RetiredGySgt
Diamond Member
Fact, about 48 percent of the US Voting population disagree with Obama and his administration. We don't know how many non voting percentage there is.
Is it reasoned debate to claim your opponents are terrorists for legally and politically disagreeing with your political side?
Is it reasoned debate for a sitting President to use as a defense from a scandal " I did not know what my appointees were doing because the Government is to big?"
Is it reasoned debate to make a statement that the President and the Attorney General had no knowledge of a scandal but then claim executive Privilege to hide the documents that would either prove or disprove the statement? As I understand Executive Privilege it is to protect sensitive communications between the President and his appointees. If the claim is NO COMMUNICATION occurred how can the President use the Privilege?
Is it reasoned debate to claim your opponents are terrorists for legally and politically disagreeing with your political side?
Is it reasoned debate for a sitting President to use as a defense from a scandal " I did not know what my appointees were doing because the Government is to big?"
Is it reasoned debate to make a statement that the President and the Attorney General had no knowledge of a scandal but then claim executive Privilege to hide the documents that would either prove or disprove the statement? As I understand Executive Privilege it is to protect sensitive communications between the President and his appointees. If the claim is NO COMMUNICATION occurred how can the President use the Privilege?