FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Sally Yates - Your Fired
Sally Yates - Your Fired
Jump to: Newest in thread
 | |||
| |||
"Indeed, how dare she say that, as the highest ranking lawyer in the country, she thinks that what Trump is doing is not legally defensible. How inconvenient for Trump. Best he get rid of her as acting AG and put another acting AG in place whilst Trumps chum Session's allegations of racism are looked into. -Matt" Lets be realistic Matt; 1; she spoke out against him and his instructions 2; she has far too short hair 3; her heels are not high enough to show off her legs 4; she is getting on a bit some females suit short hair, but nope, she needs to grow hers. | |||
| |||
 | |||
"So if you employ someone and they do not perform as instructed you keep them on anyway? " You are absolutely right! Did she disobey Obama when he identified certain countries for restrictions? Trump is right to replace her and get the job that he was elected for done! | |||
"Just like The Apprentice how dare she speak up, perhaps she is far to close and snuggled up to obama "Well done hand for not actually knowing what the role of the AG actually does... It tries to keep the government on the right side of the law... so if she thinks an act is unlawful then she has to tell people that She is beholden to the law and the constitution... not a president In fact.. let me put it even simpler hand... if our AG had done his job properly the government would have not lost the Gina miller brexit case... because they would not have contested it after high court, when most people who know the law said they would lose the appeal.... Trump is trying to turn a judicial decision into a political one.... And oh... you might want to go back and look at her congressional approval hearing... she got praised on all sides No other republicans have come out praising the decision....just let that stew a bit | |||
"So if you employ someone and they do not perform as instructed you keep them on anyway? " Which part of her job was she not performing? -Matt | |||
"So if you employ someone and they do not perform as instructed you keep them on anyway? You are absolutely right! Did she disobey Obama when he identified certain countries for restrictions? Trump is right to replace her and get the job that he was elected for done!" Her job is not to obey or disobey the President. Her job is to ensure that the government is operating legally. I guess her view was that Obamas requirement that travellers from those 7 countries obtain a visa for travel was legal. Being that she was deputy AG at that time, I'm not sure if it was her decision though. Her view that Trump's sudden banning of travel of people from those countries unilaterally out of the blue not in response to any incident is not legal. -Matt | |||
" She is beholden to the law and the constitution... not a president Trump is trying to turn a judicial decision into a political one.... And oh... you might want to go back and look at her congressional approval hearing... she got praised on all sides No other republicans have come out praising the decision....just let that stew a bit " Fabio; you forget one thing; She has "NO" Job, she has been sacked, dismissed, she "betrayed" the justice department end off, why is it you always back the loser? | |||
| |||
| |||
" She is beholden to the law and the constitution... not a president Trump is trying to turn a judicial decision into a political one.... And oh... you might want to go back and look at her congressional approval hearing... she got praised on all sides No other republicans have come out praising the decision....just let that stew a bit Fabio; you forget one thing; She has "NO" Job, she has been sacked, dismissed, she "betrayed" the justice department end off, why is it you always back the loser?" Oh. I see. You didn't read the words. Never mind  | |||
" She is beholden to the law and the constitution... not a president Trump is trying to turn a judicial decision into a political one.... And oh... you might want to go back and look at her congressional approval hearing... she got praised on all sides No other republicans have come out praising the decision....just let that stew a bit Fabio; you forget one thing; She has "NO" Job, she has been sacked, dismissed, she "betrayed" the justice department end off, why is it you always back the loser?" Again hand.... she made a decision based on the law and her interpretation of it... it looks like the only person in law that saw it was Rudy guliani... and even he has said his brief was to get it as close to a Muslim ban as legally possible... Various judges think there is a valid enough case that it is unconstitutional to say they can't do parts of what they wanted.. which is why the green card holders had to be let in It's not about winning or losing... it it staying within the rhelms of the law If it is deemed unconstitutional she is going to have a hell of a lawsuit for defamation and dismissal.... | |||
"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 is beholden to the law and the constitution... not a president Trump is trying to turn a judicial decision into a political one.... And oh... you might want to go back and look at her congressional approval hearing... she got praised on all sides No other republicans have come out praising the decision....just let that stew a bit Fabio; you forget one thing; She has "NO" Job, she has been sacked, dismissed, she "betrayed" the justice department end off, why is it you always back the loser? Again hand.... she made a decision based on the law and her interpretation of it... it looks like the only person in law that saw it was Rudy guliani... and even he has said his brief was to get it as close to a Muslim ban as legally possible... Various judges think there is a valid enough case that it is unconstitutional to say they can't do parts of what they wanted.. which is why the green card holders had to be let in It's not about winning or losing... it it staying within the rhelms of the law If it is deemed unconstitutional she is going to have a hell of a lawsuit for defamation and dismissal.... " all "if's and what if's" gets boring after a while perhaps some should "but out" and wait see the end results. how many times over the past year have your predictions been wrong, truthfully now | |||
"So if you employ someone and they do not perform as instructed you keep them on anyway? " So a director tells a HR manager to sack all muslim workers, HR manager refuses so the directors correct to sack the poor HR person...  | |||
| |||
 | |||
| |||
" all "if's and what if's" gets boring after a while perhaps some should "but out" and wait see the end results. how many times over the past year have your predictions been wrong, truthfully now "Again... dear lord..... please try to understand HE made a decision based on politics SHE made a decision based on the law and the constitution HE made a political decision to sack her... HE is trying to turn a legal argument into a political one | |||
" all "if's and what if's" gets boring after a while perhaps some should "but out" and wait see the end results. how many times over the past year have your predictions been wrong, truthfully now "Again... dear lord..... please try to understand HE made a decision based on politics SHE made a decision based on the law and the constitution HE made a political decision to sack her... HE is trying to turn a legal argument into a political one | |||
" all "if's and what if's" gets boring after a while perhaps some should "but out" and wait see the end results. how many times over the past year have your predictions been wrong, truthfully now
Again... dear lord..... please try to understand
HE made a decision based on politics
SHE made a decision based on the law and the constitution
HE made a political decision to sack her... HE is trying to turn a legal argument into a political one
"Had telephone conferences yesterday and today with my colleagues in the US and today this topic was top of the agenda. Yesterday, it was about the chances of Trump getting impeached within the first half of his term. We were all wondering after what he did yesterday, what steps the man child might take if he comes under a formal investigation? It seems incredulous, yet entirely true to form, that he would not think twice about clearing out the top level of the FBI. | |||
" all "if's and what if's" gets boring after a while perhaps some should "but out" and wait see the end results. how many times over the past year have your predictions been wrong, truthfully now
Again... dear lord..... please try to understand
HE made a decision based on politics
SHE made a decision based on the law and the constitution
HE made a political decision to sack her... HE is trying to turn a legal argument into a political one
Had telephone conferences yesterday and today with my colleagues in the US and today this topic was top of the agenda. Yesterday, it was about the chances of Trump getting impeached within the first half of his term. We were all wondering after what he did yesterday, what steps the man child might take if he comes under a formal investigation? It seems incredulous, yet entirely true to form, that he would not think twice about clearing out the top level of the FBI."Nothing wrong with clearing out corruption & the corrupt, throw out the dead wood The USA has the chance of a new beginning, a better way of life and god is on their side | |||
" Nothing wrong with clearing out corruption & the corrupt, throw out the dead wood The USA has the chance of a new beginning, a better way of life and god is on their side "How would you define corrupt? How do you define someone who claims to no longer have an interest in his business because his children run it? How would you define someone who just does what they're told without question? Is that preferable to speaking truth to power? The USA also has the chance of a new beginning with a worse way of life. Under a God without empathy, or sympathy or love. | |||
" Nothing wrong with clearing out corruption & the corrupt, throw out the dead wood The USA has the chance of a new beginning, a better way of life and god is on their side
How would you define corrupt?
How do you define someone who claims to no longer have an interest in his business because his children run it?
How would you define someone who just does what they're told without question? Is that preferable to speaking truth to power?
The USA also has the chance of a new beginning with a worse way of life.
Under a God without empathy, or sympathy or love."you are feeding the troll | |||
" Under a God without empathy, or sympathy or love." ... Pretty realistic then  | |||
" all "if's and what if's" gets boring after a while perhaps some should "but out" and wait see the end results. how many times over the past year have your predictions been wrong, truthfully now
Again... dear lord..... please try to understand
HE made a decision based on politics
SHE made a decision based on the law and the constitution
HE made a political decision to sack her... HE is trying to turn a legal argument into a political one
Had telephone conferences yesterday and today with my colleagues in the US and today this topic was top of the agenda. Yesterday, it was about the chances of Trump getting impeached within the first half of his term. We were all wondering after what he did yesterday, what steps the man child might take if he comes under a formal investigation? It seems incredulous, yet entirely true to form, that he would not think twice about clearing out the top level of the FBI."YFOS | |||
" all "if's and what if's" gets boring after a while perhaps some should "but out" and wait see the end results. how many times over the past year have your predictions been wrong, truthfully now
Again... dear lord..... please try to understand
HE made a decision based on politics
SHE made a decision based on the law and the constitution
HE made a political decision to sack her... HE is trying to turn a legal argument into a political one
Had telephone conferences yesterday and today with my colleagues in the US and today this topic was top of the agenda. Yesterday, it was about the chances of Trump getting impeached within the first half of his term. We were all wondering after what he did yesterday, what steps the man child might take if he comes under a formal investigation? It seems incredulous, yet entirely true to form, that he would not think twice about clearing out the top level of the FBI.
YFOS"What's your brier score? | |||
