• We will be taking the forum down for maintenance at [5:15 am CDT] - in 15 minutes. We should be down less than 1 hour.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

"We will not be questioned!"

JumpinJack

JumpinJack

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 19, 2013
Messages
6,628
Reaction score
2,971
Location
Dallas, TX
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
Stephen Miller, President Trump's political advisor (a political operative), made the rounds on the Sunday political shows. At one stop, he said the following about the Constitutionally-required judicial review of the travel ban Executive Order:

(O)ur opponents, the media and the whole world will soon see as we begin to take further actions, that the powers of the president to protect our country are very substantial and will not be questioned.
Click to expand...

This one sentence should send chills down the spines of all Americans, the media, and the judicial and legislative branches. This is the talk of dictators, not Presidential staff in the democratic United States of America.

It is not only legal to question the actions of the White House, it is our duty to question. Powers cannot go unchecked in a democracy, which is why our Founding Fathers set up a checks and balances system, foreseeing a grab for power.

This is scary stuff, regardless what the subject matter of the EO or any other action, and whether a citizen would be in favor of the action or not.

Imagine if an Obama or Clinton political advisor came out and said:

(O)ur opponents, the media and the whole world will soon see as we begin to take further actions, that the powers of the president to protect our country are very substantial and will not be questioned.
Click to expand...

Look it up and watch the expression on his face. There is something very wrong going on.

The Founding Fathers were realistic about the presence and popularity of demagogues. The tendency of political systems to slip into autocracy weighed heavily on their minds. That power corrupts, and that power can be leveraged to amass more power, was a familiar idea. The political system the founders built is designed to withstand these pressures, and to a large extent, it has. *** But the danger of a demagogic, aspirational autocrat winning the White House is one problem the Madisonian constitutional order is exquisitely designed to handle. The founders feared charismatic populists, they worried over would-be monarchs, and so they designed a system of government meant to frustrate them.
Click to expand...
How to stop an autocracy - Vox
 
Last edited:
JumpinJack said:
Stephen Miller, President Trump's political advisor (a political operative), made the rounds on the Sunday political shows. At one stop, he said the following about the Constitutionally-required judicial review of the travel ban Executive Order:



This one sentence should send chills down the spines of all Americans, the media, and the judicial and legislative branches. This is the talk of dictators, not Presidential staff in the democratic United States of America.

It is not only legal to question the actions of the White House, it is our duty to question. Powers cannot go unchecked in a democracy, which is why our Founding Fathers set up a checks and balances system, foreseeing a grab for power.

This is scary stuff, regardless what the subject matter of the EO or any other action, and whether a citizen would be in favor of the action or not.

Imagine if an Obama or Clinton political advisor came out and said:



Look it up and watch the expression on his face. There is something very wrong going on there.
Click to expand...

People have been posting similarities between Trump and dictators since before he was president. This takes it to a whole new level.

We should be worried, but words and actions are two different things. If Trump really does try to pull some BS, even Trump supporters will be angry. There aren't a lot of things pretty much all Americans agree on, but hating dictators is one of them.
 
JumpinJack said:
Stephen Miller, President Trump's political advisor (a political operative), made the rounds on the Sunday political shows. At one stop, he said the following about the Constitutionally-required judicial review of the travel ban Executive Order:



This one sentence should send chills down the spines of all Americans, the media, and the judicial and legislative branches. This is the talk of dictators, not Presidential staff in the democratic United States of America.

It is not only legal to question the actions of the White House, it is our duty to question. Powers cannot go unchecked in a democracy, which is why our Founding Fathers set up a checks and balances system, foreseeing a grab for power.

This is scary stuff, regardless what the subject matter of the EO or any other action, and whether a citizen would be in favor of the action or not.

Imagine if an Obama or Clinton political advisor came out and said:



Look it up and watch the expression on his face. There is something very wrong going on.

How to stop an autocracy - Vox
Click to expand...

Gosh. Who told Trump about the Pen and the Phone?
 
Nomad4Ever said:
People have been posting similarities between Trump and dictators since before he was president. This takes it to a whole new level.

We should be worried, but words and actions are two different things. If Trump really does try to pull some BS, even Trump supporters will be angry. There aren't a lot of things pretty much all Americans agree on, but hating dictators is one of them.
Click to expand...

I think you are underestimating the authoritarian nature of Trump-supporters. There are quite a few on this very board that refuse to question anything he says or does. These people are looking for "a daddy", and in Trump they believe they have found him.
 
Unsurprisingly we see the White House a bit hot that four judges violated the law to kill key parts of their Immigration EO.

I give them a pass.

I am hot too.
 
Nomad4Ever said:
People have been posting similarities between Trump and dictators since before he was president. This takes it to a whole new level.

We should be worried, but words and actions are two different things. If Trump really does try to pull some BS, even Trump supporters will be angry. There aren't a lot of things pretty much all Americans agree on, but hating dictators is one of them.
Click to expand...
I used to think that before Trumpism came along.

Now a fair lot of his loyal supporters are actually courting and urging on his dictatorship.

Some really do want a new Hitler. Others are under the spell of his cult, and will agree and support anything he does, because: cult.
 
JumpinJack said:
Stephen Miller, President Trump's political advisor (a political operative), made the rounds on the Sunday political shows. At one stop, he said the following about the Constitutionally-required judicial review of the travel ban Executive Order:



This one sentence should send chills down the spines of all Americans, the media, and the judicial and legislative branches. This is the talk of dictators, not Presidential staff in the democratic United States of America.

It is not only legal to question the actions of the White House, it is our duty to question. Powers cannot go unchecked in a democracy, which is why our Founding Fathers set up a checks and balances system, foreseeing a grab for power.

This is scary stuff, regardless what the subject matter of the EO or any other action, and whether a citizen would be in favor of the action or not.

Imagine if an Obama or Clinton political advisor came out and said:



Look it up and watch the expression on his face. There is something very wrong going on.

How to stop an autocracy - Vox
Click to expand...

Did he actually say, "we will not be questioned"?
 
JumpinJack said:
Stephen Miller, President Trump's political advisor (a political operative), made the rounds on the Sunday political shows. At one stop, he said the following about the Constitutionally-required judicial review of the travel ban Executive Order:



This one sentence should send chills down the spines of all Americans, the media, and the judicial and legislative branches. This is the talk of dictators, not Presidential staff in the democratic United States of America.

It is not only legal to question the actions of the White House, it is our duty to question. Powers cannot go unchecked in a democracy, which is why our Founding Fathers set up a checks and balances system, foreseeing a grab for power.

This is scary stuff, regardless what the subject matter of the EO or any other action, and whether a citizen would be in favor of the action or not.

Imagine if an Obama or Clinton political advisor came out and said:



Look it up and watch the expression on his face. There is something very wrong going on.

How to stop an autocracy - Vox
Click to expand...

GWB was widely charged in the court of public opinion with "allowing" 9/11 to happen. Trump takes a very reasonable precaution to mitigate the potential for a similar act and he's called a dictator.

This hoopla is, rather obviously, nothing more than a political stunt by the populist left.
 
Lutherf said:
GWB was widely charged in the court of public opinion with "allowing" 9/11 to happen. Trump takes a very reasonable precaution to mitigate the potential for a similar act and he's called a dictator.

This hoopla is, rather obviously, nothing more than a political stunt by the populist left.
Click to expand...

Yes, and it is the reputation of Judges which will pay the most for getting it wrong.

Trump is absolutely right to lead the attack on them for the Rebellion.

They have long sucked.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
Unsurprisingly we see the White House a bit hot that four judges violated the law to kill key parts of their Immigration EO.
Click to expand...

I don't suppose you've used your legal training to analyze the district and circuit courts' opinions, and draft a memo explaining the faults in their reasoning. Have you?





Behavior such as displayed in your post really is quite baffling and I'm not sure it can be chalked up to the fact that in general, the public loves to hate lawyers. Why is it that people think that they have any basis to declare that a court got a constitutional issue wrong, full stop, simply because said people may have once read the constitution?

You wouldn't consider it sensible to declare that SO(32) heterotic string theory is stupid and wrong unless you had spent a lifetime in theoretical physics, would you? You wouldn't blindly declare that a certain neurosugery technique is better than another unless you actually have experience studying and using these techniques as an actual neurosurgeon, would you? But somehow, law is the one profession and constitutional interpretation the one issue as to which completely untrained laymen feel free to declare things obviously constitutional and unconstitutional (a practice which is blatantly driven by the result they want to be right).

I'm betting you didn't even try to read either of the opinions at issue. It's just that Trump said the court was wrong, so you and other Trump supporters repeat it.
 
I'm pretty surprised they let Miller do interviews. The guy is definitely not a natural speaker. It seems to me the dumbest thing right now for the Trump administration to do would be to let people openly interview either Miller or Bannon.
 
MrPeanut said:
I'm pretty surprised they let Miller do interviews. The guy is definitely not a natural speaker. It seems to me the dumbest thing right now for the Trump administration to do would be to let people openly interview either Miller or Bannon.
Click to expand...

Besides his obvious reading off cue cards as he angrily spittled his nonsense -- the debut of this dead-eyed snake man was a total cluster****.
 
paperview said:
besides his obvious reading off cue cards as he angrily spittled his nonsense -- the debut of this dead-eyed snake man was a total cluster****.
Click to expand...

snafu
 
Mr Person said:
I don't suppose you've used your legal training to analyze the district and circuit courts' opinions, and draft a memo explaining the faults in their reasoning. Have you?





Behavior such as displayed in your post really is quite baffling and I'm not sure it can be chalked up to the fact that in general, the public loves to hate lawyers. Why is it that people think that they have any basis to declare that a court got a constitutional issue wrong, full stop, simply because said people may have once read the constitution?

You wouldn't consider it sensible to declare that SO(32) heterotic string theory is stupid and wrong unless you had spent a lifetime in theoretical physics, would you? You wouldn't blindly declare that a certain neurosugery technique is better than another unless you actually have experience studying and using these techniques as an actual neurosurgeon, would you? But somehow, law is the one profession and constitutional interpretation the one issue as to which completely untrained laymen feel free to declare things obviously constitutional and unconstitutional (a practice which is blatantly driven by the result they want to be right).

I'm betting you didn't even try to read either of the opinions at issue. It's just that Trump said the court was wrong, so you and other Trump supporters repeat it.
Click to expand...

I do not buy the argument that only those in possession of an EXPERT shingle are allowed to speak, especially on matters where we see evidence of a branch of government usurping the people.
 
apdst said:
This is from YOUR source...ok?...



No, lie your way out...go!
Click to expand...

“As we begin to take further actions,” Miller said, it will be shown in the end “that the powers of the president to protect our country are very substantial and will not be questioned.”
 
MrPeanut said:
“As we begin to take further actions,” Miller said, it will be shown in the end “that the powers of the president to protect our country are very substantial and will not be questioned.”
Click to expand...

He made both comments, obviously. How do we square that?

He right, the President's national security authority is without question; IOW, there is no question as to what the President's authority is. The law clearly states what his authority is. Hell, it's legal to put people in camps.
 
apdst said:
He made both comments, obviously. How do we square that?

He right, the President's national security authority is without question; IOW, there is no question as to what the President's authority is. The law clearly states what his authority is. Hell, it's legal to put people in camps.
Click to expand...

^ See what I mean?
 
Mr Person said:
I don't suppose you've used your legal training to analyze the district and circuit courts' opinions, and draft a memo explaining the faults in their reasoning. Have you?





Behavior such as displayed in your post really is quite baffling and I'm not sure it can be chalked up to the fact that in general, the public loves to hate lawyers. Why is it that people think that they have any basis to declare that a court got a constitutional issue wrong, full stop, simply because said people may have once read the constitution?

You wouldn't consider it sensible to declare that SO(32) heterotic string theory is stupid and wrong unless you had spent a lifetime in theoretical physics, would you? You wouldn't blindly declare that a certain neurosugery technique is better than another unless you actually have experience studying and using these techniques as an actual neurosurgeon, would you? But somehow, law is the one profession and constitutional interpretation the one issue as to which completely untrained laymen feel free to declare things obviously constitutional and unconstitutional (a practice which is blatantly driven by the result they want to be right).

I'm betting you didn't even try to read either of the opinions at issue. It's just that Trump said the court was wrong, so you and other Trump supporters repeat it.
Click to expand...

I've read both the district and appeals court rulings. They are garbage. They flatly ignore both the federal statute which was authority for the executive order and the Supreme Court's very clear legal rule about the plenary power of the two political branches of the government to makes decisions about the exclusion of aliens. All four of those judges should be impeached for flouting the law they are bound to follow. President Trump cannot afford to let these lawless actions by a handful of judges interfere with his clear constitutional duty to protect the nation from foreign threats.
 
JumpinJack said:
Stephen Miller, President Trump's political advisor (a political operative), made the rounds on the Sunday political shows. At one stop, he said the following about the Constitutionally-required judicial review of the travel ban Executive Order:



This one sentence should send chills down the spines of all Americans, the media, and the judicial and legislative branches. This is the talk of dictators, not Presidential staff in the democratic United States of America.

It is not only legal to question the actions of the White House, it is our duty to question. Powers cannot go unchecked in a democracy, which is why our Founding Fathers set up a checks and balances system, foreseeing a grab for power.

This is scary stuff, regardless what the subject matter of the EO or any other action, and whether a citizen would be in favor of the action or not.

Imagine if an Obama or Clinton political advisor came out and said:



Look it up and watch the expression on his face. There is something very wrong going on.

How to stop an autocracy - Vox
Click to expand...




You guys and your hysterics. :lol:


What he means is that it will hold up to judicial review, even the 9th circus.
 
Paperview said:
For those who want to look into the dead-eyed, pus bag Senior Advisor the President made his world-wide stage entrance this Sunday, and may have missed it -- have a gander at this mess:

Click to expand...


9/10.


His nonverbal could get better, but this was pretty darn good. I am pretty sure he did such a spin on Conway that we could call it a lie, but it does not bother me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom