Why Yates Had to Go...

[Mad Scientist]

Yates made a brave effort. God bless her.

She served as Acting United States Attorney General from January 20, 2017 until her dismissal by President Donald Trump on January 30, 2017.

Not a resume enhancer.

She defied tyranny. She can put that on here resume now.

You and Ms Yates have something in common:
You BOTH don't know what Tyranny is.

Not a resume enhancer.

 

[kaz]

Yates made a brave effort. God bless her.

She served as Acting United States Attorney General from January 20, 2017 until her dismissal by President Donald Trump on January 30, 2017.

Not a resume enhancer.

She defied tyranny. She can put that on here resume now.

You and Ms Yates have something in common:
You BOTH don't know what Tyranny is.

Not a resume enhancer.

Yes, it's amazing that they think it's tyranny for a government to prevent terrorists from killing you

 

[jc456]

Yates made a brave effort. God bless her.

effort?

 

[HenryBHough]

Let us hope dismissal also ends pension rights. I love it when the sound of a Democrat sucking the public tit goes silent!

 

[jc456]

Yates made a brave effort. God bless her.

Well, I would go along with that. A brave but ill informed effort.

All efforts against evil are much appreciated

I am impressed that you agree it was an incorrect action. Instead of doing the business of the nation, she was a political operative. That was NOT her job.

She used her influence to fight evil, at great risk. I applaud her

which evil would that be, her own?

 

[jc456]

Yates made a brave effort. God bless her.

She served as Acting United States Attorney General from January 20, 2017 until her dismissal by President Donald Trump on January 30, 2017.

Not a resume enhancer.

She defied tyranny. She can put that on here resume now.

You and Ms Yates have something in common:
You BOTH don't know what Tyranny is.

Not a resume enhancer.

 

[jc456]

God forbid anyone in the Trump administration following their conscience, instead of their puppetmaster.

you should read up on constitutional authority. Why not learn something if you're going to chime in?

 

[jc456]

Trump disagrees with Yates on the lawfulness of his EO. Of course he does. It is HIS order.

It is also his perogative to fire anyone in the Executive branch he wishes.

I do not dispute his right to do so at all. Get that clear.

What is also clear is that the AG felt the EO was unlawful. No one here has any authority to say she was wrong. You have nothing but opinions, not legal expertise.

The courts will ultimately decide the legality of the EO. Which is precisely why Trump fired Yates, because it would have been her job to defend it in court when that time comes, and she said she would not.

Since Trump will need someone to defend his EO in court, he has to fire the person who won't and replace her with someone who will.

One can't help but wonder how half-hearted Sessions will defend the EO since he said during his confirmation hearing he is against a Muslim ban.

As it stands right now, there is already a federal injunction by a judge against part of Trump's EO.

No one here has any authority to say she was wrong.

sure I do. I have the same right as her. She was out of line. she ought to know the president has the right to make EOs and can limit immigration. It would be very easy for her to go look up the constitution. But she choose to be political and instead..."you're fired" happened to her.

Wing bat demos can't get passed themselves I tell you. It must be tough for them to take a crap, they roll it in all day.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[

Actually, that is precisely her job, dumbass.

No, you lying, ignorant pile of shit, it is not.

When a President wants to write a law, he consults the AG for its legalities.

Jesus, get a ******* grip, retard.

Presidents don't write laws, shit fer brains.

Navigate away from the Soros hate sites, and take an introduction to civics class, retard.

 

[Uncensored2008]

God forbid anyone in the Trump administration following their conscience, instead of their puppetmaster.

you should read up on constitutional authority. Why not learn something if you're going to chime in?

The leftists here wear their ignorance like a badge of honor.

 

[Uncensored2008]

An EO is not a law, shit fer brains, as you shrieked for 8 years, when your beloved Obama was in charge.

I never said that, liar.

ex·ec·u·tive or·der
noun

1. a rule or order issued by the president to an executive branch of the government and having the force of law.

{An executive order is a directive handed down from a president or state governor without involvement from the legislative or judicial branches. Executive orders can only be given to federal or state agencies like the Department of Homeland Security or the State Department.}

What Are Executive Orders?

You should have finished 3rd grade, retard.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

[

Exactly IF the order were Constitutional/legal. BUT her job was also to contest actions which were unconstitutional/illegal on their face and to NOT ACT LIKE A RUBBER STAMP for a regime with an unconstitutional agenda. That is something you Trump parrots refuse to comprehend. Trump will get Nixon'ed doing that!

Utter ignorance and bullshit, Comrade. She was not a SCOTUS justice. The AG serves at the pleasure of the President. Yates is another petulant leftist throwing a tantrum, nothing more.

That shows the extent of your knowledge of the responsibilities of Article III judges...jack shit, zero, nada! Now run off and have another shit sundae, boi!

 

[francoHFW]

OP- She wanted to be fired. BFD. lol

 

[Uncensored2008]

Trump disagrees with Yates on the lawfulness of his EO. Of course he does. It is HIS order.

It is also his perogative to fire anyone in the Executive branch he wishes.

I do not dispute his right to do so at all. Get that clear.

What is also clear is that the AG felt the EO was unlawful. No one here has any authority to say she was wrong. You have nothing but opinions, not legal expertise.

The courts will ultimately decide the legality of the EO. Which is precisely why Trump fired Yates, because it would have been her job to defend it in court when that time comes, and she said she would not.

Since Trump will need someone to defend his EO in court, he has to fire the person who won't and replace her with someone who will.

One can't help but wonder how half-hearted Sessions will defend the EO since he said during his confirmation hearing he is against a Muslim ban.

As it stands right now, there is already a federal injunction by a judge against part of Trump's EO.

And that injunction doesn't mean anything. Trump applied the law.

Actually, the injunction does mean something. Do you have no ******* clue at all what an injunction is? You aren't doing a very good job of demonstrating your legal expertise!

Perhaps you missed this...

It is a very simple proposition. Our Constitution vests all executive power — not some of it, all of it — in the president of the United States. Executive-branch officials do not have their own power. They are delegated by the president to execute his power. If they object to the president’s policies, their choice is clear: salute and enforce the president’s directives, or honorably resign. There is no third way.

No, it does not. Absolutely wrong. That is an autocracy/monarchy you are describing.

"""The Separation of Powers devised by the framers of the Constitution was designed to do one primary thing: to prevent the majority from ruling with an iron fist. Based on their experience, the framers shied away from giving any branch of the new government too much power. The separation of powers provides a system of shared power known as Checks and Balances."""

"""Judicial Branch

• Checks on the Legislature
  • Judicial review
  • Seats are held on good behavior
  • Compensation cannot be diminished
• Checks on the Executive
  • Judicial review
  • Chief Justice sits as President of the Senate during presidential impeachment"""

Wiat, so you think the AG is part of the Judicial branch?

BWAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:

You and Guno5000 make a perfect team.

40 IQ points max, between the both of you...

 

[Uncensored2008]

OP- She wanted to be fired. BFD. lol

For once we agree. She was playing to your master, Soros, maneuvering for power should you Stalinists ever gain control of the government again.

 

[jc456]

[

Exactly IF the order were Constitutional/legal. BUT her job was also to contest actions which were unconstitutional/illegal on their face and to NOT ACT LIKE A RUBBER STAMP for a regime with an unconstitutional agenda. That is something you Trump parrots refuse to comprehend. Trump will get Nixon'ed doing that!

Utter ignorance and bullshit, Comrade. She was not a SCOTUS justice. The AG serves at the pleasure of the President. Yates is another petulant leftist throwing a tantrum, nothing more.

That shows the extent of your knowledge of the responsibilities of Article III judges...jack shit, zero, nada! Now run off and have another shit sundae, boi!

so do you think she was a judge?

 

[Uncensored2008]

That shows the extent of your knowledge of the responsibilities of Article III judges...jack shit, zero, nada! Now run off and have another shit sundae, boi!

Yates is not a judge, sparky.

Put down the spray paint and paper bag...

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

so do you think she was a judge?

Yates is not a judge, sparky.

I got the ID tags for Donnelly and Yates mixed. Make as much hay out of it as you childish clowns wish if it tickles your immature fancies!

 

[francoHFW]

OP- She wanted to be fired. BFD. lol

For once we agree. She was playing to your master, Soros, maneuvering for power should you Stalinists ever gain control of the government again.

Soros the GOP bogeyman lol....STALIN? Only on planet superdupe...

 

[Vandalshandle]

God forbid anyone in the Trump administration following their conscience, instead of their puppetmaster.

you should read up on constitutional authority. Why not learn something if you're going to chime in?

You should read up on personal ethics. i would have done the same thing, knowing I would be fired, but I would have done it knowing that I was doing the right thing.