HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » BREAKING CNN - After defy...

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 02:48 PM

BREAKING CNN - After defying Congress; can Trump circumvent the Supreme Court?

Justice Department tells court it is looking at options to add citizenship question to census
By Ariane de Vogue, Kevin Liptak and Gregory Wallace, CNN
Updated 1:05 PM ET, Fri July 5, 2019

(CNN) - Lawyers for the Department of Justice told a federal judge in Maryland Friday afternoon that the Trump administration will continue to explore options of adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census, but made no mention of a potential executive order being considered by the White House.

An administration official stressed that as of now the census will be printed without the citizenship question, though discussions are continuing about how to challenge last week's Supreme Court ruling blocking the Census Bureau from adding it to the questionnaire.

Earlier Friday, President Donald Trump said he is considering his options, which include an executive order or a potential addendum to the questionnaire that would allow the question to be added at a later date. Such a move could require the administration to provide a new justification for the addition of the question, following a Supreme Court ruling requiring a new rationale.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/05/politics/census-citizenship-question-deadline-donald-trump/index.html?cid=web-alerts&nsid=38903092

69 replies, 3704 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 69 replies Author Time Post
Reply BREAKING CNN - After defying Congress; can Trump circumvent the Supreme Court? (Original post)
real Cannabis calm Jul 2019 OP
C_U_L8R Jul 2019 #1
jberryhill Jul 2019 #5
at140 Jul 2019 #6
StarfishSaver Jul 2019 #15
Celerity Jul 2019 #26
marylandblue Jul 2019 #31
Celerity Jul 2019 #34
marylandblue Jul 2019 #41
StarfishSaver Jul 2019 #50
StarfishSaver Jul 2019 #36
marylandblue Jul 2019 #42
StarfishSaver Jul 2019 #35
Celerity Jul 2019 #38
marylandblue Jul 2019 #44
StarfishSaver Jul 2019 #53
tblue37 Jul 2019 #59
Polybius Jul 2019 #57
StarfishSaver Jul 2019 #58
Polybius Jul 2019 #60
StarfishSaver Jul 2019 #61
Polybius Jul 2019 #62
StarfishSaver Jul 2019 #63
Polybius Jul 2019 #64
StarfishSaver Jul 2019 #65
demosincebirth Jul 2019 #55
superpatriotman Jul 2019 #2
at140 Jul 2019 #23
Celerity Jul 2019 #29
misanthrope Jul 2019 #32
Celerity Jul 2019 #37
misanthrope Jul 2019 #39
superpatriotman Jul 2019 #45
Celerity Jul 2019 #48
superpatriotman Jul 2019 #43
Celerity Jul 2019 #46
superpatriotman Jul 2019 #56
Celerity Jul 2019 #68
elleng Jul 2019 #3
at140 Jul 2019 #4
woodsprite Jul 2019 #11
triron Jul 2019 #7
MyOwnPeace Jul 2019 #30
malaise Jul 2019 #8
AncientGeezer Jul 2019 #21
kentuck Jul 2019 #9
world wide wally Jul 2019 #13
muriel_volestrangler Jul 2019 #20
AncientGeezer Jul 2019 #22
SoCalDem Jul 2019 #10
nuxvomica Jul 2019 #12
triron Jul 2019 #14
StarfishSaver Jul 2019 #16
empedocles Jul 2019 #49
Retrograde Jul 2019 #17
Celerity Jul 2019 #40
misanthrope Jul 2019 #47
Everyman Jackal Jul 2019 #18
AncientGeezer Jul 2019 #25
MiniMe Jul 2019 #19
notdarkyet Jul 2019 #27
pwb Jul 2019 #24
real Cannabis calm Jul 2019 #28
pwb Jul 2019 #66
real Cannabis calm Jul 2019 #69
0rganism Jul 2019 #33
Kurt V. Jul 2019 #51
Initech Jul 2019 #52
Gothmog Jul 2019 #54
bluecollar2 Jul 2019 #67

Response to real Cannabis calm (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 02:54 PM

1. If Trump defies the court

what can/will they do about it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to C_U_L8R (Reply #1)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 03:03 PM

5. Most likely have the Marshals seize the forms

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to C_U_L8R (Reply #1)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 03:06 PM

6. Courts have no military to enforce anything

It is the executive branch which is supposed to enforce court edicts.
If the chief executive ignores the court, who can enforce?
Only a military coup can stop an out of control president.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to at140 (Reply #6)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 03:38 PM

15. US Marshals are technically in DOJ but they answer to the judges

And if a judge orders them to make an arrest, I don't think they'll disobey that lawful order, even if the AG says so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #15)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:00 PM

26. unfortunately the AG has the ultimate authority over them

He can shut them down with a stroke of a pen.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/561

28 U.S. Code § 561. United States Marshals Service


(a) There is hereby established a United States Marshals Service as a bureau within the Department of Justice under the authority and direction of the Attorney General. There shall be at the head of the United States Marshals Service (hereafter in this chapter referred to as the “Service”) a Director who shall be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
(b) The Director of the United States Marshals Service (hereafter in this chapter referred to as the “Director”) shall, in addition to the powers and duties set forth in this chapter, exercise such other functions as may be delegated by the Attorney General.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Celerity (Reply #26)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:18 PM

31. Marshals are required by law to enforce court orders.

The AG can't stop it. If the AG orders a Marshal to refuse a court order or fires the Marshal, it sets up a conflict with the judicial branch that is a true constitutional crisis. The Marshal will have to decide which master to serve. Or maybe that's the time to take to the streets.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marylandblue (Reply #31)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:24 PM

34. oh, it will be a constitutional crisis, but the AG can shut them down, court order or not

see my post here, for the way I see the current lay of the land

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212248189#post29

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Celerity (Reply #34)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:39 PM

41. All the AG can do is to fire and replace the Marshal.

But each executive branch employee decides for him or herself what is an unlawful order and can refuse it. So if the Marshal has any principles (and that's not a given under this administration) he or she can ignore the AG and also refuse to be fired for an unlawful purpose. That's a bit farfetched, but anything is possible with Trump.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marylandblue (Reply #41)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 05:05 PM

50. The deputy marshals are the ones who actually carry out the court orders

The courts shouldn't have any trouble finding plenty of deputy marshals to carry out their orders

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marylandblue (Reply #31)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:28 PM

36. The marshals aren't likelt to defy a lawful court order, especially in response

to an unlawful order from the AG.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #36)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:40 PM

42. Well I'd hope so, but who knows what kind of trolls lurk in the Trump Administration.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Celerity (Reply #26)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:26 PM

35. The AG can't just "shut them down" - Congress created them and only Congress can get rid of them

The marshals aren't likely to follow an unlawful order from the AG. And, if push came to shove, the court can deputize the marshals to carry out its orders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #35)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:36 PM

38. I would like to believe your are right but I will believe it when I see it

I did not mean shut them down as in tear down the organisation, by the way. I meant he will order them to not obey the court, as he will claim it is an unlawful order from them (as Rump will have signed a countermanding executive order by then and Barr will claim the court has not ruled on that <<<< even though that is complete rubbish).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Celerity (Reply #38)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:42 PM

44. No, he can't order them to disobey a court order.

The law delegates enforcement of court orders directly to the Marshals, not the AG.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marylandblue (Reply #44)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 05:20 PM

53. Fun Fact: Thurgood Marshall's son was the chief US Marshal during the Clinton Administration

He was Marshal Marshall.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #53)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 11:07 PM

59. I wonder if he knew Major Major Major Major. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #15)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 10:48 PM

57. Arrest who? Trump?

They would be shot by the Secret Service before they got within 1,000 feet of him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Reply #57)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 11:04 PM

58. No, not Trump

The Treasury officials who refuse to turn over the documents. Trump is not party to the litigation and the court order doesn't apply to him. It applies to the custodians of his tax records.

However, even if this were Trump, the Secret Service is charged with protecting the life and safety of the president it's not their mission to protect him from embarrassment, political consequences or arrest. They won't shoot a fellow law enforcement officer unless the president is in immediate danger.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #58)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 11:08 PM

60. It falls under safety if they are trying to arrest him

Maybe they wouldn't immediately shoot them, but they wouldn't let them arrest him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Reply #60)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 11:11 PM

61. No, it doesn't

Arresting him isn't a threat to his safety. And if the agents tried to interfere with a judge's order to take him into custody, they'd be violating a lawful order and would themselves be subject to arrest for contempt of court and possibly other crimes. They may insist on accompanying him, but they would not legally be permitted to prevent the arrest.

Of course, this is all academic since this scenario isn't likely to happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #61)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 11:18 PM

62. His safety could be in jeopardy in jail

Besides the point though. No SS is going to let anyone take a President. Lets stop talk about this though, since your original post that I replied to was misinterpreted (and you weren't talking about arresting Trump).

If he's impeached or a new President is sworn in though, it's a far different story.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Reply #62)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 11:21 PM

63. Being arrested doesn't mean he would be put into an unsafe situation or even go to jail

Secret Service would make sure that he's not in danger in jail - he surely wouldn't go into general population, something the judge would address when issuing the bench warrant. But Secret Service couldn't interfere with his arrest by claiming they think he would be in danger in jail. They have to do what the judge says, no matter what and if the judge says he's going to jail, Secret Service has no say in whether he does or not. Their power, at that point, would be limited to trying to keep him safe in whatever situation the judge orders him into.

Yes, it's beside the point, but it's an interesting thought experiment, isn't it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #63)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 11:24 PM

64. They might compromise

Imagine if they insisted that they would accompany him in jail? Wouldn't that be interesting?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Reply #64)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 11:28 PM

65. Yes

If it were to come to this, they would work out everything in advance.

They would surely insist on accompanying him to jail. The judge would put him protective custody outside of the general population. He'd be in a secure area, with his Secret Service detail and full communication apparatus - which the White House Communications Agency would have to set up - because as Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces, he'd have to have constant, secure communication capability. His military aide would also have to be within a few yards at all times.

If the president's in jail for contempt of court, would the 25th Amendment kick in or would he be deemed to still be capable of carrying out the duties of the office from jail?

This would be a very interesting endeavor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to C_U_L8R (Reply #1)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 07:30 PM

55. How do you think they'll vote? Give you one guess

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to real Cannabis calm (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 02:55 PM

2. Who will stop him?

The unitary executive is, essentially, a dictator by design.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to superpatriotman (Reply #2)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 03:58 PM

23. Elizabeth Warren! .. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to superpatriotman (Reply #2)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:10 PM

29. Yep, Trump is at the head of a constitutional trifecta of tyranny

Trump (commander in chief with vast executive powers)
AG Barr who control the Justice Department
Senate Majority leader McTurtle, who controls the only organ (other than the puppet cabinet and VP) who can oust Trump

The SCOTUS has no real enforcement power, as the AG can block the US Marshals, etc

The House can only impeach, not remove (the only thing they can do is try and shutdown the government, but Trump will just bypass via executive order and dare anyone to stop it)

The cabinet (as already mentioned) is hand-picked puppets

it is an epic clusterfuck

The only ones who MIGHT step in

is the truly awful option

The US Military

do we really want a coup?

it may come down to that, if things go truly all pete tong (I mean full blown, to a point far beyond where we are at now, but certainly that point is starting to enter the longer range event horizon)

perilous times

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Celerity (Reply #29)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:22 PM

32. The linchpin to the entire miasma is

Mitch McConnell. As the leader of the GOP Senate, he could put a stop to it by rallying his charges and letting the House know the limit has been reached and the teapot dictator must be deposed.

Yes, he could do that, but he won't. He's too craven, too Machiavellian. He would rather the nation burn than relinquish partisan division to safeguard the Constitution and our representative democracy.

How ironic. He calls himself Republican but is willing to destroy a republic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to misanthrope (Reply #32)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:30 PM

37. this has all been 'war gamed' out for decades by the rethugs and their paymasters

They look at every single level and vector of power, every combo from state/local up to federal, then find inflection points that they can use to increase their power at the expense of all other competing entities.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Celerity (Reply #37)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:38 PM

39. Yes, it has

They started a couple of generations ago, filling as many offices as possible from the bottom up.

One of my college roommates and I used to joke about the widespread adoption of the word "liberal" as a solely negative descriptive during the Reagan era, that we expected to hear people start using it for inclement weather. Here's the rub: he was vice president of our university's Young Republicans chapter. Even so, he still understood the ridiculousness of what was unfolding.

It was no accident that "liberal" became tainted like that. It was purposeful, a small portion of a larger plan from those who had their eyes trained many decades into the future. They had capital and they had patience. What we're seeing now is all part of the same thing, something launched before the first space shuttle.

Their schemes have been despicable, but masterful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Celerity (Reply #37)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:43 PM

45. Liberty university

George Mason university
ALEC
Federalist Society
Koch Industries
University of Chicago
Etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to superpatriotman (Reply #45)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:53 PM

48. The Powell Memo too, regardless of it's apparent obscurity in the beginning

The Powell Memo with Commentary

Below is the first page of the memo with its thesis circled:

https://www.thwink.org/sustain/articles/017_PowellMemo/index.htm

The Powell Memo was the precipitating event for the swift rise and astounding success of big business and its control of the United States, starting in the early 1970s. The memo presented a bold strategy for how the corporate life form could take over the key portions of the system, without the other side knowing what was happening. Unless they have read the memo, they still don't.

snip


Authentic Reproduction of the Memo
Here is an authentic reproduction of the complete Powell Memo PDF with no commentary

https://www.thwink.org/sustain/articles/017_PowellMemo/PowellMemoReproduction.pdf

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Celerity (Reply #29)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:41 PM

43. Bravo on the Pete Tong reference!

You must be an aging house fan, like me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to superpatriotman (Reply #43)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:43 PM

46. no, 23 year old London-raised girl, lolol

It's rhyming slang

pete tong 'wrong'

but have listened to Pete at Ibiza and on the BBC for ages

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Celerity (Reply #46)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 09:43 PM

56. At 23 'ages' means something different than it does an old raver

Do you listen to the ‘old’ Tong shows on YT?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to superpatriotman (Reply #56)

Sat Jul 6, 2019, 06:08 PM

68. some yes, or downloads, like his older, 90's Essential Selections

here is a great BBC Radio 1 set with one of my favourite Swedish techno DJ's Adam Beyer

it's from February 2019



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to real Cannabis calm (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 02:55 PM

3. Let's see how long it takes for someone/entity to say STOP,

with strong and enforceable consequences.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #3)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 03:03 PM

4. Who will that be? Turtle face? Willard?

Those mobs showing up at Drumpf's rallies has every republican scared.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #3)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 03:30 PM

11. Right now, I doubt that will ever happen.

Republican judges, Republican Senate, his administration, his family? They're all his enablers, and truthfully, his users too, because they're using him as much as he's using them to grab and pocket what they can.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to real Cannabis calm (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 03:06 PM

7. If he does he will get a sternly worded letter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to triron (Reply #7)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:13 PM

30. Or, if they're really serious,

a "doubly sternly" worded letter! (I'd like to put a bunch of here, but I'm beginning to think that we've gone past the point of thinking it as something impossible........... )

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to real Cannabis calm (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 03:07 PM

8. The Court ruled

That should be end of fucking story - PERIOD

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #8)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 03:54 PM

21. Not really...SCOTUS sent it back down..leaving a door open

 

..for the Dumpster to fix the reasoning...
Trying to do an EO.....that would be an interesting case to watch

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to real Cannabis calm (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 03:15 PM

9. What can the Court do about it if he issues an executive order? Nothing.

It is still up to Congress to hold the President accountable.

We shall see where it goes after Mueller?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #9)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 03:33 PM

13. Well. Nancy?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #9)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 03:53 PM

20. "Executive order" doesn't mean "this overrides the courts"

They've struck down his executive orders before, eg the Muslim ban.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #20)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 03:57 PM

22. But..with a rewording(2nd bite)...have upheld the EO's

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to real Cannabis calm (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 03:17 PM

10. Of course he can/will.

The house can only impeach, but the Senate will save his bacon.

Get used to it. We've got a tyrant in charge, running amok

I do not see the house doing diddly squat.. except for the stern looks and wringing of hands & clutching of pearls.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to real Cannabis calm (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 03:31 PM

12. They SC shouldn't have offered another bite at the apple

As soon as their motives were found to be inadequate, that should've been it. It doesn't matter what alternate rationale they manage to cobble together, the original motivation still exists. If someone murders a spouse for the insurance money, do they get a retrial if they can later figure out how to plead self-defense?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nuxvomica (Reply #12)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 03:37 PM

14. Normally not but exceptions are made for the President.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nuxvomica (Reply #12)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 03:41 PM

16. The Court did the right thing

Last edited Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:59 PM - Edit history (1)

In fact, they went further than I expected. They could have ruled based solely on the record before them, which didn't include evidence of the lies.

Sending it back for further proceedings, which allows the lower court judge to reopen the record was the appropriate thing to do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #16)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:59 PM

49. Thank you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to real Cannabis calm (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 03:42 PM

17. "Mr Marshall has made his law

now let him enforce it” , according to Trump’s hero Andy Jackson. The ruling in question upheld Native American rights against Southern landgrabbers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Retrograde (Reply #17)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:39 PM

40. yep, like Stalin said

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Retrograde (Reply #17)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:51 PM

47. I always get a kick out of Trump's stated "admiration" of Jackson

All he knows about the seventh POTUS was that he liked killing brown people and manipulated the ignorant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to real Cannabis calm (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 03:45 PM

18. Since an EO can not override The Supreme Court

 

the question will be invalid. It looks like if he tries then the question will be on a separate form. We have to make sure that everyone including illegal immigrants through that piece of paper away. How can they arrest you for not answering a question that legally doesn't even exist? Since legal and illegal throw away that form how will they know who is legal or illegal are they going to arrest millions of people?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Everyman Jackal (Reply #18)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 03:59 PM

25. SCOTUS didn't actually decide the case...they sent it back down

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to real Cannabis calm (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 03:49 PM

19. Unless SCOTUS says it is legal to put the question on the census, I'm not answering that question

Yes, I am a citizen. But it it why they are asking it that I object to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MiniMe (Reply #19)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:05 PM

27. I'm blacking mine out and writing redacted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to real Cannabis calm (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 03:59 PM

24. Should news organizations ask questions?

A question is not news.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pwb (Reply #24)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:07 PM

28. I spent my entire career in media: AND WE ASKED PLENTY OF "QUESTIONS!"

Many news articles focus on specific and general questions in western media. How long did you work in media?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to real Cannabis calm (Reply #28)

Sat Jul 6, 2019, 06:51 AM

66. Sure you did?

Asking people questions is fine. Asking a question in general is not news. Fox pulls questions out of their ass all the time? who cares? I work for the federal government.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pwb (Reply #66)

Sun Jul 7, 2019, 09:35 AM

69. In college, where I learned to write news, questions were the basis:

WHO?
WHAT?
WHEN?
WHERE?
HOW MUCH?
HOW MANY?


By the way, nice promo for Faux News. Other real media does the same thing, on occasion.

If you worked for certain agencies at the US Federal Govt, you would have full access to my employment history, instead of questioning my honest reply. Also, I realize that of all the people, who graduate with a communications degree, only a few actually obtain jobs in media.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to real Cannabis calm (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 04:23 PM

33. he can and if he does, there will be no timely consequences for him

i think it's past time to admit the founders dropped the ball on this one. among other things, they didn't foresee a malevolent executive, hostile to the republic itself and supported by foreign powers, which would arise within the nation, feeding on internal divisions drawn from its own history.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 0rganism (Reply #33)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 05:11 PM

51. plus a subservient half of congress.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to real Cannabis calm (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 05:16 PM

52. Please for the love of god don't give him any ideas!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to real Cannabis calm (Original post)

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 06:17 PM

54. The court hearing the discrimatory intent case just ruled against the DOJ

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to real Cannabis calm (Original post)

Sat Jul 6, 2019, 10:25 AM

67. Yes

We have reached the point where the separation of powers is now irrelevant.

Trump will do as he pleases and force the issues into courts which are now rigged.

Our hope right now must be to turn out the vote in such overwhelming numbers that he is booted from the White House.

The next Democratic President will be tasked with restoring faith in government and its institutions....as usual.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread