1. You really think a person would come all the way to a foreign country (i.e. the USA) to just change its policies?
2. We need every point of view not just what is fed us by, as Seymour Hersh puts it, the "stenographers of the US govt" such as the NY Times. This freedom counters the ignorance and arrogance we have that what we think is a…
1. You really think a person would come all the way to a foreign country (i.e. the USA) to just change its policies?
2. We need every point of view not just what is fed us by, as Seymour Hersh puts it, the "stenographers of the US govt" such as the NY Times. This freedom counters the ignorance and arrogance we have that what we think is always right.
3. Whether there is criminal activity or not, the US govt is saying that the Pres. has the power to deport people if he feels their view undermines our foreing POLICY (not national security.)
4. What Trump et al are doing is not just to deport one person but to intimidate EVERYONE ELSE!!
5. When Trump doesn't like what federal judges are doing he threatens them or his lawyers lie to the judges or claim that the Pres. has the right to ignore them.
6. IMHO if you do not see that Trump is going after an imperial presidency that is superior to the other two branches AND the US Constitution then you will not be rightly alarmed as what is going on. Get past your hate for some people and see what is a greater evil.
1. Terrorists have done it in past, even willing to commit suicide, and spies go to other countries all the time. There is a term for it, foreign agitator"
2.They dont need to be here to hear them and we while criticism from within is unimpeachably desirable. Criticism from those seeking to BECOME citizens still is accepting and inviting foreign meddling in our affairs.
3. He has this power explicitly in current law. It's literally a phrase in the text of the law to deport someone who harms our foreign policy
1. Presidents being approved in a referendum by the voters every four years, attenuates their imperiousness.
2. Most judges are not elected at all and have life tenure, which might or might not be a good idea.
3. Legislating from the bench makes the judiciary more imperial than either of the other two branches.
4. If any one of the branches is to be more imperial than the other two, it could safely be the legislature since the will of the people is expressed most widely and variously through the direct election of 535 members across the country.
1. You really think a person would come all the way to a foreign country (i.e. the USA) to just change its policies?
2. We need every point of view not just what is fed us by, as Seymour Hersh puts it, the "stenographers of the US govt" such as the NY Times. This freedom counters the ignorance and arrogance we have that what we think is always right.
3. Whether there is criminal activity or not, the US govt is saying that the Pres. has the power to deport people if he feels their view undermines our foreing POLICY (not national security.)
4. What Trump et al are doing is not just to deport one person but to intimidate EVERYONE ELSE!!
5. When Trump doesn't like what federal judges are doing he threatens them or his lawyers lie to the judges or claim that the Pres. has the right to ignore them.
6. IMHO if you do not see that Trump is going after an imperial presidency that is superior to the other two branches AND the US Constitution then you will not be rightly alarmed as what is going on. Get past your hate for some people and see what is a greater evil.
1. Terrorists have done it in past, even willing to commit suicide, and spies go to other countries all the time. There is a term for it, foreign agitator"
2.They dont need to be here to hear them and we while criticism from within is unimpeachably desirable. Criticism from those seeking to BECOME citizens still is accepting and inviting foreign meddling in our affairs.
3. He has this power explicitly in current law. It's literally a phrase in the text of the law to deport someone who harms our foreign policy
4- TDS; DR
IMHO:
1. Presidents being approved in a referendum by the voters every four years, attenuates their imperiousness.
2. Most judges are not elected at all and have life tenure, which might or might not be a good idea.
3. Legislating from the bench makes the judiciary more imperial than either of the other two branches.
4. If any one of the branches is to be more imperial than the other two, it could safely be the legislature since the will of the people is expressed most widely and variously through the direct election of 535 members across the country.