Federal Judge Reveals 'King Has No Clothes'

[PoliticalChic]

What happens when the nation has as it's President a 'constitutional lawyer' who either ignores the Constitution, or is unaware of same?

Simple: Pod People vote for him!

1. "Once you remove yourself from the principles set forth in the Constitution — inter-session versus intra-session — you are adrift,” said Judge Thomas B. Griffith.

2. A federal appeals court on Wednesday questioned not only President Obama’s controversial January recess appointments but the entire system of such appointments, using oral arguments in a case to cast doubt on whether presidential powers can ever be exercised unless Congress has adjourned for good.

3. The case involves a challenge to Mr. Obama’s recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board in early January — during a time when the Senate was holding pro forma sessions every three days,

4. ...Obama argued that since the full Senate wasn’t actually meeting regularly,...

5. But two judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit questioned not only that move, but every recess appointment made other than during a traditional inter-session recesses...

5. He was joined in his pointed questioning by Chief Judge David B. Sentelle, who said the clause in the Constitution giving presidents recess appointment powers refers to “the recess,”...

6. “Forget about a century of precedent — go back to the Constitution,” he told Beth Brinkmann, the Justice Department lawyer who argued the case for the Obama administration.

7. He also questioned the lawyers challenging the recess appointments, wondering why the Senate itself wasn’t contesting Mr. Obama’s moves. Instead, only Senate Republicans, who are the minority party, have sued."
Court casts doubt on Obama's recess appointments - Washington Times

 

[Si modo]

There is zero evidence that Obama is a "constitutional scholar".

The ACLU has serious questions about his summary executions of US Citizens without any judicial review.

 

[George Costanza]

Recess appointments are always controversial and always result in a hue and cry from the Out party. I remember when Dubya made them. Same result.

 

[Si modo]

Recess appointments are always controversial and always result in a hue and cry from the Out party. I remember when Dubya made them. Same result.

Only the Senate wasn't in recess when Obama pulled these.

 

[George Costanza]

Recess appointments are always controversial and always result in a hue and cry from the Out party. I remember when Dubya made them. Same result.

Only the Senate wasn't in recess when Obama pulled these.

Well, that's the issue before a federal court right now - whether or not the Senate was in recess when the appointments were made. Here's the deal:

Obama made the labor board appointments while the Senate was on a 20-day break over the Christmas and New Year's holidays. But his opponents claim it technically stayed in session because it was gaveled in and out every few days for so-called pro forma sessions. GOP lawmakers used the tactic specifically to prevent Obama from using his recess power.

An interesting issue, once again pointing up the high degree of technicality (translation: bull shit) that often dominates political disputes such as these.

The entire article from which the above quote came is most enlightening and should be read if you have the time:

The Associated Press: Court hears challenge to Obama recess appointments

 

[PoliticalChic]

Recess appointments are always controversial and always result in a hue and cry from the Out party. I remember when Dubya made them. Same result.

Only the Senate wasn't in recess when Obama pulled these.

Well, that's the issue before a federal court right now - whether or not the Senate was in recess when the appointments were made. Here's the deal:

Obama made the labor board appointments while the Senate was on a 20-day break over the Christmas and New Year's holidays. But his opponents claim it technically stayed in session because it was gaveled in and out every few days for so-called pro forma sessions. GOP lawmakers used the tactic specifically to prevent Obama from using his recess power.

An interesting issue, once again pointing up the high degree of technicality (translation: bull shit) that often dominates political disputes such as these.

The entire article from which the above quote came is most enlightening and should be read if you have the time:

The Associated Press: Court hears challenge to Obama recess appointments

Don't ya' just hate it when there's a suggestion that elected officials actually follow the Constitution, Georgie?

 

[rightwinger]

Recess appontments have as much Constitutional validity as a Senate filibuster of appointments

 

[konradv]

Casting doubt? Hardly the same as a ruling. I can remember Obamacare getting the third degree. How'd that work out?

 

[George Costanza]

Only the Senate wasn't in recess when Obama pulled these.

Well, that's the issue before a federal court right now - whether or not the Senate was in recess when the appointments were made. Here's the deal:

Obama made the labor board appointments while the Senate was on a 20-day break over the Christmas and New Year's holidays. But his opponents claim it technically stayed in session because it was gaveled in and out every few days for so-called pro forma sessions. GOP lawmakers used the tactic specifically to prevent Obama from using his recess power.

An interesting issue, once again pointing up the high degree of technicality (translation: bull shit) that often dominates political disputes such as these.

The entire article from which the above quote came is most enlightening and should be read if you have the time:

The Associated Press: Court hears challenge to Obama recess appointments

Don't ya' just hate it when there's a suggestion that elected officials actually follow the Constitution, Georgie?

I "just hate it" when disingenuous politicians use technicalities and trickery to prevent other elected officials from performing acts that are constitutioanlly permissible.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Well, that's the issue before a federal court right now - whether or not the Senate was in recess when the appointments were made. Here's the deal:



An interesting issue, once again pointing up the high degree of technicality (translation: bull shit) that often dominates political disputes such as these.

The entire article from which the above quote came is most enlightening and should be read if you have the time:

The Associated Press: Court hears challenge to Obama recess appointments

Don't ya' just hate it when there's a suggestion that elected officials actually follow the Constitution, Georgie?

I "just hate it" when disingenuous politicians use technicalities and trickery to prevent other elected officials from performing acts that are constitutioanlly permissible.

Georgie....don't waste a minute!!

You'd best get right on the phone to tell those two federal judges what a mistake they're making!!

 

[jillian]

Don't ya' just hate it when there's a suggestion that elected officials actually follow the Constitution, Georgie?

that's right, sweetie... you keep telling the lawyers on the board how to read the constitution.



btw, hon... where were you for bush's recess appointments?

just wondering.

 

[Si modo]

Don't ya' just hate it when there's a suggestion that elected officials actually follow the Constitution, Georgie?

that's right, sweetie... you keep telling the lawyers on the board how to read the constitution.



btw, hon... where were you for bush's recess appointments?

just wondering.

Obama, the current "constitutional scholar" in office, is an alleged attorney, so I hear.

He is clueless about the Constitution. Hell, he has kill lists and he summarily executes American citizens without judicial review.

Real constitutional.....

 

[RosieS]

Don't ya' just hate it when there's a suggestion that elected officials actually follow the Constitution, Georgie?

that's right, sweetie... you keep telling the lawyers on the board how to read the constitution.



btw, hon... where were you for bush's recess appointments?

just wondering.

Obama, the current "constitutional scholar" in office, is an alleged attorney, so I hear.

He is clueless about the Constitution. Hell, he has kill lists and he summarily executes American citizens without judicial review.

Real constitutional.....

Former Àmericans turned traitors killed in the War on Terror. Not a drop of American soldiers' blood spilled doing it, too.

Don't like it? Call the ACLU and hear them ROFL@ you.

Regards from Rosie

 

[Si modo]

that's right, sweetie... you keep telling the lawyers on the board how to read the constitution.



btw, hon... where were you for bush's recess appointments?

just wondering.

Obama, the current "constitutional scholar" in office, is an alleged attorney, so I hear.

He is clueless about the Constitution. Hell, he has kill lists and he summarily executes American citizens without judicial review.

Real constitutional.....

Former Àmericans turned traitors killed in the War on Terror. Not a drop of American soldiers' blood spilled doing it, too.

Don't like it? Call the ACLU and hear them ROFL@ you.

Regards from Rosie

Oh, I don't need to call the ACLU. They are already on it and being a good thorn in the side of the unconstitutional POTUS.



Read all about it at the ACLU.





Moron.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Don't ya' just hate it when there's a suggestion that elected officials actually follow the Constitution, Georgie?

that's right, sweetie... you keep telling the lawyers on the board how to read the constitution.



btw, hon... where were you for bush's recess appointments?

just wondering.

This requires an elucidation.

On any particular topic about which I post, I have yet to find any "lawyers on the board" who know more than I do.

You see, your degree gives you a right to practice....but hardly states that you know more about a subject than any layman who chooses to explore the topic.