He's a brilliant constitutional attorney....
Posted By: that's wha's really making you sick. on 2008-10-24
In Reply to: What is really sickening about him - sm
No he's not, yes he is, no he's not, yes he is arguments will not win any elections.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Good for the attorney general and US attorney for filing their complaint. sm
He doesn't realize [or maybe he knows exactly] how effective his *satire* could be on his audience. All it takes is a few nut jobs listening in and there you have a vigilante sniping imigrants. I tried to find a clip to listen to on the web but couldn't.
Constitutional law I believe. nm
.
now that's brilliant! sm
your opinion is the "right one." If there was a right and a wrong, it wouldn't be an opinion.
Those agreements are Constitutional law
Bush ignored Constitutional law to invade Iraq. (That's the very definition of corruption, by the way). You seem to think that's just hunky dory.
Why do you hate America?
Is he a constitutional lawyer?
Just because he is a lawyer does not make him an expert. Please cite statutes, case law, etc.
There IS no constitutional crisis.
Recession teetering on the brink of depression. WAKE UP, will ya?
Dude, that was brilliant!
Better check your funny bone.
I have an attorney.........
and they stay right on it. I belong to a cancer support group and it's like half of them get SSD and half of them don't. It seems to matter what state you live in.......also, age is a factor (this cancer is rare and the median age is 66 - I'll be 50 in May) - so, they look at it like they'll have to pay for me longer (right - cannot afford treatment right now, husband laid off). I'll fight to the very end - have to - otherwise my private insurance will stop paying.
Terrorists arrived there AFTER our brilliant
x
In 3 day after running the most brilliant campaign
What part of we are in a bunch of crisEs do you not get? I for one am EXTREMELY gratified that he is the man of action we need him to be. He was elected. The electoral college members will enthusiastically cast 365 votes for him in December. On all airways and in all media outlets, he is referred to as the President Elect. He will be sworn into office in January. Get over it. You make yourself sound even more petty than Malkin. Why get so hung up over a trite technicality? Why not use your time more constructively, like trying to figure out what to do about the GOP leadership crisis/vacuum and their need for a platform transplant?
Turley on Bush's Constitutional Skin
Well, first of all this President's theory of his power I think is now so extreme that it's unprecedented. He believes that he has the inherent authority to violate federal law. He has said that. Not just the signing statements and the infamous torture memo-that Alberto Gonzales signed. It was stated that he could in some circumstances order federal officials to violate federal law and this is consistent across the board with this President. Frankly, I'm not too sure what he thought he was swearing to when he took the oath of office to uphold the Constitution and our laws. I've never seen a President who is so uncomfortable in his constitutional skin.
http://movies.crooksandliars.com/news_Countdown_Turley_051006.wmv
America is a Constitutional Republic, NOT democracy
This is a very good read.
I like the quote by Tom Tancredo "When I took the oath of the office, it wasn't to my party or President, it was to the Constitution".
http://www.stopthenorthamericanunion.com/NotDemocracy.html
Reasons there would be a constitutional crisis according to one expert...
The Consequences of “Forgetting”
There are factual economic, social, Constitutional, military and financial consequences of forgetting what damage an ineligible POTUS will do to our Country and the Constitution. These consequences are so serious that our government will not exist if we forget the rule of law, and what our Constitution demands. These are succinctly addressed in an article by Edwin J. Viera, Jr. entitled “Obama must step up or stand down now”.
Of the nine (9) reasons why Obama should step down if he has not proven his eligibility, the two that most notably concern me are:
No laws of Congress are valid
“Congress can pass no law while a usurper pretends to occupy “the Office of President.” The Constitution provides that “[e]very Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States” (Article I, Section 7, Clause 2). Not to a usurper posturing as “the President of the United States,” but to the true and rightful President. If no such true and rightful President occupies the White House, no “Bill” will or can, “before it become a Law, be presented to [him].” If no “Bill” is so presented, no “Bill” will or can become a “Law.” And any purported “Law” that the usurper “approve[s]” and “sign[s],” or that Congress passes over the usurper’s “Objections,” will be a nullity. Thus, if Obama deceitfully “enters office” as an usurper, Congress will be rendered effectively impotent for as long as it acquiesces in his pretenses as “President.”
And
He Could not be Removed Except by Force
If Obama does become an usurper posturing as “the President,” Congress cannot even impeach him because, not being the actual President, he cannot be “removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” (see Article II, Section 4). In that case, some other public officials would have to arrest him—with physical force, if he would not go along quietly—in order to prevent him from continuing his imposture. Obviously, this could possibly lead to armed conflicts within the General Government itself, or among the States and the people.
Bear in mind that as an imposter Commander–in-Chief of the Armed Forces, “he will be entitled to no obedience whatsoever from anyone in those forces. Indeed, for officers or men to follow any of his purported “orders” will constitute a serious breach of military discipline—and in extreme circumstances perhaps even “war crimes.” In addition, no one in any civilian agency in the Executive Branch of the General Government will be required to put into effect any of Obama’s purported “proclamations,” “executive orders,” or “directives” (Viera, J.).
http://texasdarlin.wordpress.com/2008/12/05/stand-by-me/
We also have the constitutional right to the free expression thereof....
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Center on the words or prohibit the free exercise thereof. It is our constitutional right to freely express our religious views. You want to deny us that constitutional right do you?
Talk about a heap of constitutional amendments!
x
Stop the Obama Constitutional Crisis...
http://www.rallycongress.com/constitutional-qualification/1244/
Would rather the attorney prosper
I would rather have an attorney who is helping someone injured from a major corporation profit from his good work..to protect the little guy. I would rather not help the big corporations who are polluting our air and water, committing white collar crimes and most getting away with it and dont give a fig about the back bone of America, the working middle class.
Finally a compliment for our Sarah! Yes, she is brilliant....
glad one of you finally noticed!!!!!
Yeah, yeah, I know you were being saracastic, but hey.....when you're right, I will admit it.
Sarah Palin is brilliant, make no mistake. She's smarter than you are. She's smarter than the left media.
Darn right, stroke of brilliance for the lady.
Brilliant investors who endorse Obama
You'll have to consult your usual right-wing rant rags to get the answer you want to hear. Learned a while back that trying to engage you in any sort of intelligent dialog is a waste of time and energy.
Another brilliant response from the peanut gallery!
President Obama's doing a great job, and it is eating you up inside. Why don't you just admit it instead of using elementary school comments, which are the equivalent of nya, nya, nya, nya, nya!
She is brilliant and hit the proverbial nail on the head!!!
The show is known for its liberty/constitutional story lines. sm
I thought it was funny, but I also understood the message.
Obama was their attorney at one time
So as their attorney he didn't know this was going on....like crap he didn't. He was part of the corruption. He continues to be heavily involved with them....lets not hide our heads in the sand.
Obama says he was ONLY an attorney for ACORN
He conveniently forgot to state the fact that he gave ACORN 800,000 dollars to ACORN.
Declare war on the media. Brilliant campaign strategy.
nm
My confidence in Obama is based on his brilliant intellect,
his ability to bring people together, his leadership capacity, his calm demeanor, his form of thinking, the multi-tasking problem-solving skills he has demonstrated, his world view, his plans and policies, his voting record, his biography, his focus on the middle class, his accomplishments, his instincts (especially when assessing that the country was "ready" to elect a black president), his confidence, his judgment, his desire to seek a broad-based, wide variety of opinions, his decisiveness, his vision, his orientation toward the future, his multicultural global outlook, his global appeal, his compassion, his family orientation and, above all, his love for his country. He will make an extraordinary leader for America and we are lucky and blessed to have him.
wow, what a brilliant response...boy wonder can only use Bush as an excuse for a few more months...
then he owns it.
C.S. Lewis makes a brilliant case in his book
He discusses the idea that throughout recorded human history there has been a shared notion of right and wrong - the Law of Human Nature. While it might have varied in its details from one place or time to another, it has always had striking consistency (for instance, there has never been a society in which it was considered admirable to be a coward).
He then examines the possible origins of this Law and utterly destroys any idea that it could have ever come from man himself.
Lewis himself was a rather brilliant atheist (an Oxford professor, no less) for much of his life until he finally confronted the fact that atheism was forcing him to take all sorts of foolish positions that his logical mind could not accept. He wrote 'Mere Christianity' in 1952, and it has remained essentially unassailable to this day when taken exactly as it was written without introducing any subtext. As such, it has been responsible for the conversion of many people who demand reasons for faith instead of blind assertions.
It is at the advice of the office of the attorney general...
of the state of Alaska. It has turned into a political hatchet job. Just a scant few months ago, Hollis French (running the "investigative" committee) said that the governor's office was cooperating and no subpoenas were necessary. Then, when she was picked as the VP candidate and Obama folks descended on Alaska...all of a sudden the "investigation" grew (and the pictures of Obama and Hollis French and the other key democrat on this committee yucking it up surfaced). It has come to light that the investigator they hired is a personal friend of the man he is investigating. No bias there, right? Now that the attorney general is involved, politics can be removed from this and it can be brought to a result, whatever that result is.
What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty? Flew right past that basic right, eh?
Now son of a Democratic congressman being investigated for hacking her personal email. Wondering how THAT will turn out.
He was advised to do so by the attorney general's office...
of the state of Alaska. Actually, the letter came from the attorney general to the committee, stating that no one would be responding to the subpoenas pending their investigation. No one "scoffed" at subpoenas.
Who is this guy, a real attorney? Looking for what? Pretty scary! nm
.
Former Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania...
(Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania – 08/21/08) - Philip J. Berg, Esquire, [Berg is a former Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania; former candidate for Governor and U.S. Senate in Democratic Primaries; former Chair of the Democratic Party in Montgomery County; former member of Democratic State Committee; an attorney with offices in Montgomery County, PA and an active practice in Philadelphia, PA, filed a lawsuit in Federal Court today, Berg vs. Obama, Civil Action No. 08-cv-4083, seeking a Declaratory Judgment and an Injunction that Obama does not meet the qualifications to be President of the United States. Berg filed this suit for the best interests of the Democratic Party and the citizens of the United States
This liberal is a retired attorney. Not in it for the money.
All she wants is for McCain campaign to denounce the death threats and tone down the rhetoric. Once done, suit withdrawn.
Yes it is. Any attorney with an ax to grind can file appeals
until he gets it through his thick skull that his claim is lame. Got any idea how long it take to wend your way through immigration courts these days? Count yourself lucky if the case has been resolved by the next election cycle.
Taxpayers will pay for Gonzales' private attorney
This is incredible.
Lawyers from the Justice Department's civil division often represent department employees who're sued in connection with their official actions. However, Gonzales' attorney recently revealed in court papers that the Justice Department had approved his request to pay private attorney's fees arising from the federal lawsuit.
Dan Metcalfe, a former high-ranking veteran Justice Department official who filed the suit on behalf of eight law students, called the department's decision to pay for a private attorney rather than rely on its civil division "exceptional."
"It undoubtedly will cost the taxpayers far more," he said.
According to a person with knowledge of the case, the Justice Department has imposed a limit of $200 an hour or $24,000 a month on attorneys' fees. Top Justice Department attorneys generally earn no more than $100 per hour. The person spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the case.
Asked why Gonzales made the request, Gonzales spokesman Robert Bork Jr. said that his client "values the work that the department's civil attorneys do in all cases" but thinks that "private counsel can often be useful where (department) officials are sued in an individual capacity, even where the suit has no substantive merit."
Charles Miller, a Justice Department spokesman, said the department wouldn't have any comment on the reasons for the approval and wouldn't answer questions about the cost to taxpayers.
The lawsuit I am talking about was just filed this week...by some Democrat attorney...
in Pennsylvania. It may be the same material Bill and Hillary were going to go to court with...this is the first I heard that they personally were going to do it.
And Rendell said just this morning...saw it on the news...that he was "ashamed" of the way the press and fawned over Obama during the primaries much more than on Clinton. He did not say anything against Obama per se...just harangued the press for its biased coverage.
Also just heard a guy, and can't remember for the life of me what his organization is called...basically disgruntled Hillary supporters...who says that some 30% of her supporters are firmly deciding to support McCain...according to him, that's almost 3 million people. If that many Dems vote for McCain...don't know if Obama can overcome that.
I still say Hillary may say she supports Obama to the public, but in private I am thinking she is behind these people making waves because she wants Hillary in 2012.
It is really fascinating how this is playing out.
Don't jump on me...jump on the attorney who filed it...
good grief.
|
