TSA ignore me. Or maybe is me disappeared.
Just watch CNN and you will.you can not and will not find a cons utional expert correctly refuting Dershowitz
Fact
BTW, Dershowitz is the same guy who went on television and said Trump's travel ban was cons utional.
How did the judges react to that and continue to view it as again?
We'll accept your retraction and apology for promoting fake news whenever you're ready.
Factjust watch CNN
You make this too easy dunce. For once in your life try and back a re ed claim you throw out
I'll retract when you answer the question you dodged.
Was the January dinner story in the memos yes or no?
You make this too easy dunce. For once in your life try and back a re ed claim you throw out
What a weak ass response. You have to do better than that, cuck.
Answer my question next time.
Here are some videos if you care to watch or have the time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVfS5NvXmNw
There is more but I believe I have made my point.
Were the memos ever discussed in the article yes or no?
I pretty much ignore Jeffrey Toobin.
No . He's way out of your safe space.I pretty much ignore Jeffrey Toobin.
What was the gist of your three videos?
dershowitz is one of the more respected legal minds in the country. that doesn't mean he's immune from criticism or mistake. supreme court justices are typically among the most respected legal minds... until they start having opinions that have political ramifications.
nobody will doubt that scalia was a an on the bench, but people disagree with his interpretations all the time.
erwin chemerinsky is one of the more notable cons utional law scholars around, too. he's the author of the most frequently used con-law casebook used in law schools, but he called trump's travel ban illegal, something i'm sure many of you have argued against
its pretty foolish to hold up on respected scholar as a definitive source. people have been arguing cons utional issues for centuries
i dont think obstruction of justice and the cons utional authority to fire the FBI director are mutually exclusive. richard nixon had the authority to fire his attorney general, but look at what happened with the saturday night massacre... (also
TSA said I couldn't find a cons utional expert who could refute Dershowitz correctly. I just did.
Just because he's respected and has accolades doesn't mean he's not wrong at times. You're specially vulnerable when you take a political stance that leans heavily on one direction. And he does shw some heavy Trump bias.
I would think the president's power to shut down an investigation would not apply, if POTUS was the subject of the investigation. Clearly, that wasn't the case.
dershowitz is a liberal, reck... except for views relating to israel
What does that mean -- he shows some heavy "Trump bias"? Does that mean he's not saying what you want him to?
I thought so too. He may as well be. But in the case of Trump he's all in.
No it means, in order to defend him, he's going against his own interest which is interpret the law as it should be without the bias.
no, it just means he disagrees on this point and isn't a partisan shill that agrees or disagrees with a cons utional view because of the sitting president's party
He's "all in"? Really?
??? You're going down a weird rabbit hole.
Yet he's shilling for Trump.
He said Trump travel ban wasn't uncos utional. Has defended him with the Flynn issue, and now he's all over Comey.
That forms a trend despite whether he's right or wrong. He's not particularly leaning right. Just defending Trump on all these issues.
Your point was you would post a dozen articles yet you ended up posting 3 CNN YouTube videosWhat a weak ass response. You have to do better than that, cuck.
Answer my question next time.
Here are some videos if you care to watch or have the time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVfS5NvXmNw
There is more but I believe I have made my point.
I said I'd retract if answered my question. Go.
I get it now. Shilling for Trump means having legal opinions that don't negatively affect Trump.
I ask again but nervous about character broken.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
