The Supreme Court is slowly returning executive power back to the president related to political appointees? Will a pending decision do the same for U.S. Attorney picks? Dr. Eastman explains.
Boy was I naive all this time thinking judges were impartial and not biased. I remember when their oath actually meant something, I guess justice is no longer blind and rulings are now made according to political party affiliation.
Isn't that exactly why Soros bought and sold lots of District Attorney's in numerous states, so that he can run the deck?
I'm surprised that at least 3 of them got bounced in CA, George Gascon (Los Angeles), Pamela Price (Alameda County) and Chesa Boudin (San Francisco) who definitely played with the Soros full facial hand right in the middle of their back!
And Gavin Newsom is literally OWNED by SOROS since the Soros conglomerate funded AT THE LEAST, $12 Million and likely more in Newsom's pockets! Newsom is another back loaded puppet...with dyslexia! Guess who is pulling the strings, probably Alex Soros who is even more manipulative than his ancient father (if he is still cognizant)!
So the whole controversy before us is nothing more than another illicit Democrat dirty trick. Senate Democrats scrupulously obstruct the “blue slip” procedure and wait for the 120-day interim appointments to expire so that Democrat judges can appoint Democrat-approved U.S. Attorneys in Democrat leveraged judicial districts. It is clear how, in normal times, the statutory remedy for the 120-day interim appointment would, from time to time, create the interbranch conflict-of-interest as Mr. Eastman informs us. But the illicit “blue slip” scheme forces an even greater threat to the principle of separation of powers. It eviscerates all three branches since the process itself is a naked coordination between the legislative and judicial branches to install their choice for an important executive official. The strategy is effective because the President must expend precious time and political capital to appoint his own U.S. Attorneys to replace the illicit ones. In the meantime, Democrats enjoy disrupting the process and wielding real power in Democrat judicial districts to further sabotage the President’s agenda.
I am familiar with the blue slip and now with the reason why these interim judges are leaving after 120 days for good. But the most important question is what is the argument against these rules? Professor Eastman just answered it: it’s the Take Care Act that the President swears an oath to Take Care that the laws are faithfully executed. These institutional methods are a roadblock that need every effort to remove so that the President can fulfill his oath.
John, Thank you for clearly explaining the reason these nominations are being held up and even denied. The Dems always seem to find a way to change the intended rules of engagement to impede, block and deter Trump from doing his job but when the roles are reversed they cry foul!
SCOTUS seems to take issues that they can't get out of. In most of these cases they rule in favor of President Trump....because it is the law. Anything that might catch them grief, they ignore. You might say that the abortion ruling would catch them lots of grief and it did. to some degree, but their decision was just to send it to the states for them to decide.
If SCOTUS rules for POTUS he should have a list of aggressive young yet accomplished attorneys ready to serve at the drop of a hat . Let us hope and pray we get back to the constitution and its original intended guidelines ala the TEN COMMANDMENTS .
Love this and you Julie! We spent years standing a post while you slept and I pass any praise onto you, dear. Bannon is 100% right: J6'ers owe their freedom to your work and convincing the president to pardon those wonderful Patriots. G-d has and will continue to bless you.
You ever need help defending "Fort Kelly" my truck will be packed and ready.
Boy was I naive all this time thinking judges were impartial and not biased. I remember when their oath actually meant something, I guess justice is no longer blind and rulings are now made according to political party affiliation.
Isn't that exactly why Soros bought and sold lots of District Attorney's in numerous states, so that he can run the deck?
I'm surprised that at least 3 of them got bounced in CA, George Gascon (Los Angeles), Pamela Price (Alameda County) and Chesa Boudin (San Francisco) who definitely played with the Soros full facial hand right in the middle of their back!
And Gavin Newsom is literally OWNED by SOROS since the Soros conglomerate funded AT THE LEAST, $12 Million and likely more in Newsom's pockets! Newsom is another back loaded puppet...with dyslexia! Guess who is pulling the strings, probably Alex Soros who is even more manipulative than his ancient father (if he is still cognizant)!
In Illinois, they will put you in jail for driving while revoked for six years, you could kill somebody while driving a car drunk and do four
Very disturbing…
Sounds like this SCOTUS might side with POTUS.
Julie, thank you for your good work.
So the whole controversy before us is nothing more than another illicit Democrat dirty trick. Senate Democrats scrupulously obstruct the “blue slip” procedure and wait for the 120-day interim appointments to expire so that Democrat judges can appoint Democrat-approved U.S. Attorneys in Democrat leveraged judicial districts. It is clear how, in normal times, the statutory remedy for the 120-day interim appointment would, from time to time, create the interbranch conflict-of-interest as Mr. Eastman informs us. But the illicit “blue slip” scheme forces an even greater threat to the principle of separation of powers. It eviscerates all three branches since the process itself is a naked coordination between the legislative and judicial branches to install their choice for an important executive official. The strategy is effective because the President must expend precious time and political capital to appoint his own U.S. Attorneys to replace the illicit ones. In the meantime, Democrats enjoy disrupting the process and wielding real power in Democrat judicial districts to further sabotage the President’s agenda.
I am familiar with the blue slip and now with the reason why these interim judges are leaving after 120 days for good. But the most important question is what is the argument against these rules? Professor Eastman just answered it: it’s the Take Care Act that the President swears an oath to Take Care that the laws are faithfully executed. These institutional methods are a roadblock that need every effort to remove so that the President can fulfill his oath.
John, Thank you for clearly explaining the reason these nominations are being held up and even denied. The Dems always seem to find a way to change the intended rules of engagement to impede, block and deter Trump from doing his job but when the roles are reversed they cry foul!
Thanks for all this pertinent information, as I said before, that I don’t see anywhere else.
SCOTUS seems to take issues that they can't get out of. In most of these cases they rule in favor of President Trump....because it is the law. Anything that might catch them grief, they ignore. You might say that the abortion ruling would catch them lots of grief and it did. to some degree, but their decision was just to send it to the states for them to decide.
If SCOTUS rules for POTUS he should have a list of aggressive young yet accomplished attorneys ready to serve at the drop of a hat . Let us hope and pray we get back to the constitution and its original intended guidelines ala the TEN COMMANDMENTS .
Love this and you Julie! We spent years standing a post while you slept and I pass any praise onto you, dear. Bannon is 100% right: J6'ers owe their freedom to your work and convincing the president to pardon those wonderful Patriots. G-d has and will continue to bless you.
You ever need help defending "Fort Kelly" my truck will be packed and ready.
Julie, a relative sent me stuff on Fanone and your work enabled me to shut it down. Thanks big-time.