PPRuNe Forums


Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 31st Jan 2017, 21:26   #101 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Florence
Posts: 894
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/178844
ZeBedie is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2017, 22:02   #102 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: uk
Age: 59
Posts: 42
These petitions are interesting but, what do you bet the donald will be impeached before they even get to be discussed in Parliament? At the speed the Republicans are turning against him, he won't even rule for the two years most people thought he was going to last... (article R. Kuttner in "The Huffington Post") What a joke! and a waste of time...
alicopter is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2017, 22:07   #103 (permalink)
Resident insomniac
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 72
Posts: 1,741
But what (ie who) will follow Trump?

(Penny for your thoughts . . . )
G-CPTN is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2017, 22:15   #104 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: uk
Age: 59
Posts: 42
May be Theresa May, she could be in charge of both Nations??? At least until the next UK General Elections in a couple of months????
alicopter is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2017, 22:17   #105 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 6,012
Oh populism ? Maybe the USA are realising a big mistake with Trump us to follow with a realisation and reality check too then Trump and May can walk hand in hand into the distance both leaders of division and anger

Good riddance to both of them
Pace is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2017, 22:26   #106 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,591
Quote:
Surely that's a "spoof", or "fake news", or "alternative facts", it cannot really be a real US government press release?
Quote:
That press release is absolutely appalling!!! Someone please confirm for me that it is fake. Please? Pretty pretty please?
Absolutely not:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press...torney-general

And to add an additional layer of class and graciousness, he gave the AG exactly a two minute warning by way of a handwritten note written by a lowly White House staff member before his White House clowns released the statement to the press. Very interesting also how his press secretary Baghdad Sean today tried to give the whole thing a totally different spin.

What a sad, little person.

Last edited by virginblue; 31st Jan 2017 at 22:56.
virginblue is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2017, 22:27   #107 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: North Up
Posts: 206
Quote:
Trump and May can walk hand in hand into the distance both leaders of division and anger
It's happened before:
Cazalet33 is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2017, 23:14   #108 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: deepest darkest recess of your mind
Posts: 884
F2ck me, you lot are gonna need fleet of outrage buses.
porch monkey is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2017, 23:22   #109 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: On the beach with a cerveza.
Posts: 1,032
Quote:
Originally Posted by virginblue View Post
Absolutely not:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press...torney-general

And to add an additional layer of class and graciousness, he gave the AG exactly a two minute warning by way of a handwritten note written by a lowly White House staff member before his White House clowns released the statement to the press. Very interesting also how his press secretary Baghdad Sean today tried to give the whole thing a totally different spin.

What a sad, little person.
If the AG is refusing to implement the Law what on earth did she expect was going to happen?
Jet II is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2017, 23:42   #110 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: North Up
Posts: 206
Quote:
If the AG is refusing to implement the Law what on earth did she expect was going to happen?
The Attorney General wasn't doing what you propose. She was pointing out the legal difficulties imposed by Chump's edict.

A sackable offence in a fascist state? Sure.
Cazalet33 is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2017, 23:56   #111 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Paraparaumu NZ
Posts: 1,347
Quote:
She was pointing out the legal difficulties imposed by Chump's edict.
In her opinion, many other legal minds did not agree with her assumptions.

She was an Obama appointee, would you really have expected her to agree?? or to have kept the position much longer??
prospector is online now  
Old 31st Jan 2017, 23:56   #112 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: On the beach with a cerveza.
Posts: 1,032
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cazalet33 View Post
The Attorney General wasn't doing what you propose. She was pointing out the legal difficulties imposed by Chump's edict.

A sackable offence in a fascist state? Sure.
No - she banned her staff from implementing the Executive Order.

Surely it was obvious to everyone that the moment she did that her position as AG was untenable.
Jet II is offline  
Old 1st Feb 2017, 00:22   #113 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 68
Posts: 665
The AG's duties include defending the Government in Litigation.

Her personal views are moot upon her taking the job.

She was like any other Lawyer representing a Client....her Counsel was supposed to be done in private and then upon being overridden by her Client...either get to work or offer up a Resignation.

Going Public is not the done thing....not even in a similar situation in the UK.

Deal with folks....she wanted to play the Martyr and that is what happened.

Trump fired her....exactly as she knew he would.

She could very well wind up losing her License to practice law as a result of her misconduct.


Quote:
Here, via the Huffington Post, is the announcement from acting attorney general Sally Yates:

On January 27, 2017, the President signed an Executive Order regarding immigrants and refugees from certain Muslim-majority countries. The order has now been challenged in a number of jurisdictions. As the Acting Attorney General, it is my ultimate responsibility to determine the position of the Department of Justice in these actions.

My role is different from that of the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), which, through administrations of both parties, has reviewed Executive Orders for form and legality before they are issued. OLC’s review is limited to the narrow question of whether, in OLC’s view, a proposed Executive Order is lawful on its face and properly drafted. Its review does not take account of statements made by an administration or it surrogates close in time to the issuance of an Executive Order that may bear on the order’s purpose. And importantly, it does not address whether any policy choice embodied in an Executive Order is wise or just.

Similarly, in litigation, DOJ Civil Division lawyers are charged with advancing reasonable legal arguments that can be made supporting an Executive Order. But my role as leader of this institution is different and broader. My responsibility is to ensure that the position of the Department of Justice is not only legally defensible, but is informed by our best view of what the law is after consideration of all the facts. In addition, I am responsible for ensuring that the positions we take in court remain consistent with this institution’s solemn obligation to always seek justice and stand for what is right. At present, I am not convinced that the defense of the Executive Order is consistent with these responsibilities nor am I convinced that the Executive Order is lawful.

Consequently, for as long as I am the Acting Attorney General, the Department of Justice will not present arguments in defense of the Executive Order, unless and until I become convinced that it is appropriate to do so.


She did not make any case for WHY she feels the way she does......is that not what Lawyers are all about....presenting their case?

Last edited by SASless; 1st Feb 2017 at 00:34.
SASless is offline  
Old 1st Feb 2017, 03:08   #114 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: California
Posts: 166
Quote:
The AG's duties include defending the Government in Litigation. Her personal views are moot upon her taking the job.
When she was nominated to be Deputy AG, Jeff Sessions asked her if she would say NO to an unlawful order of the President. She said she would, and she did. I wonder if Sessions will do the same.
MarcK is offline  
Old 1st Feb 2017, 03:17   #115 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 68
Posts: 665
What was unlawful? Layout your case why the EO is illegal!

Did not the DOJ OLC review the EO and approve it for being legal and properly written?

She did not agree to the policy aspects....and that is not her remit....that is the President's decision.

Her statement clearly pointed out it was her personal opinion....not a legal opinion.
SASless is offline  
Old 1st Feb 2017, 07:07   #116 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,591
Quote:
If the AG is refusing to implement the Law what on earth did she expect was going to happen?
Getting sacked, of course, and getting a courteous thank you for her almost 30 years of public service, wishing her all the best for the future. That is what half-decent, well-behaved people would have done. Not calling her a traitor, a weak person etc. in a White House press release, avoiding to call her personally and informing the press two minutes after a scribbled note by one of Trump's ass-kissers was delivered by a messenger.

That was my point. The total, complete and utter lack of any class and style in this reality show turned administration of narcistic bullies.
virginblue is offline  
Old 1st Feb 2017, 07:09   #117 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The Luberon
Age: 65
Posts: 801
sitigeltfel is offline  
Old 1st Feb 2017, 07:28   #118 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 1,258
At least Sally Yates was consistent with her principles.

I saw a clip yesterday evening of the hearings back when she was appointed to the AG post under Obama.

Ironically, Trump's nominated replacement asked her, how she would react if she was confronted with a scenario in which she was asked to implement something she tough may be unlawful. She replied that her job was to uphold the law and the constitution above all else.

She appears to have done that, and lost her job (which she'd have lost ultimately in any event) as a result.

Whether in this instance she was right or wrong, she stuck to her principles.
ATNotts is offline  
Old 1st Feb 2017, 07:42   #119 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Soon to be out of the EU.
Posts: 550
sitigeltfel, I love that cartoon. It would be even funnier if it wasn't actually true. The sad this is that the exceptional double standards endemic throughout the left.

I wonder what would happen if I wore a pro Trump jumper near Westminster. I should imagine a lot of verbal and likely physical violence from the undemocratic left. I also bet that if I went away and came back wearing a pro ISIS jumper or flew an ISIS flag then absolutely nothing would happen.

Selective outrage at its finest.

As for Tusk saying that President Donald J. Trump is a risk to the EU. Translating that I read it as 'someone else actually has the balls to stand up to us, only this time is a REALLY powerful country'. The EU is over. Fabulous.

I cannot wait to go and see President Donald J. Trump on his full state visit to our wonderful country. I don't know what placard to take. I'm thinking:

OBAMA DID THE SAME on one side with WHERE WAS THE OUTRAGE THEN? on the back.
HeartyMeatballs is offline  
Old 1st Feb 2017, 07:45   #120 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Out to Grasse
Posts: 392
Many years ago, I worked on a derrick barge in the North Sea with all the top dogs being Texans.

One day a Rig crane driver refused to lift a load off the barge deck because it was overweight for the crane. The deck foreman asked him to lift one corner to remove a chain. He again refused. The foreman hauled him out of the cab and hooked up the load himself. The Barge sank on a long wave and the crane jib folded neatly in half at the elbow.

Cue the Barge Master on deck. What happened? - Right steward, clear his cabin, paymaster bring cash and pay him out every penny owed. Don't let that supply boat go because he's on it. The whole affair took less than 5 minutes and the foreman was gone forever.

Trump is American, and a business man, he will not suffer fools, if you are in a position of responsibility and you screw up big, you are GONE. None of this fluffy "lets do it nicely", can she be re-educated? nope! you work in the USA you play by their rules in their game. This is the way, LIBERAL OR CONSERVATIVE.



Imagegear
ImageGear is offline  
Closed Thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 03:52.


1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1