Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

White House Loses in Court Again...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • White House Loses in Court Again...

    https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/20/polit...ons/index.html
    We are not now that strength which in old days
    Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
    Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
    To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

  • #2
    San Francisco lol
    We hunt the hunters

    Comment


    • #3
      As usual, but we could expect this, CNN and Massena are hiding the fact that judge J.S. Tigar was appointed by Obama and a protector of the criminals .

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by ljadw View Post
        As usual, but we could expect this, CNN and Massena are hiding the fact that judge J.S. Tigar was appointed by Obama and a protector of the criminals .
        That doesn't matter at all and I hadn't taken the time to find out. What is important is that the judge that ruled in favor of CNN was a Trump appointee. So it appears the judge doesn't matter here, but the merits of the case.
        We are not now that strength which in old days
        Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
        Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
        To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by ljadw View Post
          As usual, but we could expect this, CNN and Massena are hiding the fact that judge J.S. Tigar was appointed by Obama and a protector of the criminals .
          Bold is mine. Yet another case of libel. I'm surprised that ACG is still allowed to continue.
          How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
          Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

          Comment


          • #6
            It'll be overturned on appeal. Judge John Tegar is an Obama appointee. Obama appointees have had a near 100% rate of overturn on appeal when ruling against Trump.

            Until then, the administration's best route is to halt all asylum hearings on the caravan until the appeal is settled.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post

              Bold is mine. Yet another case of libel. I'm surprised that ACG is still allowed to continue.
              You are simply unaccustomed to free speech.

              Free speech is only useful if you exercise it and political appointees need a dose of reality from time to time. Especially left leaning activists judges with a long history of trying to legislate from the bench.
              We hunt the hunters

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post

                You are simply unaccustomed to free speech.

                Free speech is only useful if you exercise it and political appointees need a dose of reality from time to time. Especially left leaning activists judges with a long history of trying to legislate from the bench.
                Libel is not free speech, but false accusations against other people. If you are libelous, then you can be sued for defamation. And the defense against defamation is the truth.

                In this case, Trump and the White House has lost twice in a few days, from two different judges in two different courts on opposite sides of the country. And one of the judges was appointed by Trump.
                We are not now that strength which in old days
                Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
                Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
                To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Massena View Post

                  Libel is not free speech, but false accusations against other people. If you are libelous, then you can be sued for defamation. And the defense against defamation is the truth.

                  In this case, Trump and the White House has lost twice in a few days, from two different judges in two different courts on opposite sides of the country. And one of the judges was appointed by Trump.
                  Kinda accurate which is how propaganda works. The first just required the establishment of rules and the second will be overturned. These half the story articles is why the media in the U.S. is held in such low regard by the majority of the population.
                  We hunt the hunters

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post

                    Bold is mine. Yet another case of libel. I'm surprised that ACG is still allowed to continue.
                    Libel ? He ordered that a murderer who sat for live in prison,and who claimed to be a transgender,should have the right on gender realignment surgery AT THE COST OF THE PEOPLE OF CALIFORNIA.This operation costed $ 100000 .

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      BTW protecting illegal immigrants is by definition protecting criminals. You can argue about the morality of the law but legislating morality is futile and laws are to be enforced by lower courts not legislated by them. This judge is an arrogant ass as many are. I suspect it is a product of impotence and frustration.

                      There are no civil rights issues at play here and the claims of human rights is negated by the majority of illegals being economic migrants not refugees. The horrible truth is that open borders create more victims than they help because once people start moving they lose a lot of their self determination and are easy prey to smugglers, rapists and thieves. At the same time the vast majority of true refugees cannot even start the journey.

                      We hunt the hunters

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Massena View Post

                        That doesn't matter at all and I hadn't taken the time to find out. What is important is that the judge that ruled in favor of CNN was a Trump appointee. So it appears the judge doesn't matter here, but the merits of the case.
                        And the judge in the CNN case was supported by all minus 2 Democrats for his nomination : only Gillibrand and Pocahontas voted against .
                        Sanders, Booker, Feinstein, Franken supported his nomination .
                        This proves that the DOJ and Sessions had not done their job correctly .
                        A judge supported by Sanders does not look at the merrits of the case : Sanders is a marxist but not a fool : he would never support the nomination of a conservative .He would prefer to send a conservative to the Gulag .

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post

                          You are simply unaccustomed to free speech.

                          Free speech is only useful if you exercise it and political appointees need a dose of reality from time to time. Especially left leaning activists judges with a long history of trying to legislate from the bench.
                          Absolutely agree with your first two sentences. Free Speech is sacrosanct, even when used in a highly partisan and out-right silly manner by the Right and the Left of our political spectrum.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post

                            Bold is mine. Yet another case of libel. I'm surprised that ACG is still allowed to continue.
                            Not libel under the First Amendment to the US Constitution.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Actually, there's a simple solution for the administration given the judge's ruling. That is, they prosecute each case where the person illegally entered the country for illegal entry. Then give them an asylum hearing. At the hearing bring up their conviction for illegal entry and use that to make them ineligible for asylum on the basis of their criminal record.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X