|
|
Post by stiffy1957 on Nov 7, 2024 10:53:55 GMT -6
He was in darelect of duty last term he was in office. No reason to think he will protect it this time. The oath of presiden says: constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S1-C8-1/ALDE_00001126/Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:–I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. What is the time relationship between a President’s assumption of office and his taking the oath? Apparently, the former comes first, this answer appearing to be the assumption of the language of the clause. The Second Congress assumed that President George Washington took office on March 4, 1789,1 although he did not take the oath until the following April 30. That the oath the President is required to take might be considered to add anything to the powers of the President, because of his obligation to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, might appear to be rather a fanciful idea. But in President Andrew Jackson’s message announcing his veto of the act renewing the Bank of the United States there is language which suggests that the President has the right to refuse to enforce both statutes and judicial decisions based on his own independent decision that they were unwarranted by the Constitution.2 The idea next turned up in a message by President Abraham Lincoln justifying his suspension of the writ of habeas corpus without obtaining congressional authorization.3 And counsel to President Andrew Johnson during his impeachment trial adverted to the theory, but only in passing.4 Beyond these isolated instances, it does not appear to be seriously contended that the oath adds anything to the President’s powers. So in short, he will violate that oath if he does not maintain the Constitution and protect it. Not turn it into an Authoritarian govenment or autocracy. |
|
froggy
Junior Member
Posts: 205
|
Post by froggy on Nov 7, 2024 11:14:06 GMT -6
He was in darelect of duty last term he was in office. No reason to think he will protect it this time. The oath of presiden says: constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S1-C8-1/ALDE_00001126/Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:–I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. What is the time relationship between a President’s assumption of office and his taking the oath? Apparently, the former comes first, this answer appearing to be the assumption of the language of the clause. The Second Congress assumed that President George Washington took office on March 4, 1789,1 although he did not take the oath until the following April 30. That the oath the President is required to take might be considered to add anything to the powers of the President, because of his obligation to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, might appear to be rather a fanciful idea. But in President Andrew Jackson’s message announcing his veto of the act renewing the Bank of the United States there is language which suggests that the President has the right to refuse to enforce both statutes and judicial decisions based on his own independent decision that they were unwarranted by the Constitution.2 The idea next turned up in a message by President Abraham Lincoln justifying his suspension of the writ of habeas corpus without obtaining congressional authorization.3 And counsel to President Andrew Johnson during his impeachment trial adverted to the theory, but only in passing.4 Beyond these isolated instances, it does not appear to be seriously contended that the oath adds anything to the President’s powers. So in short, he will violate that oath if he does not maintain the Constitution and protect it. Not turn it into an Authoritarian govenment or autocracy. What do you call ignoring our immigration laws and leaving the southern border wide open for 4 years? |
|
|
|
Post by longtimereader on Nov 7, 2024 11:27:03 GMT -6
Camps! Camps! Camps! Camps! WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
|
|
|
|
Post by stiffy1957 on Nov 7, 2024 11:30:50 GMT -6
What do you call ignoring our immigration laws and leaving the southern border wide open for 4 years? He ignored nothing. He has deported more than Trump has. and closed borders mean no trade coming in or out. He did put together a non-partisan bill the GOP would not sign to fix it. Trump told them no. Trump is more at fault here. Let him fix it now. You can sign up with an assault rifle and sit on the border and pick em off one at a time. Maybe you could do a 2 for and recruit some school shooters. You would be in "like" company. |
|
|
|
Post by mikeinez on Nov 7, 2024 11:37:33 GMT -6
He ignored nothing. He has deported more than Trump has. and open borders mean no trade coming in or out. He did put together a non-partisan bill the GOP would not sign to fix it. Trump told them no. Trump is more at fault here. Let him fix it now. You can sign up with an assault rifle and sit on the border and pick em off one at a time. Maybe you could do a 2 for and recruit some school shooters. You would be in "like" company. I thought deporting immigrants was bad. Now you are bragging about how Biden deported more than Trump? Which is it??? |
|
|
|
Post by captbudman on Nov 7, 2024 11:44:36 GMT -6
He ignored nothing. He has deported more than Trump has. and open borders mean no trade coming in or out. He did put together a non-partisan bill the GOP would not sign to fix it. Trump told them no. Trump is more at fault here. Let him fix it now. You can sign up with an assault rifle and sit on the border and pick em off one at a time. Maybe you could do a 2 for and recruit some school shooters. You would be in "like" company. Sorry Stiffy, but the illegitimate Biden regime has refused to deport illegal immigrants, even those who have been convicted of felonies and ordered deported. The regime flooded the nation with illegals. Come January 20th, the mass deportation of illegal immigrants will begin. We HAVE to take control of our borders and restore our sovereignty.  |
|
|
|
Post by Billy John Davy on Nov 7, 2024 11:47:02 GMT -6
He was in darelect of duty last term he was in office. No reason to think he will protect it this time. excuse me, retard, but Sundowner extended the eviction moritorium after saying he knew the courts would find it unConstitutional. |
|
|
|
Post by stargatebabe on Nov 7, 2024 11:47:25 GMT -6
He was in darelect of duty last term he was in office. No reason to think he will protect it this time. The oath of presiden says: constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S1-C8-1/ALDE_00001126/Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:–I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. What is the time relationship between a President’s assumption of office and his taking the oath? Apparently, the former comes first, this answer appearing to be the assumption of the language of the clause. The Second Congress assumed that President George Washington took office on March 4, 1789,1 although he did not take the oath until the following April 30. That the oath the President is required to take might be considered to add anything to the powers of the President, because of his obligation to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, might appear to be rather a fanciful idea. But in President Andrew Jackson’s message announcing his veto of the act renewing the Bank of the United States there is language which suggests that the President has the right to refuse to enforce both statutes and judicial decisions based on his own independent decision that they were unwarranted by the Constitution.2 The idea next turned up in a message by President Abraham Lincoln justifying his suspension of the writ of habeas corpus without obtaining congressional authorization.3 And counsel to President Andrew Johnson during his impeachment trial adverted to the theory, but only in passing.4 Beyond these isolated instances, it does not appear to be seriously contended that the oath adds anything to the President’s powers. So in short, he will violate that oath if he does not maintain the Constitution and protect it. Not turn it into an Authoritarian govenment or autocracy. Like Biden has repeatedly done? thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/566836-canceling-the-constitution-biden-hailed-for-violating-rule-of-law/www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/biden-knows-section-702-is-unconstitutional-yet-his-administration-still-defends-itwww.cnn.com/2023/09/08/politics/biden-administration-social-media-lawsuit/index.htmlwww.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2021/08/06/bidens_unprecedented_attack_on_the_constitution_146205.html |
|
|
|
Post by str8shooter on Nov 7, 2024 12:19:17 GMT -6
He was in darelect of duty last term he was in office. No reason to think he will protect it this time. The oath of presiden says: constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S1-C8-1/ALDE_00001126/Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:–I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. What is the time relationship between a President’s assumption of office and his taking the oath? Apparently, the former comes first, this answer appearing to be the assumption of the language of the clause. The Second Congress assumed that President George Washington took office on March 4, 1789,1 although he did not take the oath until the following April 30. That the oath the President is required to take might be considered to add anything to the powers of the President, because of his obligation to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, might appear to be rather a fanciful idea. But in President Andrew Jackson’s message announcing his veto of the act renewing the Bank of the United States there is language which suggests that the President has the right to refuse to enforce both statutes and judicial decisions based on his own independent decision that they were unwarranted by the Constitution.2 The idea next turned up in a message by President Abraham Lincoln justifying his suspension of the writ of habeas corpus without obtaining congressional authorization.3 And counsel to President Andrew Johnson during his impeachment trial adverted to the theory, but only in passing.4 Beyond these isolated instances, it does not appear to be seriously contended that the oath adds anything to the President’s powers. So in short, he will violate that oath if he does not maintain the Constitution and protect it. Not turn it into an Authoritarian govenment or autocracy. You have set a new bar for being uninformed and clueless. I doubt your new standard for ignorance can be surpassed. |
|
|
|
Post by oedipustex on Nov 7, 2024 12:42:29 GMT -6
He was in darelect of duty last term he was in office. No reason to think he will protect it this time. The oath of presiden says: constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S1-C8-1/ALDE_00001126/Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:–I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. What is the time relationship between a President’s assumption of office and his taking the oath? Apparently, the former comes first, this answer appearing to be the assumption of the language of the clause. The Second Congress assumed that President George Washington took office on March 4, 1789,1 although he did not take the oath until the following April 30. That the oath the President is required to take might be considered to add anything to the powers of the President, because of his obligation to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, might appear to be rather a fanciful idea. But in President Andrew Jackson’s message announcing his veto of the act renewing the Bank of the United States there is language which suggests that the President has the right to refuse to enforce both statutes and judicial decisions based on his own independent decision that they were unwarranted by the Constitution.2 The idea next turned up in a message by President Abraham Lincoln justifying his suspension of the writ of habeas corpus without obtaining congressional authorization.3 And counsel to President Andrew Johnson during his impeachment trial adverted to the theory, but only in passing.4 Beyond these isolated instances, it does not appear to be seriously contended that the oath adds anything to the President’s powers. So in short, he will violate that oath if he does not maintain the Constitution and protect it. Not turn it into an Authoritarian govenment or autocracy. You have set a new bar for being uninformed and clueless. I doubt your new standard for ignorance can be surpassed. Where do you start with someone like her? She's batshit crazy to believe even half that demonstrably false nonsense. I'll bet her clocks strike 13. |
|
|
|
Post by stiffy1957 on Nov 7, 2024 13:56:52 GMT -6
He ignored nothing. He has deported more than Trump has. and open borders mean no trade coming in or out. He did put together a non-partisan bill the GOP would not sign to fix it. Trump told them no. Trump is more at fault here. Let him fix it now. You can sign up with an assault rifle and sit on the border and pick em off one at a time. Maybe you could do a 2 for and recruit some school shooters. You would be in "like" company. I thought deporting immigrants was bad. Now you are bragging about how Biden deported more than Trump? Which is it??? Your words. not mine. |
|
|
|
Post by Aesa on Nov 7, 2024 14:03:13 GMT -6
He was in darelect of duty last term he was in office. No reason to think he will protect it this time. I believe the term you were looking for but were to lazy or stupid to look up was. .. dereliction of duty" and your assumption is a complete fallacy. Wipe your tears away and start acting like an adult. |
|
|
|
Post by moody on Nov 7, 2024 15:27:42 GMT -6
He was in darelect of duty last term he was in office. No reason to think he will protect it this time. The oath of presiden says: constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S1-C8-1/ALDE_00001126/Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:–I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. What is the time relationship between a President’s assumption of office and his taking the oath? Apparently, the former comes first, this answer appearing to be the assumption of the language of the clause. The Second Congress assumed that President George Washington took office on March 4, 1789,1 although he did not take the oath until the following April 30. That the oath the President is required to take might be considered to add anything to the powers of the President, because of his obligation to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, might appear to be rather a fanciful idea. But in President Andrew Jackson’s message announcing his veto of the act renewing the Bank of the United States there is language which suggests that the President has the right to refuse to enforce both statutes and judicial decisions based on his own independent decision that they were unwarranted by the Constitution.2 The idea next turned up in a message by President Abraham Lincoln justifying his suspension of the writ of habeas corpus without obtaining congressional authorization.3 And counsel to President Andrew Johnson during his impeachment trial adverted to the theory, but only in passing.4 Beyond these isolated instances, it does not appear to be seriously contended that the oath adds anything to the President’s powers. So in short, he will violate that oath if he does not maintain the Constitution and protect it. Not turn it into an Authoritarian govenment or autocracy. You are a child emotionally and Intellectually. |
|
|
|
Post by stiffy1957 on Nov 7, 2024 16:44:09 GMT -6
He was in darelect of duty last term he was in office. No reason to think he will protect it this time. I believe the term you were looking for but were to lazy or stupid to look up was. .. dereliction of duty" and your assumption is a complete fallacy. Wipe your tears away and start acting like an adult. If anyone should know how to word it should be a Trumper.He has violated many laws and rules while president. Trump beingTrump will still be his worst enemy. He NEEDS immunity since he plans on breaking the laws so often. |
|
|
|
Post by Billy John Davy on Nov 7, 2024 17:20:33 GMT -6
you need to slow down dude. you dont have the testicular fortitude to do this for the next 4 years. you'll give yourself a heart attack and end up as dead as your sibling on second thought, please continue your retarded rantings daily. |
|
