HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » So the DOJ has chimed in ...

Wed Nov 14, 2018, 12:54 PM

So the DOJ has chimed in about Whitaker?

Last edited Wed Nov 14, 2018, 01:31 PM - Edit history (1)

The bases of the report is that Trump can appoint whoever he wants to fill in acting AG? Where is this legal that a moron can appoint a racist radical ass kissing weasel to that vacancy? As Rudy G said it, "the law isn't the law, just like the the truth isn't truth"! This is Trump's world and I hope it will be over soon!

7 replies, 600 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 7 replies Author Time Post
Reply So the DOJ has chimed in about Whitaker? (Original post)
imanamerican63 Nov 2018 OP
RockRaven Nov 2018 #1
Jersey Devil Nov 2018 #2
onenote Nov 2018 #3
Roland99 Nov 2018 #4
onenote Nov 2018 #6
imanamerican63 Nov 2018 #5
duforsure Nov 2018 #7

Response to imanamerican63 (Original post)

Wed Nov 14, 2018, 12:56 PM

1. They have, their official position, written by a guy who assisted in the torture memo, is that

his appointment is peachy. So there you go. Totes legit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imanamerican63 (Original post)

Wed Nov 14, 2018, 12:57 PM

2. DOJ opinion is not binding on anyone

The DOJ has no judicial authority and its opinions are not precedent. I would have hardly expected the DOJ to rule that its own boss was there illegally.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imanamerican63 (Original post)

Wed Nov 14, 2018, 01:20 PM

3. Here is a link to the OLC memo

Just in case anyone wants to read it before reaching conclusions on its merits. While not binding on any court (and not entitled to any deference from the courts), it spells out what undoubtedly will be the government's response to the lawsuit brought by the State of Maryland challenging Whitaker's appointment.

http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2018/images/11/14/acting.ag.op.pdf

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #3)

Wed Nov 14, 2018, 01:24 PM

4. Check this! OLC reasoning is flawed

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Roland99 (Reply #4)

Wed Nov 14, 2018, 01:41 PM

6. I don't think this is as big a deal as the tweet suggests

Before there was a Vacancies Reform Act, there was a Vacancies Act that pre-dated Section 508. Section 508 as originally enacted, referenced Section 3345 of the original Vacancies Act. When Congress enacted the Vacancies Reform Act, it replaced the original Section 3345 with a new Section 3345, but it didn't change the language of Section 508. The effect therefore was to make the cross reference to Section 3345 in 508 applicable to the new Section 3345 just as it had been applicable to the previous iteration of Section 3345.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #3)

Wed Nov 14, 2018, 01:31 PM

5. It meant to be sarcastic!

I was poking fun at Trump an Whitaker. I'm not a legally person. Sorry for the reference to leading the wrong idea of my thread.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imanamerican63 (Original post)

Wed Nov 14, 2018, 01:43 PM

7. An opinion coming from

Another trump loyalist has no bearings what so ever on the law. They'll find out soon it was unconstitutional to begin with to appoint him to the position.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread