you don't have a right to know' what's going on in government

[Antares]

Like when nigga Bush wouldn't let nigga Rove testify.

About what?

One particular incident was when Justice Dept lawyers were fired for no reason, and Rove was deemed possibly involved. But executive privilege was invoked , and Rove never testified.

What do you think Ms Norton was talking about? You don't know because the video was hacked down to 18 seconds. Do you think she only spoke for 18 seconds ? Don't think you might be missing important information?

She's talking about executive privilege. Same thing all Presidents have invoked, even Bush.

You get to prove it was about Executive Privilege, good luck.

 

[B. Kidd]

Do you think it's too soon to open up a pitchfork store?

 

[Antares]

It isn't "illegal" if the President does it, right boy's and girl's?

 

[asterism]

Like when nigga Bush wouldn't let nigga Rove testify.

About what?

One particular incident was when Justice Dept lawyers were fired for no reason, and Rove was deemed possibly involved. But executive privilege was invoked , and Rove never testified.

What do you think Ms Norton was talking about? You don't know because the video was hacked down to 18 seconds. Do you think she only spoke for 18 seconds ? Don't think you might be missing important information?

She's talking about executive privilege. Same thing all Presidents have invoked, even Bush.

How do you know she's talking about executive privilege?

 

[bripat9643]

What she says is technically correct as outlined in the constitution, no branch is entirely accountable to the others and has the right to keep it's internal deliberations and actions to itself.

Where does the Constitution say that?

 

[Impenitent]

About what?

One particular incident was when Justice Dept lawyers were fired for no reason, and Rove was deemed possibly involved. But executive privilege was invoked , and Rove never testified.

What do you think Ms Norton was talking about? You don't know because the video was hacked down to 18 seconds. Do you think she only spoke for 18 seconds ? Don't think you might be missing important information?

She's talking about executive privilege. Same thing all Presidents have invoked, even Bush.

You get to prove it was about Executive Privilege, good luck.

This is about compelling White House advisor David Simas to testify beforeIssa's dog and pony show, which is unconstitutional under the separation of powers principle of our government. Issa knows this, which is why there has been no subpoena issued yet, so it is not quite to the executive privilege point yet, but it easily can be.

There has been no allegation of criminal activity, and Simas has spoken to the committee informally. There is no need for his return. This is what delegate norton is telling Issa, who is not quite on her constitutional knowledge level .

Darrell Issa Won't Drop Subpoena For Top White House Official

 

[Antares]

One particular incident was when Justice Dept lawyers were fired for no reason, and Rove was deemed possibly involved. But executive privilege was invoked , and Rove never testified.

What do you think Ms Norton was talking about? You don't know because the video was hacked down to 18 seconds. Do you think she only spoke for 18 seconds ? Don't think you might be missing important information?

She's talking about executive privilege. Same thing all Presidents have invoked, even Bush.

You get to prove it was about Executive Privilege, good luck.

This is about compelling White House advisor David Simas to testify beforeIssa's dog and pony show, which is unconstitutional under the separation of powers principle of our government. Issa knows this, which is why there has been no subpoena issued yet, so it is not quite to the executive privilege point yet, but it easily can be.

There has been no allegation of criminal activity, and Simas has spoken to the committee informally. There is no need for his return. This is what delegate norton is telling Issa, who is not quite on her constitutional knowledge level .

Darrell Issa Won't Drop Subpoena For Top White House Official

Nothing is illegal if the President does it?

 

[Impenitent]

You get to prove it was about Executive Privilege, good luck.

This is about compelling White House advisor David Simas to testify beforeIssa's dog and pony show, which is unconstitutional under the separation of powers principle of our government. Issa knows this, which is why there has been no subpoena issued yet, so it is not quite to the executive privilege point yet, but it easily can be.

There has been no allegation of criminal activity, and Simas has spoken to the committee informally. There is no need for his return. This is what delegate norton is telling Issa, who is not quite on her constitutional knowledge level .

Darrell Issa Won't Drop Subpoena For Top White House Official

Nothing is illegal if the President does it?

Illegality is possible, but there is no evidence of it.

As opposed to any Republican administration.

Btw, you can thank Ms Norton for affirming your 1st Amendment Right to yell nigga nigga nigga at the top of your lungs, any time, anywhere. She was the lawyer who represented the National States Rights Party in their winning freedom of speech case before the Supreme Court.

 

[Antares]

This is about compelling White House advisor David Simas to testify beforeIssa's dog and pony show, which is unconstitutional under the separation of powers principle of our government. Issa knows this, which is why there has been no subpoena issued yet, so it is not quite to the executive privilege point yet, but it easily can be.

There has been no allegation of criminal activity, and Simas has spoken to the committee informally. There is no need for his return. This is what delegate norton is telling Issa, who is not quite on her constitutional knowledge level .

Darrell Issa Won't Drop Subpoena For Top White House Official

Nothing is illegal if the President does it?

Illegality is possible, but there is no evidence of it.

As opposed to any Republican administration.

Btw, you can thank Ms Norton for affirming your 1st Amendment Right to yell nigga nigga nigga at the top of your lungs, any time, anywhere. She was the lawyer who represented the National States Rights Party in their winning freedom of speech case before the Supreme Court.

Deflection.

Norton is a fucking racist piece of shit.

 

[Impenitent]

Nothing is illegal if the President does it?

Illegality is possible, but there is no evidence of it.

As opposed to any Republican administration.

Btw, you can thank Ms Norton for affirming your 1st Amendment Right to yell nigga nigga nigga at the top of your lungs, any time, anywhere. She was the lawyer who represented the National States Rights Party in their winning freedom of speech case before the Supreme Court.

Deflection.

Norton is a fucking racist piece of shit.

Here's a nice quote from her:

"I defended the First Amendment, and you seldom get to defend the First Amendment by defending people you like ... You don’t know whether the First Amendment is alive and well until it is tested by people with despicable ideas. And I loved the idea of looking a racist in the face—remember this was a time when racism was much more alive and well than it is today—and saying, 'I am your lawyer, sir, what are you going to do about that?"

 

[asaratis]

What she says is technically correct as outlined in the constitution, no branch is entirely accountable to the others and has the right to keep it's internal deliberations and actions to itself.

More proof that the far left does not understand the Constitution.

The left understands that our Constitution impedes their "progress" toward the goal of creating a socialist state by destroying a healthy capitalistic economy. The fact that they do not want the American public to know what they are doing behind closed doors indicates to me that they know they are doing what the majority of the public does not want.

 

[Clementine]

What she says is technically correct as outlined in the constitution, no branch is entirely accountable to the others and has the right to keep it's internal deliberations and actions to itself.

More proof that the far left does not understand the Constitution.

The left understands that our Constitution impedes their "progress" toward the goal of creating a socialist state by destroying a healthy capitalistic economy. The fact that they do not want the American public to know what they are doing behind closed doors indicates to me that they know they are doing what the majority of the public does not want.

Exactly. They know if they were open about their true agenda, the majority of Americans would not support them. So they lie about what they are doing and when the Republicans don't go along with the bills they propose, the left claims they are against helping people.

Few read the bills and the people sure aren't privy to what is in them. If we were informed, more would agree that many of the bills shouldn't pass. No one knew what was in Obamacare and still don't. It's a mess, but Obama keeps unilaterally changing it to cover his ass. He thinks he has the power to do whatever he wants and so far is getting away with it. Obama is using executive orders because that is the only way to push the radical agenda. I would hope some Dems would stand against this, but the Dem party is famous for going along with whatever their leader says. They laugh at Republicans when they argue amongst each other, but honestly it would be good if Dems had the balls to speak out instead of following silently. That is screwed up! Our founding fathers intended for public servants to speak for their constituents and that should mean not following the status quo. No one ever made a campaign promise to be a blind sheep. It's always about change, but once they get in office, it's all about toeing the party line.

They would prefer that people don't pay close attention to what is going on and they can't afford to tell colleagues on the other side of the aisle what they intend to do because they know there will be a lot of opposition.

Too many libs are willing to abide by Obama's blatant disregard for the constitution because they approve of the outcome, or at least what they believe will be the result. Some serious history lessons are in order for those who think things will be better if Obama succeeds in his plans to transform America.

I wish Republicans would get more aggressive in trying to call him up on this bullshit.

Speaking during a Congressional hearing Friday on the White House decision to ignore a House subpoena of David Simas, Obama’s director of the Office of Political Strategy and Outreach, Norton admonished her Republican colleagues with the following statement:


“You don’t have a right to know everything in a separation-of-powers government, my friend.



That is the difference between a parliamentary government and a separation-of-powers government.”


Aside from the fact that this administration promised to be (and claims that it is) the “most transparent administration in history,” Norton is telling the Congressional Oversight Committee – whose very charge is overseeing the Executive Branch of the Federal Government – that it doesn’t have a right to do so.

This woman has the same attitude that Obama and others have. They want privacy as they carry out their dirty agenda. They are acting like royals who don't have to explain themselves to anyone. This is the opposite of what our founding fathers intended.

 

[Noomi]

Eleanor Holmes Norton, the non-voting congressional delegate for the District of Columbia, angrily sputtered during a congressional hearing Friday that the White House should not be held up to scrutiny, saying that there was no right to know what it was doing behind closed doors.

Eleanor Holmes Norton, the non-voting congressional delegate for the District of Columbia, angrily sputtered during a congressional hearing Friday that the White House should not be held up to scrutiny, saying that there was no right to know what it was doing behind closed doors.

Eleanor Holmes Norton says 'you don't have a right to know' what's going on in government | WashingtonExaminer.com

Why don't black people want us to know what they are doing?

She is right. Some things you have no right to know.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Eleanor Holmes Norton, the non-voting congressional delegate for the District of Columbia, angrily sputtered during a congressional hearing Friday that the White House should not be held up to scrutiny, saying that there was no right to know what it was doing behind closed doors.

Eleanor Holmes Norton, the non-voting congressional delegate for the District of Columbia, angrily sputtered during a congressional hearing Friday that the White House should not be held up to scrutiny, saying that there was no right to know what it was doing behind closed doors.

Eleanor Holmes Norton says 'you don't have a right to know' what's going on in government | WashingtonExaminer.com

Why don't black people want us to know what they are doing?

She is right. Some things you have no right to know.

Really? The people that are the government don't have a right to know what their government is doing in their name? Since when did we start voting for people that won't tell us what is really happening?

Shit, never mind I forgot that's the democrat party. You can only see the what is in the law after we have passed it.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hV-05TLiiLU]Pelosi: "We Have to Pass the Bill So That You Can Find Out What Is In It" - YouTube[/ame]

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Really? The people that are the government don't have a right to know what their government is doing in their name? Since when did we start voting for people that won't tell us what is really happening?

How about you growing the fuck up and learning that all governments have secrets? Just because you helped pay for it doesn't mean you get the know the launch codes. I have a head full of secrets I'm forbidden to talk about, for life. You and millions of other helped pay for that and you don't get to a know a single one. That's life on this rock so grow up!!!!!

 

[Kosh]

Eleanor Holmes Norton, the non-voting congressional delegate for the District of Columbia, angrily sputtered during a congressional hearing Friday that the White House should not be held up to scrutiny, saying that there was no right to know what it was doing behind closed doors.

Eleanor Holmes Norton, the non-voting congressional delegate for the District of Columbia, angrily sputtered during a congressional hearing Friday that the White House should not be held up to scrutiny, saying that there was no right to know what it was doing behind closed doors.

Eleanor Holmes Norton says 'you don't have a right to know' what's going on in government | WashingtonExaminer.com

Why don't black people want us to know what they are doing?

She is right. Some things you have no right to know.

I predict that this thought came about for the far left in 2009.

 

[Stephanie]

this is pretty much where we are at...a TYRANT Federal Government

look at the IRS, the BLM, the EPA, etc etc

it took years but here we are with people like her elected to serve WE THE PEOPLE

and Obama promised some of the most transparent government ever

another lie out of many

 

[peach174]

Really? The people that are the government don't have a right to know what their government is doing in their name? Since when did we start voting for people that won't tell us what is really happening?

How about you growing the fuck up and learning that all governments have secrets? Just because you helped pay for it doesn't mean you get the know the launch codes. I have a head full of secrets I'm forbidden to talk about, for life. You and millions of other helped pay for that and you don't get to a know a single one. That's life on this rock so grow up!!!!!

Yes of course we have to have some secrets but not in this case. This has nothing to do with the Military, FBI or CIA.
Using the office as a political campaign operation is a violation of the Federal election law and we have a right to find out if it is true or not and have the people held responsible for violating the law.
For Holmes to say that no one has the right to know that, is what Tyrannical governments do. Not our American form of government.
What has happened to our liberals where they used to say the openness and transparency are a must to prevent abuses of powers?
We are not a closed tyrannical government but Holmes seems to think so.

 

[Avatar4321]

I agree. We don't have a right to know what's going on.

We have a fundamental responsibility to know what's going on. It's our responsibility to keep our representatives accountable. Anyone who denies us said information is trying to impede our ability to keep them accountable and is unfit for office

 

[Wildman]

To the Most Honorable Eleanor Holmes Norton,

Who the Hell do you think you are!?

...Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

...when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

this quote should read:
To the Most DisHonorable Bitch, Eleanor "Dumbass" Holmes Norton,

Who the fuck do you think you are?