have to serve a bench warrant.

I can see it now. "Sorry judge...not in the mood to serve that warrant for you today."

You obviously do not since just a few posts earlier you were trying to be a smart ass and say they were under the Judicial Branch. Ooops. They arent.

That's exactly right they don't have to. Because a judge is not in their chain of command.

It's why a Senator (Legislative Branch) cannot order a Judge (Judicial) who cannot order a LEO (Executive).

Happens all the time locally. Warrants getting voided because the Executive Branch sees the judges action as bullshit (like sentencing a guy to 90 days in jail for speeding because the judge has a personal issue). It just doesn't get served. Or an agency in Georgia finds a guy with a bench warrant in Tennessee....and Tennessee law enforcement just says no...we aren't coming for him.

 

[bucs90]

You are correct.

Nevertheless, bucs' wording implies that this man was put in jail and charged with a crime, neither of which occurred.

I don't know if the man spent any time in jail, but there cannot be an arrest without a charge of a crime. The crime in this case was a capais for failure to appear on something for which he was never served.

The problem which is MY concern (in addition to the poor "investment" choices of the government with our money on toxic assets) is the DoJ has contracted out collections on debts to private debt collectors. That's fine an annoying bunch, at best.

However, because these are federal debts, the debt collectors are now federal contractors. As such, they are not obliged to following debt collection laws - laws enacted to protect consumers. Pretty slickin a sick sort of way. And, now...folks are getting arrested for debts. Unheard of in modern times (except for dead beat dads).

This is a policy unique to this administration. Personally, I see it as a problem which needs to be addressed. Then again, I'm no doe-eyed groupie who thinks nothing ever bad happens under this administration.

Yep its a disturbing turn of events. And apparently their boss Obama was just fine with it.

So a local cops boss is the governor of the state...

Nope. That's a mayor. A local cop works for a city government. A STATE cop...yes...the governor is his boss.

A federal cop? The President.

The US Marshals are not "Federal Cops". They do not investigate crimes, nor do they enforce any laws other than those pertaining to the Judiciary.

They are law enforcement. They have the same power of enforcement of any sheriff in the nation in each county (federal law). They are federal law enforcement under the Executive Branch. Jesus Christ....how difficult is that?

 

[Skylar]

The guy in your OP was not "taken into custody", he was brought into court to respond to a bench warrent. He was not put in jail.

Ummmm...any LEO "taking" someone to court on a Bench Warrant is an arrest.

You are correct.

Nevertheless, bucs' wording implies that this man was put in jail and charged with a crime, neither of which occurred.

So Obamas Marshals under his DOJ...lead by Lolo Lynch....are rounding up innocent people at gun point without probable cause of any crime???

The federal marshals, created as the enforcement arm of the judiciary were issued a bench warrant for the arrest of the guy in the OP by the federal judiciary....and the judge directed the marshals to arrest him.

So much for your claim that 'Obama send the marshals'. As usual, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about, bucky.

For the final time.....the judge cannot DIRECT them to do shit. He can request it. He is not in their chain of command.

Nonsense. It is the duty of the marshals to execute federal court orders. If a court orders the arrest, its the marshals they order to execute that arrest. And if the federal courts direct them to do something in the execution of their responsibilities, they do it. Says who? Says the US Marshal service:

The USMS is primarily responsible for the service of civil process (except for a summons and complaint or subpoena unless directed to do so by the federal court). If service of civil process can more easily be effected by someone other than USMS personnel, the court or the U.S. Attorney may appoint or approve an alternative server. For more specific information on types of civil process served.

U.S. Marshals Service of Process

So, yes....the federal court CAN direct the US Marshals. Remember. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about. You're gloriously ignorant of the law.

You've never been able to back your claim that 'Obama sent the Marshals', and instead completely abandoned your own OP. As the very article you cited affirmed that it was a judge that directed the officers to arrest the man. NOT 'Obama'.

As usual, my little fake cop......you're fucking clueless.

 

[Skylar]

I don't know if the man spent any time in jail, but there cannot be an arrest without a charge of a crime. The crime in this case was a capais for failure to appear on something for which he was never served.

The problem which is MY concern (in addition to the poor "investment" choices of the government with our money on toxic assets) is the DoJ has contracted out collections on debts to private debt collectors. That's fine an annoying bunch, at best.

However, because these are federal debts, the debt collectors are now federal contractors. As such, they are not obliged to following debt collection laws - laws enacted to protect consumers. Pretty slickin a sick sort of way. And, now...folks are getting arrested for debts. Unheard of in modern times (except for dead beat dads).

This is a policy unique to this administration. Personally, I see it as a problem which needs to be addressed. Then again, I'm no doe-eyed groupie who thinks nothing ever bad happens under this administration.

Yep its a disturbing turn of events. And apparently their boss Obama was just fine with it.

So a local cops boss is the governor of the state...

Nope. That's a mayor. A local cop works for a city government. A STATE cop...yes...the governor is his boss.

A federal cop? The President.

The US Marshals are not "Federal Cops". They do not investigate crimes, nor do they enforce any laws other than those pertaining to the Judiciary.

They are law enforcement. They have the same power of enforcement of any sheriff in the nation in each county (federal law). They are federal law enforcement under the Executive Branch. Jesus Christ....how difficult is that?

They are required, by law, to execute any court order, my little fake cop. The judges issue those orders to the marshals. They direct marshals to act, and the Marshals act.

And as your own article affirms, it was a judge that directed the marshals to arrest the man after

So much for your imaginary 'Obama sent the Marshals' horseshit. Remember....your arguments are always hampered by your own ignorance of the law.

 

[bucs90]

Ummmm...any LEO "taking" someone to court on a Bench Warrant is an arrest.

You are correct.

Nevertheless, bucs' wording implies that this man was put in jail and charged with a crime, neither of which occurred.

So Obamas Marshals under his DOJ...lead by Lolo Lynch....are rounding up innocent people at gun point without probable cause of any crime???

The federal marshals, created as the enforcement arm of the judiciary were issued a bench warrant for the arrest of the guy in the OP by the federal judiciary....and the judge directed the marshals to arrest him.

So much for your claim that 'Obama send the marshals'. As usual, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about, bucky.

For the final time.....the judge cannot DIRECT them to do shit. He can request it. He is not in their chain of command.

Nonsense. It is the duty of the marshals to execute federal court orders. If a court orders the arrest, its the marshals they order to execute that arrest. And if the federal courts direct them to do something in the execution of their responsibilities, they do it. Says who? Says the US Marshal service:

The USMS is primarily responsible for the service of civil process (except for a summons and complaint or subpoena unless directed to do so by the federal court). If service of civil process can more easily be effected by someone other than USMS personnel, the court or the U.S. Attorney may appoint or approve an alternative server. For more specific information on types of civil process served.

Request Rejected

So, yes....the federal court CAN direct the US Marshals. Remember. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about. You're gloriously ignorant of the law.

You've never been able to back your claim that 'Obama sent the Marshals', and instead completely abandoned your own OP. As the very article you cited affirmed that it was a judge that directed the officers to arrest the man. NOT 'Obama'.

As usual, my little fake cop......you're fucking clueless.

Direct. Demand. Request. You can call it whatever you want. But they are not in the chain of command. That's just a fact. Now....if a Marshal repeatedly refuses to serve warrants? Probably will be fired.

But that doesn't change the FACT that concerning the Marshals.....if a judge says do something, and POTUS or the DOJ disagree.....POTUS/DOJ have chain of command authority over the Marshals.

 

[bucs90]

Yep its a disturbing turn of events. And apparently their boss Obama was just fine with it.

So a local cops boss is the governor of the state...

Nope. That's a mayor. A local cop works for a city government. A STATE cop...yes...the governor is his boss.

A federal cop? The President.

The US Marshals are not "Federal Cops". They do not investigate crimes, nor do they enforce any laws other than those pertaining to the Judiciary.

They are law enforcement. They have the same power of enforcement of any sheriff in the nation in each county (federal law). They are federal law enforcement under the Executive Branch. Jesus Christ....how difficult is that?

They are required, by law, to execute any court order, my little fake cop. The judges issue those orders to the marshals. They direct marshals to act, and the Marshals act.

And as your own article affirms, it was a judge that directed the marshals to arrest the man after

So much for your imaginary 'Obama sent the Marshals' horseshit. Remember....your arguments are always hampered by your own ignorance of the law.

Where does a judge sit on the chain of command of the US Marshals then????

 

[Si modo]

Direct. Demand. Request. You can call it whatever you want. But they are not in the chain of command. That's just a fact. Now....if a Marshal repeatedly refuses to serve warrants? Probably will be fired.

But that doesn't change the FACT that concerning the Marshals.....if a judge says do something, and POTUS or the DOJ disagree.....POTUS/DOJ have chain of command authority over the Marshals.

Absolutely correct.

And, Executive Orders doing just that have been issued in the past.

 

[Skylar]

You are correct.

Nevertheless, bucs' wording implies that this man was put in jail and charged with a crime, neither of which occurred.

So Obamas Marshals under his DOJ...lead by Lolo Lynch....are rounding up innocent people at gun point without probable cause of any crime???

The federal marshals, created as the enforcement arm of the judiciary were issued a bench warrant for the arrest of the guy in the OP by the federal judiciary....and the judge directed the marshals to arrest him.

So much for your claim that 'Obama send the marshals'. As usual, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about, bucky.

For the final time.....the judge cannot DIRECT them to do shit. He can request it. He is not in their chain of command.

Nonsense. It is the duty of the marshals to execute federal court orders. If a court orders the arrest, its the marshals they order to execute that arrest. And if the federal courts direct them to do something in the execution of their responsibilities, they do it. Says who? Says the US Marshal service:

The USMS is primarily responsible for the service of civil process (except for a summons and complaint or subpoena unless directed to do so by the federal court). If service of civil process can more easily be effected by someone other than USMS personnel, the court or the U.S. Attorney may appoint or approve an alternative server. For more specific information on types of civil process served.

Request Rejected

So, yes....the federal court CAN direct the US Marshals. Remember. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about. You're gloriously ignorant of the law.

You've never been able to back your claim that 'Obama sent the Marshals', and instead completely abandoned your own OP. As the very article you cited affirmed that it was a judge that directed the officers to arrest the man. NOT 'Obama'.

As usual, my little fake cop......you're fucking clueless.

Direct. Demand. Request. You can call it whatever you want.

Laughing....so now the federal courts CAN direct the marshals, my little fake cop? Its not what I'm calling it. Its what the U.S. Marshals are calling it.

And your own article affirms that it was the judge that sent the marshals to arrest the man in the OP.

So much your latest round of pseudo-legal gibberish. And down goes your 'Obama sent the marshals' nonsense once agian.

 

[Skylar]

Direct. Demand. Request. You can call it whatever you want. But they are not in the chain of command. That's just a fact. Now....if a Marshal repeatedly refuses to serve warrants? Probably will be fired.

But that doesn't change the FACT that concerning the Marshals.....if a judge says do something, and POTUS or the DOJ disagree.....POTUS/DOJ have chain of command authority over the Marshals.

Absolutely correct.

And, Executive Orders doing just that have been issued in the past.

Show me that Obama had a *thing* to say about this arrest. You can't....as there is no such evidence.

The judge ordered the arrest. And the marshals executed the court order, as they are legally required to do. As the courts directed the marshals to arrest the man in the OP.

Not 'Obama'. But keep polishing the OP's turd. You just keep covering yourself in shit.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

You are correct.

Nevertheless, bucs' wording implies that this man was put in jail and charged with a crime, neither of which occurred.

So Obamas Marshals under his DOJ...lead by Lolo Lynch....are rounding up innocent people at gun point without probable cause of any crime???

The federal marshals, created as the enforcement arm of the judiciary were issued a bench warrant for the arrest of the guy in the OP by the federal judiciary....and the judge directed the marshals to arrest him.

So much for your claim that 'Obama send the marshals'. As usual, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about, bucky.

For the final time.....the judge cannot DIRECT them to do shit. He can request it. He is not in their chain of command.

Nonsense. It is the duty of the marshals to execute federal court orders. If a court orders the arrest, its the marshals they order to execute that arrest. And if the federal courts direct them to do something in the execution of their responsibilities, they do it. Says who? Says the US Marshal service:

The USMS is primarily responsible for the service of civil process (except for a summons and complaint or subpoena unless directed to do so by the federal court). If service of civil process can more easily be effected by someone other than USMS personnel, the court or the U.S. Attorney may appoint or approve an alternative server. For more specific information on types of civil process served.

Request Rejected

So, yes....the federal court CAN direct the US Marshals. Remember. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about. You're gloriously ignorant of the law.

You've never been able to back your claim that 'Obama sent the Marshals', and instead completely abandoned your own OP. As the very article you cited affirmed that it was a judge that directed the officers to arrest the man. NOT 'Obama'.

As usual, my little fake cop......you're fucking clueless.

Direct. Demand. Request. You can call it whatever you want. But they are not in the chain of command. That's just a fact. Now....if a Marshal repeatedly refuses to serve warrants? Probably will be fired.

But that doesn't change the FACT that concerning the Marshals.....if a judge says do something, and POTUS or the DOJ disagree.....POTUS/DOJ have chain of command authority over the Marshals.

Again, you are incorrect.

The US Marshals Service does not have any discretion over which court orders it executes.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Direct. Demand. Request. You can call it whatever you want. But they are not in the chain of command. That's just a fact. Now....if a Marshal repeatedly refuses to serve warrants? Probably will be fired.

But that doesn't change the FACT that concerning the Marshals.....if a judge says do something, and POTUS or the DOJ disagree.....POTUS/DOJ have chain of command authority over the Marshals.

Absolutely correct.

And, Executive Orders doing just that have been issued in the past.

Link?

I've done a fairly thorough search of every executive order that's ever been signed, and not one of them contains the word "Marshals".

 

[bucs90]

So Obamas Marshals under his DOJ...lead by Lolo Lynch....are rounding up innocent people at gun point without probable cause of any crime???

The federal marshals, created as the enforcement arm of the judiciary were issued a bench warrant for the arrest of the guy in the OP by the federal judiciary....and the judge directed the marshals to arrest him.

So much for your claim that 'Obama send the marshals'. As usual, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about, bucky.

For the final time.....the judge cannot DIRECT them to do shit. He can request it. He is not in their chain of command.

Nonsense. It is the duty of the marshals to execute federal court orders. If a court orders the arrest, its the marshals they order to execute that arrest. And if the federal courts direct them to do something in the execution of their responsibilities, they do it. Says who? Says the US Marshal service:

The USMS is primarily responsible for the service of civil process (except for a summons and complaint or subpoena unless directed to do so by the federal court). If service of civil process can more easily be effected by someone other than USMS personnel, the court or the U.S. Attorney may appoint or approve an alternative server. For more specific information on types of civil process served.

Request Rejected

So, yes....the federal court CAN direct the US Marshals. Remember. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about. You're gloriously ignorant of the law.

You've never been able to back your claim that 'Obama sent the Marshals', and instead completely abandoned your own OP. As the very article you cited affirmed that it was a judge that directed the officers to arrest the man. NOT 'Obama'.

As usual, my little fake cop......you're fucking clueless.

Direct. Demand. Request. You can call it whatever you want.

Laughing....so now the federal courts CAN direct the marshals, my little fake cop? Its not what I'm calling it. Its what the U.S. Marshals are calling it.

And your own article affirms that it was the judge that sent the marshals to arrest the man in the OP.

So much your latest round of pseudo-legal gibberish. And down goes your 'Obama sent the marshals' nonsense once agian.

Nonsense.

I asked you a simple question.


WHERE does a judge sit in the chain of command of a US Marshal?

 

[Skylar]

It is the role and mission of the U.S Marshals to provide security and to obey, execute, and enforce all orders of the federal courts. They are literally required to obey the court, with the US marshals own website affirming that the federal courts can direct the marshals......but you're *still* trying to claim that the judge didn't direct the marshals to arrest that man?

Laughing..... how much do you have to ignore for your argument to start making sense?

And notice how utterly you both have abandoned the thread's pseudo-legal horseshit about 'Obama sending the marshals. I certainly did.