Rule of Law or Just Rule?

Everything the political left does, breaks or violates the laws.

They don't enforce laws against their own party, but swiftly hammer down law on any one who doesn't stand with them.

Honestly, who wants to stand with such obvious losers?

They cheat and steal, all the while accusing others of doing the same. Well, if the right did half of what the left does, how much worse would things be?

On the other hand, if the leftist commie sympathizers, want to be treated the way they treat others, perhaps it's time to oblige them.

Laws must be enforced, not just ones they want to.
People think they want some thing they already have, equal rights. American people have all, had equal rights for damn near a century. It's not an ongoing thing. Identity politics, has convinced an ignorant younger generation otherwise.

It's a whole bunch of smoke and mirrors hiding BS.

Fools have convinced the people otherwise, evil fools...

The left in America -- ya know, the folks who say everybody that disagrees with them is a "threat" -- does not believe in the rule of law.

There are so many questions that remain unanswered.

However, the topic of this missive focuses on the 93-page decision issued on Monday by US District Judge Aileen Cannon. She ruled that the DoJ-appointed special counsel, Jack Smith, was unconstitutional based upon the Appointments Clause of the US Constitution. Notice I did not use the Biden reference of a bullseye. Needless to say, the progressive socialist left is in an apoplectic meltdown.

Just to inform you, our astute readers, the Appointments Clause is found in Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution. It reads:

“He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.”

The “he” refers to the President of the United States since Article II of the Constitution enumerates the powers granted to the Executive Branch. The bottom line is that as part of our system of checks and balances, the Congress, namely here, the US Senate, has a role in these appointments. As well, Judge Cannon ruled that Smith’s elevation violated proper appropriations since the American taxpayer was footing the bill for his “lawfare.” There had been no lawful appropriation of such; this is a sound constitutional ruling, but that means nothing to the left.

The left in America, ya know, the folks who say everybody that disagrees with them is a threat, does not believe in the rule of law. They only want rule and will achieve such by judicial activism. When a court gives them what they want, it’s hoorah. When a court constitutionally denies them what they want, then it is all about stacking the SCOTUS or viciously attacking a jurist. Let us not forget the assassination plot against Justice Kavanaugh. And I am quite sure there are plenty of threats being levied against Judge Cannon, the least of which is demanding her removal from the bench.

Click this link to read more;

a reply to: ADVISOR

The "rule" part reminds me of everyday experience in Europe. Bureaucrats make the rules and enforce them arbitrarily. When most people are in control of themselves, it all sort of functions. But the "in control" part is gradually slipping, and I don't expect the future rule-making to be enlightened.

Cheers

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2

That is a major part of the problem here in the USofA.

Too many people in politics, creating more unnecessary laws, while not enforcing the ones already on the books.

We the People didn't vote for autocracy...

We need real common sense.

Second major problem is, activist judges.
That should be an automatic disbarment.

We don't need opinions from deranged political appointees.

We need the Law of the Constitution, enforced, unabridged.

Without a doubt vote them all out, and drain that swamp!

I for one, am proud to be an American, I am proud to be a white conservative Christian male, and a Nationalist.

I will never capitulate to the globalist one world government, aka NWO. I stand against everything they stand for. Sue me.

Pride however doesn't dictate my life choices, like some people. Remember it was pride, that brought down the most glorious Angel.

The world needs Jesus.

More than it realizes.

a reply to: ADVISOR
FFS. JESUS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE GOVERNMENT. It seems the left and right are both deranged.

a reply to: Cracka

Do you need an exorcist or a reminder?

I didn't say government, I said THE WORLD NEEDS JESUS!

DON'T LIKE IT DON'T READ IT.

However if God wasn't taken out of Congress and Schools, I bet half the evil BS we see today, would not exist.

If GOD was in the government employees hearts, they wouldn't have room for evil intentions.

IF GOD WAS IN YOUR HEART, through JESUS I bet you wouldn't be so triggered.

I'll pray to GOD for you, that JESUS saves your soul... before it is lost for eternity.

🙏



God willing, government will be reigned in.

IN GOD WE TRUST

a reply to: ADVISOR
The world needs faith and spirituality, and Jesus alone is not the answer because the stories of Sumer brought over by Abraham are only one chapter of the human spiritual journey. Many of Jesus's teachings are more ancient than he was at the time, and the humans before him also had enlightenment in other parts of the world. Their spiritual accomplishments and teachings should not be diminished, and would not be diminished by a true spiritualist.

Jesus alone is not the way forward for four fifths of the humans on planet Earth. if the mindset is all those other billions of people are just lost souls who need to find Jesus, we are worlds apart from ever coming together as a unified human race. Jesus as the sole basis of everything may work for some humans, other humans have different beliefs and they should not be treated as idiotic, completely wrong, or as the enemy for having such views. I thought our Bill of Rights protected all spiritual beliefs, so long as they do not hold the rape of children and live sacrifices as a core belief, or other nutty crimes.

a reply to: ADVISOR

The “he” refers to the President of the United States since Article II of the Constitution enumerates the powers granted to the Executive Branch.

So, Cannon is saying that only POTUS can appoint Special Prosecutors and Investigators?

Everything the political left does, breaks or violates the laws.

Who appointed Fiske and Starr to investigate and prosecute Bill Clinton, at the request of Republican Congressmen? Who appointed Weiss special counsel to do a criminal investigation into Hunter Biden? Robert Hur?

I predict that Cannon's ruling will be overturned by the Circuit Court.

originally posted by: worldstarcountry
a reply to: ADVISOR
The world needs faith and spirituality, and Jesus alone is not the answer because the stories of Sumer brought over by Abraham are only one chapter of the human spiritual journey. Many of Jesus's teachings are more ancient than he was at the time, and the humans before him also had enlightenment in other parts of the world. Their spiritual accomplishments and teachings should not be diminished, and would not be diminished by a true spiritualist.

Jesus alone is not the way forward for four fifths of the humans on planet Earth. if the mindset is all those other billions of people are just lost souls who need to find Jesus, we are worlds apart from ever coming together as a unified human race. Jesus as the sole basis of everything may work for some humans, other humans have different beliefs and they should not be treated as idiotic, completely wrong, or as the enemy for having such views. I thought our Bill of Rights protected all spiritual beliefs, so long as they do not hold the rape of children and live sacrifices as a core belief, or other nutty crimes.

I can accept that.

Point was trying to make is, if more people had kind and loving intentions in general for everyone, rather than the opposite, we would all be better off.

Truth and love, and all else fall in place.

🍻

a reply to: ADVISOR

The US is far from an autocracy... but the way things are going it sure does seem like people ARE voting for one.

a reply to: ADVISOR

yea, we are one the same page for sure. There is a real power in our prayer and meditation that comes from tapping into the energy we have within. the key to unlocking that power I believe is in continued spiritual development. Collectively, and for whatever reason we as humans have forgotten something, or it may have been taken away from us by some other force, but we have forgotten about a power we have within us. I believe we are in an age where the awareness of that forgotten memory is rising up like a phoenix.

There is even a thread somewhere in this forum that talked about the age of aquarius (or virgo?) but how it was an air symbol and how the emergence of the internet and the flow of information and wireless energy was leading to some kind of consciousness awakening. Man I wish I knew what that thread was, but it had something to do with a constellation possibly Virgo and it was in the title and it was about it being an air symbol and was trying to draw a parallel that the free flow of information and wireless signals and energy are likened to that air symbol somehow.

I think the point being made just off memory is that we were entering a new age of human awareness/consciousness . And based on how people are being red pilled across the spectrum since that OP, I think thread author hit the nail on the head.

Wish I could find it, it is a great supporting reference that thread.
I think it was more Aquarius than Virgo as it is the air symbol, and the author IIRC mentioned how the symbol looks more like wireless signals than water.

a reply to: worldstarcountry

ape of children and live sacrifices as a core belief

Sacrificing a little foreskin taken without consent never hurts...

originally posted by: Cracka
a reply to: ADVISOR
FFS. JESUS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE GOVERNMENT. It seems the left and right are both deranged.

Whatabout Rome?
and Julius Caesar?
💥

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Mostly has to do with
Senate Confirmation.
💡

a reply to: ADVISOR

I only going to say this, right now the judicial system is owned by the democrats, this started with Obama, before Obama it was owned by republicans, but I do not remember republicans trying to destroy the constitution or the supreme court as blatant as democrats are doing right now.

Yes I was opposed to the Patriot Act and many other laws passed that undermine some constitutional powers, under republicans, but they were passed by congress not by executive decisions.

Our entire judicial system has been eroded, only keeping the democrats out of power for the time bean will bring back some balances.

But now biden and democrats are at it trying to get another shot at the supreme court powers.

a reply to: xuenchen

The Senate didn't confirm any of those examples of appointed Special Prosecutors and Investigators

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: xuenchen

The Senate didn't confirm any of those examples of appointed Special Prosecutors and Investigators

I believe they were Senate confirmed, but for different appointments. The idea people are implying is: Once confirmed within The DOJ, You are confirmed for anything within The DOJ. There may even be precedent. 😀 Keep in mind it's all about legal precedent, not assumptive unconstitutional wishful want lists.

a reply to: xuenchen

I believe they were Senate confirmed, but for different appointments.

They weren't confirmed as special prosecutors or special investigators by Congress.

The idea people are implying is: Once confirmed within The DOJ, You are confirmed for anything within The DOJ.

Who's idea? Ailene Cannon's? Not the Constitution's.

Keep in mind it's all about legal precedent, not assumptive unconstitutional wishful want lists.

Exactly! Ailene Cannon just threw out over 100 years of precedent.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

I don't know anything. I haven't read the ruling yet. I was responding to the specific implication about Senate Confirmation and what some people think it applies to with J.Smith (not being confirmed by The Senate for anything?).

Can you quote the parts from Cannon's Ruling that is going to get appealed for the strongest ?

There might be precedent for both sides with this!

If The Cannon "toss" gets overturned, it goes to SCOTUS anyway. 😃

a reply to: xuenchen

Can you quote the parts from Cannon's Ruling that is going to get appealed for the strongest ?

No. But I can show you this citation.

§ 600.1 Grounds for appointing a Special Counsel.

The Attorney General, or in cases in which the Attorney General is recused, the Acting Attorney General, will appoint a Special Counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted and—

(a) That investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney's Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances; and

(b) That under the circumstances, it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter.

www.ecfr.gov...
********PRECENENT********

Again, if Jack Smith's appoint was illegal, so were all the others.

Lot of things going on here.

First: this issue with Judge Cannon tossing out the Trump document case, well here's a video by a lawyer that explains it.


Secondly: This issue of religion being needed in the world, well yes and no. What is really needed is people to grow the "F" up and understand that it is their responsibility to accept the consequences of their actions, both good and bad. Religion does provide a good ground bases for this understanding but so are many personal philosophies.

What has happened is that over time, without going into who's to blame for this, is that people have been empowered to believe in themselves, but the understanding of the consequences of doing this in a negative way was never re-enforced.

As to the main issue brought up in the OP, I don't think the non-extremist needs to step over any red lines of good conduct, but it might be worth looking into exploiting the rules and mores that the extremist has spent decades creating in order to establish an environment where all people can believe in themselves and feel safe while not disrupting the order of society in the process.

The LGBT+ people need to take heed in what Gore Vidal stated in an interview, "There no homosexual people, only homosexual acts." This same notion goes for people wanting to wear the clothing of the opposite gender, or those people who think they are the wrong gender. People should be allowed and permitted to be themselves as long as it doesn't affect the community and social order of those around them. As soon as that happens, then they should be corrected by asking them to leave or behavior within the common style of the people around them.

This current idea of allowing people to attack with little or even no repercussions is in opposite of good social order and creates poor communities.