July 15, 2015

Technically, Ted Cruz And Greg Abbott Should Be Disbarred

By DAVID SCHULTZ Published JULY 15, 2015, 6:00 AM EDT

In June, the Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution protects the right of same-sex couples to marry and that states are required to issue them marriage licenses. Yet many public officials have publicly encouraged people to break the law. Among them are attorneys, such as Texas governor Greg Abbott and U.S. Senator Ted Cruz. They may frame their opposition as standing up for what’s right. But according to the ethical rules of lawyers, public officials who are attorneys defying the Supreme Court by refusing to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies or encouraging others to do the same should be disbarred.

Article VI of the Constitution makes it the supreme law of the land. The Supreme Court gets the final say on what the Constitution means. The Court may be wrong, and on occasion it has been, such as with slavery and the separate-but-equal doctrine. Yet until it is overturned by constitutional amendment or it reverses itself, the Supreme Court’s rulings on the Constitution are binding precedent on all lower courts and public officials. Every lawyer and law student knows this.

Public officials are entitled to express disagreement with Supreme Court decisions, but they are not free to disregard them, or encourage others to do so because they are legally and ethically bound to obey them. They are in a different position from ordinary citizens when it comes to civil disobedience and defying the Supreme Court. Individual citizens may ignore the Supreme Court on matters of conscience, but at their own legal peril. Public officials do not have this luxury. Almost all public officials, including elected, appointed, and civil service across the country take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution.

Refusing to follow a Supreme Court ruling as a public official, especially when one takes an oath to obey it–and even more so when one is entrusted to enforce the law–is illegal. That alone limits their ability to invoke conscience as an excuse to disobey. Now add to that an additional issue: What if the public official is an attorney?

more
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/cafe/ted-cruz-greg-abbott-should-be-disbarred

July 15, 2015

Jim Webb’s Long War With His Own Party

Jeff Greenfield

The short history of a Democratic presidential hopeful’s decades-long fight with his party’s base about Vietnam.

Jim Webb just may be the most unusual, compelling presidential candidate around: he’s a much-decorated Vietnam combat veteran whose heroics make Hollywood war heroes pale by comparison. In an era of ghost written Tweets, he’s an acclaimed novelist, screenwriter, and journalist. He was Ronald Reagan’s Secretary of the Navy whose early, prescient opposition to the Iraq War brought him back to the Democratic Party—where his views on guns, the environment, southern culture, and affirmative action are not exactly in synch with his party’s base.

But there’s a far more fundamental sense in which Webb stands in startling contrast to the root assumptions of Democrats about an issue that divided (and then shaped) his party for almost half a century: the Vietnam War. What Webb believes about that war, and specifically about those who opposed it, still makes him an apostate, if not a heretic, in the party whose presidential nomination he now seeks.

With the exception of race, no question split the Democratic Party more than Vietnam. In 1968, it helped drive the incumbent Democrat to abandon a re-election fight, and left the convention a shambles. By 1972, anti-war activists had rewritten the nominating rules and got one of their own, George McGovern, as the nominee. This led the more hawkish elements of the party (including organized labor) to withhold support, and, over time, turned neo-conservative Democrats into Republicans.

Jimmy Carter unconditionally pardoned all Vietnam draft evaders and resisters on his first day in office. And the fight at home over the war served as the incubator for the next generation of Democratic leaders. Bill Clinton’s youthful experiences as a protester and with the draft were significant campaign issues. John Kerry came to prominence as a combat veteran who denounced the war at a Senate hearing; those denunciations, in turn, triggered the “Swift Boat” ads that wounded him politically in 2004. For the last several decades, the consensus view among Democrats is that the Vietnam War was a mistake, and that the protests and liberal Congressional opposition helped bring an end to a tragedy.

more
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/07/15/jim-webb-s-long-war-with-his-own-party.html

July 15, 2015

GOP Gives Up on ‘Dump Trump’

Tim Mak

Powerful Republicans have started to accept that Cleveland will be The Donald Show debate, but have their fingers crossed it’s a one time performance.

Republican grief over Donald Trump’s all but assured presence on the debate stage next month seems to be entering it’s final stage: acceptance.

Whether it’s the winery-owning mega donor, or the Koch-backed Hispanic outreach group or the former head of the American Conservative Union, there is a distaste for the abrasive reality television star and businessman.

But although there was preliminary chatter about finding a way to marginalize Trump or keep him off the debate stage in Cleveland, Ohio, the unhappiness with his recent insulting comments about Hispanics has yielded to mere condemnation and an unhappy acquiescence to his presence in the race.

“They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people,” Trump said recently.

John Jordan, the multi-millionaire winery owner and the third largest donor to super PACs in the country in 2013, had originally contemplated gathering signatures to keep Trump off the debate stage.

“Someone in the party ought to start some sort of petition saying, ‘If Trump’s going to be on the stage, I’m not going to be on there with him,’” Jordan told the Associated Press last week. “I’m toying with the idea of it.”


more
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/07/15/gop-gives-up-on-dump-trump.html

July 14, 2015

The next GOP president won’t walk away from the Iran deal. Here’s why.

By Paul Waldman July 14 at 12:27 PM

-snip-

Scott Walker said it “will be remembered as one of America’s worst diplomatic failures.” Jeb Bush called it “dangerous, deeply flawed, and short-sighted.” Marco Rubio said it “undermines our national security.” And as usual, Lindsey Graham wins the award for the most unhinged conclusions: the deal is “akin to declaring war on Sunni Arabs and Israel,” he told Bloomberg News. He also said: “You’ve created a possible death sentence for Israel.” Most of the Republican presidential candidates have pledged in the past not to honor the deal if they reach the White House. But here’s the truth: they will.

So this is one more Obama administration achievement you can add to the list of things that Republicans rage at, insist their presidential candidates pledge to undo, and will one day (if they ever regain the White House) be appalled to find that a president from their party won’t actually be able to roll back.

-snip-

Let’s think for a moment about what it would mean if the next president abandoned this deal. Such an action would involve two parts: reimposing sanctions and walking away from inspections. But there’s no reason to think that the other world powers that agreed to this deal would go along with either one, particularly if the new arrangement is operating as it was intended. Don’t forget that this isn’t a deal between Iran and the United States, it’s a deal between Iran, the United States, Russia, China, and Europe. The reason the current sanctions regime has crippled the Iran’s economy is that it was imposed not just by the United States but also by the United Nations, the European Union, and many other individual countries. So if we reimposed sanctions but those other countries didn’t, Iran would be left with plenty of trading partners.

That means that if President Walker/Bush/Rubio/Trump walked away from the deal, it wouldn’t actually hurt Iran that much. But it would mean saying that America is no longer interested in keeping tabs on Iran’s nuclear program — we’re going to pull out our inspectors, and as far as we’re concerned they can do what they like.

That’s a plan so stupid that it’s hard to imagine even the current GOP presidential candidates carrying it out.

For now, there are two questions that every Republican who opposes this deal must be asked: First, what’s your alternative? And second, can you explain exactly how your alternative would prevent Iran from pursuing a nuclear weapon? Policy choices don’t exist in a vacuum. Whenever we say that one course of action is problematic, we’re saying that another course would be better. As far as I can tell (though it isn’t easy to figure out since they’re so vague on this question), the Republican position is that we should have walked away from these negotiations and just…wait. Then after some undetermined period, Iran would come crawling back and give us everything we could ever want, without the need for any negotiations at all.

more
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/07/14/the-next-gop-president-wont-walk-away-from-the-iran-deal-heres-why/?

July 14, 2015

Scott Walker: The Boy Scouts' Ban On Gay Troop Leaders ‘Protected Children’

Presidential candidate and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) said on Tuesday that the longstanding ban on gay troop leaders by the Boy Scouts of America had “protected children.”

The Boy Scouts decided on Monday to end that ban, and Walker, an Eagle Scout, responded with a statement to the Independent Journal Review.

From Walker's statement:

I have had a lifelong commitment to the Scouts and support the previous membership policy because it protected children and advanced Scout values

.

Walker has referred to his service as an Eagle Scout in campaign speeches. In March, he even suggested to an audience at the Chamber of Commerce in Phoenix that this experience had prepared him to be commander-in-chief. Walker’s wife, Tonette, also served as a den mother for the organization.

more
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/scott-walker-ban-gay-scout-leaders

July 14, 2015

Netanyahu says Israel not bound by Iran deal as he hints at military strike

Source: AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Tuesday after world powers reached a historic nuclear deal with Iran that Israel was not bound by it and signalled he remained ready to order military action.

Netanyahu’s harsh criticism of the agreement came after he warned for months that the deal being negotiated would not prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

While analysts say unilateral military action by Israel seems unlikely for now, Netanyahu and other officials have kept the option on the table.

“Israel is not bound by this deal with Iran, and Israel is not bound by this deal with Iran because Iran continues to seek our destruction,” Netanyahu told reporters before a meeting of his security cabinet. “We will always defend ourselves.”

-snip-

Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/2015/07/netanyahu-says-israel-not-bound-by-iran-deal-as-he-hints-at-military-strike/

July 14, 2015

‘Spouses matter': Rick Santorum warns voters Scott Walker’s wife may make him soft on gays

Tap dancing around Ronald Reagan’s “11th Amendment” — “Thou shalt not speak ill of any Republican” — prospective 2016 GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum became the second Republican candidate to criticize a rival’s wife.

According to Politico, the presidential candidate took a veiled swipe at Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s wife, saying her approval of same-sex marriage could influence her husband’s policies.

“Spouses matter,” Santorum said in an interview Monday. “When your spouse is not in-sync with you — particularly on cultural issues, moral issues — [you] tend not to be as active on those issues.”

In a recent interview with the Washington Post, Walker’s wife, Tonette along with the couple’s two sons, said she was not pleased with her husband’s disapproval of same-sex marriage

-snip-

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/07/spouses-matter-rick-santorum-warns-voters-scott-walkers-wife-may-make-him-soft-on-gays/

July 14, 2015

House Speaker John Boehner: We will do everything we can to destroy historic nuclear deal with Iran

Source: AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE

Top US Republicans expressed skepticism about a historic nuclear deal reached Tuesday with Iran, saying it gives Tehran too much room to maneuver and does not safeguard American security interests.

Some in Congress have already said they are prepared to reject the deal because it does not comprehensively halt Tehran’s enrichment process or permanently close the door on its development of a nuclear weapon.

House Speaker John Boehner blasted the deal as “unacceptable,” saying that if it is “as bad a deal as I think it is at this moment, we’ll do everything we can to stop it.”

He warned it would only “embolden” Iran and even could trigger a global nuclear arms race.

-snip-

Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/2015/07/house-speaker-john-boehner-we-do-everything-we-can-to-destroy-historic-nuclear-deal-with-iran/

July 14, 2015

Maine Attorney General Agrees That Gov. LePage Massively Botched Vetos

epublican Maine Gov. Paul LePage's efforts to stop a batch of bills he intended to veto from becoming law were dealt another blow late last week when Maine Attorney General Janet Mills (D) released a letter siding with Democratic lawmakers who say the governor missed his deadline to veto the legislation.

Under the Democrats' and Mills' reading of the Maine constitution, since LePage did not return the 19 bills passed last month in the 10-day period he had to veto them, they have already become law. Since the Bangor Daily News reported on the lapse last week, LePage has dug in and insisted he could return the bills when the legislature reconvenes this week.

Another 51 bills are set to become law, the Portland Press Herald reported, as LePage refused to act on them by the 10-day deadline that expired Saturday at midnight.

At issue in the dispute is whether lawmakers took the formal adjournment that would have allowed LePage to return the vetoed bills whenever the legislature reconvened again for three or more days. Lawmakers say the break they took last month was not that kind of an adjournment -- known as an adjournment sine die -- as they had plans to return in mid-July to consider any outstanding legislation. In Friday's letter, Mills agreed.

more
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/maine-attorney-general-veto-lepage

July 14, 2015

Not bad for a ‘lame duck’

By Steve Benen

November 2014 sure does seem like a long time ago, but that’s when much of the Beltway media decided Barack Obama’s presidency was effectively over. Republicans had just completed a very successful election cycle and Obama, defeated, was supposed to be relegated to irrelevance.

After all, we’ve seen the script for “lame duck” presidents, and it tends to be … dull. Obama, down in the polls, couldn’t credibly expect to do anything meaningful in his remaining time in office – not after suffering an ugly electoral rebuke – and the establishment agreed that it was time for the president to accept that ascendant Republicans would start calling the shots.

So much for that idea.

I came across the transcript recently of the president’s year-end press conference from December and this line stood out for me:

“My presidency is entering the fourth quarter; interesting stuff happens in the fourth quarter. And I’m looking forward to it.”

He apparently wasn’t kidding. Have you noticed just how busy the president has been since the 2014 elections ostensibly ended his time in office?

more
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/not-bad-lame-duck?cid=eml_mra_20150714