Biden issues pre-emptive pardons in final hours for Anthony Fauci, Liz Cheney, Milley and others

WyattEarp

Well-known member
May 17, 2017
7,675
2,312
113
They actually lost - marginally - due to resentment against massive inflation in the last couple of years in the US.

But anyway. His Executive Order banning birthright citizenship is clearly contradicted by the 14th Amendment. It's about as valid as me declaring my left ball Lord-Emperor of Mississauga.

So yep. It's going to be opposed. Because the law is - after all - the law. Just like Trump can't one day say that he can kill people and not face a murder charge.
You know as well as anyone the 14th amendment was written specifically to guarantee citizenship for African-Americans born into slavery.

You also know the Courts will make the decision. That's not unusual for Executive Orders.
 

WyattEarp

Well-known member
May 17, 2017
7,675
2,312
113

K Douglas

Half Man Half Amazing
Jan 5, 2005
27,741
8,504
113
Room 112
Yes his party did his dirty work. Remember Whitewater, and Hilary testifying for 11 hours on Benghazi, Trump attacking McCabe and those other FBI , firing Comey and bragging to the Russians about it. And Hunter Biden, who if he was an ordinary bloke would not have been through the gauntlet.
Hunter Biden would be in prison right now if if weren't for his name. Joe would be too. Corrupt to the bone. Hillary should have gone to prison as well. What happened in Benghazi was an abomination. You clearly watched too much CNN and MSDNC.
 

WyattEarp

Well-known member
May 17, 2017
7,675
2,312
113
Please, Earp. It's in clear English.

They did nothing wrong. So they need not take the 5th. There you go.
They have fuck all to take the fifth about anyway.
I thought your initial post was a bit incoherent. I pulled out the words "take the fifth......anyway". I was initially being polite.

Back to the point, I don't think you can declare the Fifth to protect somebody else. If you are not subject to legal jeopardy, I'm also not sure you can just refuse to answer.
 

mandrill

Well-known member
Aug 23, 2001
77,756
93,805
113
Hunter Biden would be in prison right now if if weren't for his name. Joe would be too. Corrupt to the bone. Hillary should have gone to prison as well. What happened in Benghazi was an abomination. You clearly watched too much CNN and MSDNC.
Hunter maybe.

But why Joe?.... Just idly curious...
 

mandrill

Well-known member
Aug 23, 2001
77,756
93,805
113
You know as well as anyone the 14th amendment was written specifically to guarantee citizenship for African-Americans born into slavery.

You also know the Courts will make the decision. That's not unusual for Executive Orders.
Courts already made the decision over 100 years ago, Earp.

That's why everyone in the last century has interpreted the 14A the way I just did.

I guess the USSC didn't get the same memo you did. Oddly.
 

kherg007

Well-known member
May 3, 2014
9,280
7,524
113
Hunter Biden would be in prison right now if if weren't for his name. Joe would be too. Corrupt to the bone. Hillary should have gone to prison as well. What happened in Benghazi was an abomination. You clearly watched too much CNN and MSDNC.
Don't look at what you hear from pundits on TV. Look at what people say under oath.
Not one whit of testimony on this supposed corruption of Biden, EXCEPT by what we now know is a russian agent who was charged for lying under oath when making up stories about the Bidens.
Jared walks away with $2b, Mnuchen $1b, Ivanka getting trademarks whilst a government advisor, trying to overturn an election, stealing documents, having foriegners stay at your properties, billing the governmentyour top rates for secret service...that's corruption.
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
29,760
7,706
113
Hunter Biden would be in prison right now if if weren't for his name. Joe would be too. Corrupt to the bone. Hillary should have gone to prison as well. What happened in Benghazi was an abomination. You clearly watched too much CNN and MSDNC.
If the Court Cases were not delayed by the Supreme Court over these past 4 years, no doubt that the only one heading into prison would be Trump himself!!
 

mandrill

Well-known member
Aug 23, 2001
77,756
93,805
113
I thought your initial post was a bit incoherent. I pulled out the words "take the fifth......anyway". I was initially being polite.
Good. You got it on your second try.

Many wouldn't. Mitch, Orry, Jimi. Several others on this board.

Back to the point, I don't think you can declare the Fifth to protect somebody else. If you are not subject to legal jeopardy, I'm also not sure you can just refuse to answer.
Yes, I know.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: mitchell76

WyattEarp

Well-known member
May 17, 2017
7,675
2,312
113
If the Court Cases were not delayed by the Supreme Court over these past 4 years, no doubt that the only one heading into prison would be Trump himself!!
I think that no matter the result of any of the cases, there would be no prison sentences.
 

WyattEarp

Well-known member
May 17, 2017
7,675
2,312
113
Jared walks away with $2b, Mnuchen $1b, Ivanka getting trademarks whilst a government advisor, trying to overturn an election, stealing documents, having foriegners stay at your properties, billing the governmentyour top rates for secret service...that's corruption.
It's not exactly corruption. You have to prove there was some minimal amount of quid pro quo. You can't just say Trump was/is a friend of Israel.

kherg, leave the silly Ivanka trademarks in China to weak-minded members. Do you really want to make a case that Trump is a friend of China?
 
  • Like
Reactions: mitchell76

WyattEarp

Well-known member
May 17, 2017
7,675
2,312
113
The case about keeping secret documents in his shitter?

Or the one about his sad attempted putsch to overthrow the government?
Yep, no prison sentence.
 

mandrill

Well-known member
Aug 23, 2001
77,756
93,805
113
I just want to say we are all very lucky to have an esteemed U.S. Constitutional legal expert such as yourself on the forum.
Children born to foreign nationals

The Fourteenth Amendment provides that children born in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction become American citizens at birth. The principal framer John Armor Bingham said during the 39th United States Congress two years before its passing:[41]


I find no fault with the introductory clause, which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural-born citizen; but, sir, I may be allowed to say further that I deny that the Congress of the United States ever had the power, or color of power to say that any man born within the jurisdiction of the United States, not owing a foreign allegiance, is not and shall not be a citizen of the United States. [emphasis added]
At the time of the amendment's passage, President Andrew Johnson and three senators, including Trumbull, the author of the Civil Rights Act, asserted that both the Civil Rights Act[42][43] and the Fourteenth Amendment would confer citizenship to children born to foreign nationals in the United States.[44][45] Senator Edgar Cowan of Pennsylvania had a decidedly different opinion.[46] Some scholars dispute whether the Citizenship Clause should apply to the children of unauthorized immigrants today, as "the problem ... did not exist at the time".[47] In the 21st century, Congress has occasionally discussed passing a statute or a constitutional amendment to reduce the practice of "birth tourism", in which a foreign national gives birth in the United States to gain the child's citizenship.[48]

The clause's meaning with regard to a child of immigrants was tested in United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898).[49] The Supreme Court held that under the Fourteenth Amendment, a man born within the United States to Chinese citizens who have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States and are carrying out business in the United States—and whose parents were not employed in a diplomatic or other official capacity by a foreign power—was a citizen of the United States. Subsequent decisions have applied the principle to the children of foreign nationals of non-Chinese descent.[50]

According to the Foreign Affairs Manual, which is published by the State Department, "Despite widespread popular belief, U.S. military installations abroad and U.S. diplomatic or consular facilities abroad are not part of the United States within the meaning of the [Fourteenth] Amendment."[51]


It's a fucking wiki article, Earp.

If you think you can pretend shit doesn't exist simply by being snide, Wiki exists to confound you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Valcazar

mandrill

Well-known member
Aug 23, 2001
77,756
93,805
113
It's not exactly corruption. You have to prove there was some minimal amount of quid pro quo. You can't just say Trump was/is a friend of Israel.

kherg, leave the silly Ivanka trademarks in China to weak-minded members. Do you really want to make a case that Trump is a friend of China?
How about Tiktok?

He's certainly friend-ish, isn't he?

What caused that sudden change?
 
Toronto Escorts