Trump poised to violate Constitution his first day in office, George W. Bush’s ethics lawyer says

[TheProgressivePatriot]

9) During the Chrysler bankruptcy, Obama violated the Fifth Amendment and more than 150 years of bankruptcy law by illegally making secured creditors subordinate to unsecured creditors. Tsk tsk tsk, Obama.

You'll have to explain and document that. I have no fucking idea what you're talking about and where you got that from. Alex Jones?

 

[ColonelAngus]

Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution requires the President to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."

And how has he not done that? I showed you that he has in fact enforced immigration laws. Common! Get it together!

If Obaama was enforcing immigration laws, why are people saying they are afraid Trump will deport illegal alien criminals?

Obama is not enforcing Federal Immigration laws. His deportation numbers include those turned back at the border.

We have an immigration legal process and nowhere in that process does it include sneaking across the border.

Jesus fucking Christ! What is wrong with you??!! I just documented how the Obama administration has made deporting criminals - the undocumented as well as those here legally a priority. Trump wants to deport all of them regardless of their circumstances- regardless of the status of their children- creating a huge humanitarian crisis. He has not explained what would happen to the children who were born here and are citizens. Will they be deported also.? If not who will care for them? Have you thought about any of that? Answer me! Have you thought about that? And by the way, what President -including his Republican predecessor- has done more or done it better?

See, we are still stuck on the first one.

The very existence of "Sanctuary Cities" are proof that Obama is not enforcing immigration laws.

Define a Sanctuary City.

Not it is not proof of anything . I just documented that providing Federal funds to those cities is not illegal. Are you really that obtuse??

I will try one more time. Those cities are violating Federal Immgration Laws and Obama refuses to enforce those laws. That violates the Constitution.

I'll keep going:

Number ten: Obama gave $535 million to Solyndra. It was supposed to create 4,000 jobs, but the company filed for Bankruptcy. The owners, major Obama donors, fleeced the company and the taxpayer.

Eleven: He illegally allowed unions that supported Obamacare be exempt from the law. If Obamacare is so amazing, why are these unions exempt? Violation of the equal protection clause of the 14 ammendment.....oops!!

 

[ColonelAngus]

9) During the Chrysler bankruptcy, Obama violated the Fifth Amendment and more than 150 years of bankruptcy law by illegally making secured creditors subordinate to unsecured creditors. Tsk tsk tsk, Obama.

You'll have to explain and document that. I have no fucking idea what you're talking about and where you got that from. Alex Jones?

Forbes:

The Impact Of Chrysler's Bankruptcy


A group of about 20 secured creditors refused to sign off on the deal, arguing that their stakes were worth more and demanding that their seniority rights be observed.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Now, this is interesting.

In an exclusive exchange with ThinkProgress, Richard Painter, a University of Minnesota law professor who previously served as chief ethics counsel to President George W. Bush, says that Trump’s efforts to do business with these diplomats is at odds with a provision of the Constitution intended to prevent foreign states from effectively buying influence with federal officials.

The Constitution’s “Emoluments Clause,” provides that “no person holding any office of profit or trust under” the United States “shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.”

The diplomats’ efforts in seek Trump’s favor by staying in his hotel “looks like a gift,” Painter told ThinkProgress in an email, and thus is the very kind of favor the Constitution seeks to prevent.

To explain, the ordinary rule under the Emoluments Clause is that federal officials may do business with foreign governments so long as they do not receive special treatment. If the president owns a $200,000 Rolls Royce, Painter told ThinkProgress, they can sell that car to the Queen of England, so long as they only receive its fair market value. If Her Majesty The Queen pays $250,000 for the Rolls Royce, however, that would violate the Emoluments Clause.

Rest of article here:
https://thinkprogress.org/trump-poi...hs-ethics-lawyer-says-73e14789a935#.91zyk7w2i

Trump is in SERIOUS legal trouble.

If only people got in "SERIOUS legal trouble" for violating the Constitution. Doesn't happen.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Care to explain EXACTLY when and how? Common sense should tell you that if he actually did, Congressional Republicans would have been on it like stink on shit.

We can do one at a time...

First violation of the Constitution is allowing illegal immigration. Non citizens are supposed to be deported if they do not have a valid Visa. He violated this every single day of his Presidency.
.
.
.
I can keep going, but I will let you respond to each one I post.

Ok I'll play....First of all where EXACTLY in the Constitution is the President charged with the responsibility to stop unauthorized immigration??

Secondly ,How has he failed to use the powers of his office to deal with the issue to the extent possible?? You might want to read this: 5 Things to Know About Obama’s Record on Deportations

and Obama administration tops its own deportation record

Please just stick to the facts instead of falling back on right wing talking points.

Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution requires the President to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."

And how has he not done that? I showed you that he has in fact enforced immigration laws. Common! Get it together!

He is absolu ctely not enforcing the law.

Another law he is violating is giving Federal money to sanctuary cities who refuse to comply with Federal law.

Refer to North Carolina bathrooms for how it should be handled when a state breaks the law....the lose Federal funding...as Obama threatened. He is not threatening so much those states not enforcing immigration laws.

Shit! I becoming bored and tired of you. NC violated people's civil rights under the Constitution and the Feds properly stepped in to address it. You can't compare that to the issue of sanctuary cities to that. It is a false equivalency- logical fallacy which is all you really have

 

[ColonelAngus]

Progressive,

Why do every single one of your posts include personal attacks aimed at me?

Why is it not possible for you do discuss issues without insults?

That doesn't seem to be very "Progressive"....aren't progressives all about not offending people with language?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

9) During the Chrysler bankruptcy, Obama violated the Fifth Amendment and more than 150 years of bankruptcy law by illegally making secured creditors subordinate to unsecured creditors. Tsk tsk tsk, Obama.

You'll have to explain and document that. I have no fucking idea what you're talking about and where you got that from. Alex Jones?

Forbes:

The Impact Of Chrysler's Bankruptcy


A group of about 20 secured creditors refused to sign off on the deal, arguing that their stakes were worth more and demanding that their seniority rights be observed.

WTF!!?? Not a single word about Obama breaking the law or the 5th Amendment. You are really reaching

 

[ColonelAngus]

We can do one at a time...

First violation of the Constitution is allowing illegal immigration. Non citizens are supposed to be deported if they do not have a valid Visa. He violated this every single day of his Presidency.
.
.
.
I can keep going, but I will let you respond to each one I post.

Ok I'll play....First of all where EXACTLY in the Constitution is the President charged with the responsibility to stop unauthorized immigration??

Secondly ,How has he failed to use the powers of his office to deal with the issue to the extent possible?? You might want to read this: 5 Things to Know About Obama’s Record on Deportations

and Obama administration tops its own deportation record

Please just stick to the facts instead of falling back on right wing talking points.

Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution requires the President to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."

And how has he not done that? I showed you that he has in fact enforced immigration laws. Common! Get it together!

He is absolu ctely not enforcing the law.

Another law he is violating is giving Federal money to sanctuary cities who refuse to comply with Federal law.

Refer to North Carolina bathrooms for how it should be handled when a state breaks the law....the lose Federal funding...as Obama threatened. He is not threatening so much those states not enforcing immigration laws.

Shit! I becoming bored and tired of you. NC violated people's civil rights under the Constitution and the Feds properly stepped in to address it. You can't compare that to the issue of sanctuary cities to that. It is a false equivalency- logical fallacy which is all you really have

Nope.

The Obama admin issued the order in May. NC passed its own law to go against the Obama admin order.

Is Reuters a source you consider reliable?

U.S. judge blocks Obama transgender school bathroom policy

 

[Slade3200]

POP QUIZ! How many illegal immigrants has Obama deported?

How many illegal ALIENS has Obama deported?

Using the old definition, or using Obama's new definition?

Is it really necessary to use the word aliens, or are you trying to make a point of being demeaning and offensive?

Is it really necessary to use the word aliens,

Yes, I believe using the proper term is necessary.

are you trying to make a point of being demeaning and offensive?

Why would using the proper term be either?

Alien is an old out dated term that dehumanizes real people so many substitute with immigrant. I find most people that still use it are either old school and unaware or intentionally trying to make a point of being offensive. Given your use of bold and underline for the statement I think it's fair to assume you are the later

Your PC nonsense is so passe' and out dated. LOL

Sorry, I forgot we've evolved to an era where class, respect, integrity, and character, are no longer valued attributes. Forgive me if I don't follow suit

 

[ColonelAngus]

9) During the Chrysler bankruptcy, Obama violated the Fifth Amendment and more than 150 years of bankruptcy law by illegally making secured creditors subordinate to unsecured creditors. Tsk tsk tsk, Obama.

You'll have to explain and document that. I have no fucking idea what you're talking about and where you got that from. Alex Jones?

Forbes:

The Impact Of Chrysler's Bankruptcy


A group of about 20 secured creditors refused to sign off on the deal, arguing that their stakes were worth more and demanding that their seniority rights be observed.

WTF!!?? Not a single word about Obama breaking the law or the 5th Amendment. You are really reaching

That is the entire bankruptcy laid out.

Jesus Christ.....here is an article for you.....it's from a source called THE WALL STREET JOURNAL. I don't know if you consider that a reliable source, but many people do...

Chrysler and the Rule of Law

 

[ColonelAngus]

How many illegal ALIENS has Obama deported?

Using the old definition, or using Obama's new definition?

Is it really necessary to use the word aliens, or are you trying to make a point of being demeaning and offensive?

Is it really necessary to use the word aliens,

Yes, I believe using the proper term is necessary.

are you trying to make a point of being demeaning and offensive?

Why would using the proper term be either?

Alien is an old out dated term that dehumanizes real people so many substitute with immigrant. I find most people that still use it are either old school and unaware or intentionally trying to make a point of being offensive. Given your use of bold and underline for the statement I think it's fair to assume you are the later

Your PC nonsense is so passe' and out dated. LOL

Sorry, I forgot we've evolved to an era where class, respect, integrity, and character, are no longer valued attributes. Forgive me if I don't follow suit

Do those who supposedly support the PC movement actually exercise those things?

When Hillary Clinton called roughly 25% of the American electorate a "basket of deplorables" and "irredeemable", was she showing "class, integrity, and character"?

 

[BuckToothMoron]

When Obama decided to NOT enforce federal immigration laws, was he violating the Constiution?

Actually to be fair to BO, I think he was violating his oath, and not technically the constitution. Although I guess you could argue that by violating the oath of office he also violated the constitution. Whole lot of violating going on. Guess that explains the rampant liberal butthurt.

 

[ColonelAngus]

The Supreme Court overturned 13 Obama Executive Orders because they violated the Constitution....including the 9-0 decision in National Labor Relations Board vs. Noel Canning came just as Speaker John Boehner announced plans to sue Obama for executive overreach.

The Supreme Court ruled that Obama violated the Constitution with this executive The 9-0 decision in National Labor Relations Board vs. Noel Canning came just as Speaker John Boehner announced plans to sue Obama for executive overreach.

The Supreme Court ruled UNANIMOUSLY (9-0), that Obama violated the Constiution with this executive order.

There is yet another example of Obama violating the Constiution and the Supreme Court agreed. Tough to argue a 9-0 decision...but somehow I am sure Prog will try.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

We can do one at a time...

First violation of the Constitution is allowing illegal immigration. Non citizens are supposed to be deported if they do not have a valid Visa. He violated this every single day of his Presidency.
.
.
.
I can keep going, but I will let you respond to each one I post.

Ok I'll play....First of all where EXACTLY in the Constitution is the President charged with the responsibility to stop unauthorized immigration??

Secondly ,How has he failed to use the powers of his office to deal with the issue to the extent possible?? You might want to read this: 5 Things to Know About Obama’s Record on Deportations

and Obama administration tops its own deportation record

Please just stick to the facts instead of falling back on right wing talking points.

Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution requires the President to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."

And how has he not done that? I showed you that he has in fact enforced immigration laws. Common! Get it together!

He is absolu ctely not enforcing the law.

Another law he is violating is giving Federal money to sanctuary cities who refuse to comply with Federal law.

Refer to North Carolina bathrooms for how it should be handled when a state breaks the law....the lose Federal funding...as Obama threatened. He is not threatening so much those states not enforcing immigration laws.

Shit! I becoming bored and tired of you. NC violated people's civil rights under the Constitution and the Feds properly stepped in to address it. You can't compare that to the issue of sanctuary cities to that. It is a false equivalency- logical fallacy which is all you really have

NC violated people's civil rights under the Constitution

The rights of men to go to the little girls bathroom? SMH!

 

[ColonelAngus]

In January 2012, Obama made 4 appointments while Congress was on recess. A Federal court agreed that Obama violated the Constiution and the appointments were overturned.

Summary: Another example of Obama violating the Constiution.

Supreme Court deals blow to Obama

Even fucking MSNBC admitted Obama violated the Constiution with his recess appointments.

We are a loooooooong way off of Obama "never" violating the Constiution.

When the Supreme Court rules 9-0 that you violated the Constiution, you fucking violated the Constitution.

 

[ColonelAngus]

In January 2012, Obama made 4 appointments while Congress was on recess. A Federal court agreed that Obama violated the Constiution and the appointments were overturned.

Summary: Another example of Obama violating the Constiution.

Supreme Court deals blow to Obama

Even fucking MSNBC admitted Obama violated the Constiution with his recess appointments.

We are a loooooooong way off of Obama "never" violating the Constiution.

When the Supreme Court rules 9-0 that you violated the Constiution, you fucking violated the Constitution.

Should I keep going, or is a 9-0 ruling by the Supreme Court that OBAMA VIOLATED THE CONSTITUTION enough evidence?

 

[SYTFE]

Now, this is interesting.

In an exclusive exchange with ThinkProgress, Richard Painter, a University of Minnesota law professor who previously served as chief ethics counsel to President George W. Bush, says that Trump’s efforts to do business with these diplomats is at odds with a provision of the Constitution intended to prevent foreign states from effectively buying influence with federal officials.

The Constitution’s “Emoluments Clause,” provides that “no person holding any office of profit or trust under” the United States “shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.”

The diplomats’ efforts in seek Trump’s favor by staying in his hotel “looks like a gift,” Painter told ThinkProgress in an email, and thus is the very kind of favor the Constitution seeks to prevent.

To explain, the ordinary rule under the Emoluments Clause is that federal officials may do business with foreign governments so long as they do not receive special treatment. If the president owns a $200,000 Rolls Royce, Painter told ThinkProgress, they can sell that car to the Queen of England, so long as they only receive its fair market value. If Her Majesty The Queen pays $250,000 for the Rolls Royce, however, that would violate the Emoluments Clause.

Rest of article here:
https://thinkprogress.org/trump-poi...hs-ethics-lawyer-says-73e14789a935#.91zyk7w2i

Trump is in SERIOUS legal trouble.

Think progress! Got anything from a credible source?

ThinkProgress IS a credible source, ya numbskull. What, you think they just made the entire interview up? lol

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Progressive,

Why do every single one of your posts include personal attacks aimed at me?

Why is it not possible for you do discuss issues without insults?

That doesn't seem to be very "Progressive"....aren't progressives all about not offending people with language?

First of all, I am, primarily attacking your posts-your words- try to understand the difference. And, I am doing so because you are dishonest and evading the topic of Trumps conflicts that can and should lead to impeachment by drudging up all sorts of bogus and irrelevant crap about Obama -that you are too lazy and incompetent to even properly document - as a means of diverting attention from the actual issue. You do not command my respect and I'm letting you know that. Try dealing with facts and try some honesty and you might get a different result.

 

[Lastamender]

Now, this is interesting.

In an exclusive exchange with ThinkProgress, Richard Painter, a University of Minnesota law professor who previously served as chief ethics counsel to President George W. Bush, says that Trump’s efforts to do business with these diplomats is at odds with a provision of the Constitution intended to prevent foreign states from effectively buying influence with federal officials.

The Constitution’s “Emoluments Clause,” provides that “no person holding any office of profit or trust under” the United States “shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.”

The diplomats’ efforts in seek Trump’s favor by staying in his hotel “looks like a gift,” Painter told ThinkProgress in an email, and thus is the very kind of favor the Constitution seeks to prevent.

To explain, the ordinary rule under the Emoluments Clause is that federal officials may do business with foreign governments so long as they do not receive special treatment. If the president owns a $200,000 Rolls Royce, Painter told ThinkProgress, they can sell that car to the Queen of England, so long as they only receive its fair market value. If Her Majesty The Queen pays $250,000 for the Rolls Royce, however, that would violate the Emoluments Clause.

Rest of article here:
https://thinkprogress.org/trump-poi...hs-ethics-lawyer-says-73e14789a935#.91zyk7w2i

Trump is in SERIOUS legal trouble.

"thinkprogress" Seriously?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Ok I'll play....First of all where EXACTLY in the Constitution is the President charged with the responsibility to stop unauthorized immigration??

Secondly ,How has he failed to use the powers of his office to deal with the issue to the extent possible?? You might want to read this: 5 Things to Know About Obama’s Record on Deportations

and Obama administration tops its own deportation record

Please just stick to the facts instead of falling back on right wing talking points.

Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution requires the President to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."

And how has he not done that? I showed you that he has in fact enforced immigration laws. Common! Get it together!

He is absolu ctely not enforcing the law.

Another law he is violating is giving Federal money to sanctuary cities who refuse to comply with Federal law.

Refer to North Carolina bathrooms for how it should be handled when a state breaks the law....the lose Federal funding...as Obama threatened. He is not threatening so much those states not enforcing immigration laws.

Shit! I becoming bored and tired of you. NC violated people's civil rights under the Constitution and the Feds properly stepped in to address it. You can't compare that to the issue of sanctuary cities to that. It is a false equivalency- logical fallacy which is all you really have

Nope.

The Obama admin issued the order in May. NC passed its own law to go against the Obama admin order.

Is Reuters a source you consider reliable?

U.S. judge blocks Obama transgender school bathroom policy

The topic of this thread is willful and blatant violations of the constitution that are impeachable offenses . Having a SCOTUS decision go against you does not rise to that level. What president did not lose a case in court, ever.