Murder an American woman in San Francisco: time served

#3 is not unconstitutional Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

A violation of due process and equal protection are:

"unConstitutional" AND "illegal"!

I just posted a link.

And do yourself a favor ... stick to his original statement!

In other words ... don't pull a WTF and morph the conversation!

https://www.opm.gov/about-us/

One cannot be terminated on political affiliation alone, and that has been discussed periodically over the past few months as revelations about Agents have surfaced. Their ACTIONS based on the political affiliation as it relates to their responsibilities may be the basis for termination, but not their personal beliefs and loyalties that do not interfere with their duties and responsibilities.

Historically in the jurisprudence of this Country we do not prosecute people, civilly or criminally, on what WE BELIEVE they are "thinking" but have required some ACTION to demonstrate a propensity or proclivity to implement the thoughts!

IMO that is what has been going on for over 17 years, and it is wrecking our society. And it doesn't matter "who is in charge"! The "Republicans" should not engage in it any more than the Democrats (or Conservatives vs. Liberals). If you want to see what the result is:

IMO that is what has been going on for over 17 years, and it is wrecking our society. And it doesn't matter "who is in charge"! The "Republicans" should not engage in it any more than the Democrats (or Conservatives vs. Liberals). If you want to see what the result is:
Originally Posted by LexusLover

Gerrymandering seems to have really been a huge cause of this hyper divide.




.

Gerrymandering seems to have really been a huge cause of this hyper divide.




. Originally Posted by WTF

Not unless "Gerrymandering" is an synonym for stupidity.

"Gerrymandering" caused this ...?



or this ...

Not unless "Gerrymandering" is an synonym for stupidity.

"Gerrymandering" caused this ...?



or this ...
Originally Posted by LexusLover

You're tight....gerrymandering does not cause ignorance, it does seem to give it a political voice though.

Next it appears this 'ignorance' has been going on for more than 17 years...

^^^ ONLY between YOUR EARS!

^^^ ONLY between YOUR EARS! Originally Posted by LexusLover

Oh wow, you're not part of the problem. . .


.

You'd be the one-legged, goose-stepping jackass, Andy the Little Nazi Boy. Sanchez shouldn't have been in this country to pull that fucking trigger, you ignorant fucking jackass. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Are you fucking kidding me? That dipshit father mishandled his firearm right in front of his own toddlers, and that recklessness on his part directly led to the tragic shooting death of one of his little girls. But that's not all since he did it at the front porch of the apartment he was residing, he also was endangering the public at large. So other than being an illegal alien, Sanchez didn't act any differently than what some other "ordinary" Americans had done and got away with.

So unless and until you tell the truth on why you keep condoning the "accidental" killings by white perpetrators but not others, I'll keep shoving the cold hard facts up your arse, Little Hans.


http://power965.com/news/local-news/...awrence-county

So unless and until you tell the truth on why you keep condoning the "accidental" killings ..... ] Originally Posted by andymarksman

A "guilty" on the murder conviction might have helped the "wrong death" action against the City, et al, but not so much now with a "not guilty" on the death.

BTW: Did I hear/see correctly that the weapon had belonged to a police officer?

Why do you feel he wouldn't have a leg to stand on, if he doesn't DEMAND justice for what was (By the cops own words) an accident??? Originally Posted by garhkal

That little girl deserves a jury just like Kate Steinle did. But unlike you I won't be bitching and moaning about the verdict, one way or the other.

LL is one of the few not bitching about the jury verdict.



.

A violation of due process and equal protection are:

"unConstitutional" AND "illegal"!

I just posted a link.

And do yourself a favor ... stick to his original statement!

In other words ... don't pull a WTF and morph the conversation!

https://www.opm.gov/about-us/

One cannot be terminated on political affiliation alone, and that has been discussed periodically over the past few months as revelations about Agents have surfaced. Their ACTIONS based on the political affiliation as it relates to their responsibilities may be the basis for termination, but not their personal beliefs and loyalties that do not interfere with their duties and responsibilities. Originally Posted by LexusLover

there is nothing in the constitution that prohibits a president from firing employees.

Abraham Lincoln fired 1100 employees when he became president. If he can do that, so can Donald Trump. every other president before or after him can do it when he/she finds it prudent to do so. He/she doesn't need a reason.

what you speak of is the merit based law, federal managers can't just fire employees unilaterally. they have follow to procedure to justify firing an employee.

there is nothing in the constitution that prohibits a president from firing employees.

Abraham Lincoln fired 1100 employees when he became president. If he can do that, so can Donald Trump. every other president before or after him can do it when he/she finds it prudent to do so. He/she doesn't need a reason.

what you speak of is the merit based law, federal managers can't just fire employees unilaterally. they have follow to procedure to justify firing an employee. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

I don't really care what Lincoln did about firing people.

#1: Nothing in the Constitution says the President can't grab you and throw your ass in jail for the rest of your life, either! That doesn't mean he can do it!

#2: You apparently have forgotten (either intentionally to make your argument or you were never taught) The Constitution describes the powers GIVEN BY THE PEOPLE TO THE PRESIDENT and IF ITS NOT IN THE CONSTITUTION (or a Federal Statute authorizing THE PRESIDENT TO DO IT) then HE CAN'T! (WHETHER HIS NAME IS OBAMA OR TRUMP!). It's not the other way around, like you just posted.

The Due Process clause says he can't just SUMMARILY fire someone THAT HE DIDN'T HIRE (OR APPOINT)! (And it doesn't say those exact words, of course, by that is the case law application of the principles of "due process" as applied to government employees. My recollection there is one person in the DOJ he "appointed" or "hired"! That's Sessions. If you know others then please list.

No... "what I speak of" ... are the Federal statutes and regulations that set forth the requirements of discharging someone who is a Federal employee for cause or whim! They are NOT AT WILL EMPLOYEES either in the FBI or the rank and file attorneys and staff members in the DOJ.

I thought you didn't like Obaminable pretending to be "God" (or Allah)! Apparently it was just his skin color or his political affiliation. If you have some other reason for disparate treatment, please advise.

I don't really care what Lincoln did about firing people.

#1: Nothing in the Constitution says the President can't grab you and throw your ass in jail for the rest of your life, either! That doesn't mean he can do it!

#2: You apparently have forgotten (either intentionally to make your argument or you were never taught) The Constitution describes the powers GIVEN BY THE PEOPLE TO THE PRESIDENT and IF ITS NOT IN THE CONSTITUTION (or a Federal Statute authorizing THE PRESIDENT TO DO IT) then HE CAN'T! (WHETHER HIS NAME IS OBAMA OR TRUMP!). It's not the other way around, like you just posted.

The Due Process clause says he can't just SUMMARILY fire someone THAT HE DIDN'T HIRE (OR APPOINT)! (And it doesn't say those exact words, of course, by that is the case law application of the principles of "due process" as applied to government employees. My recollection there is one person in the DOJ he "appointed" or "hired"! That's Sessions. If you know others then please list.

No... "what I speak of" ... are the Federal statutes and regulations that set forth the requirements of discharging someone who is a Federal employee for cause or whim! They are NOT AT WILL EMPLOYEES either in the FBI or the rank and file attorneys and staff members in the DOJ. Originally Posted by LexusLover

well, he can't fire appointed employees? Trump fired a whole bunch of Obama appointed employees. so you're saying he can't fire them?

what Lincoln did is relevant. you might disagree with what he did. He did it nonetheless.

I thought you didn't like Obaminable pretending to be "God" (or Allah)! Apparently it was just his skin color or his political affiliation. If you have some other reason for disparate treatment, please advise.

you make it sound like I gave Obama an exception rule. that is not the case. this includes him any other president before or after Obama. Had Obama fired employees, it his right to do so just as Lincoln did.

You might have a stronger case if there was an actual court case ruling that the president couldn't fire people.

SESSIONS?

1. Arresting city mayors. (I'll just start with the following!)

Quote:
Broad Range of Authority

The Marshals were given extensive authority to support the federal courts within their judicial districts and to carry out all lawful orders issued by judges, Congress, or the president.
https://www.usmarshals.gov/history/broad_range.htm Originally Posted by LexusLover

And what did you post that shows that sending in marshals would be breaking the law/unconstitutional??

2. Cutting off Congressionally approved local funding.

There is in place a nationwide order prohibiting such action.

https://thinkprogress.org/sanctuary-...-d8a5ebe03d89/

If you need me to find the actual order I will. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Gee, an obama appointed judge telling trump he can't do something.. GO FIGURE...

3. Summarily firing Federal employees.

Federal employees have "due process" and "equal protection" rights just like everyone else, except in some instances (most in fact) they have more "rights" than everyone else for the reason you desire for them to be terminated.

https://www.mspb.org/Federal-employe...rocedures.html Originally Posted by LexusLover

Didn't clinton and obama also do purges of prior appointees put in by reagan and bush?? SO WHY WERE THEY OK, but trump wanting to do the same, is some how unconstitutional?
For someone who at times makes it sound like you are conservative, you certainly seem to be beinging over backward to cover for obama's leeches..

[QUOTE=garhkal;1060363523
For someone who at times makes it sound like you are conservative, you certainly seem to be beinging over backward to cover for obama's leeches..[/QUOTE]

lexuslover says he's a democrat.