7 thoughts on “News/Politics 10-5-17

  1. Still smarting after being identified as a moron by Tillerson, Trump fires back:

    Like

  2. Good. At least he did the right thing given his now public transgressions.

    https://legalinsurrection.com/2017/10/rep-murphy-will-retire-after-mistress-revealed-he-urged-her-to-have-an-abortion/

    “Murphy made his announcement on Wednesday evening. From Politico:

    “After discussions with my family and staff, I have come to the decision that I will not seek reelection to Congress at the end of my current term,” Murphy said in his statement. “I plan to spend my remaining months in office continuing my work as the national leader on mental health care reform, as well as issues affecting working families in southwestern Pennsylvania.”

    Murphy added: “In the coming weeks I will take personal time to seek help as my family and I continue to work through our personal difficulties and seek healing. I ask you to respect our privacy during this time.”

    The scandal had some on the Hill privately wish that Murphy would resign or retire.”

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Even after the pardon……

    https://hotair.com/archives/2017/10/05/constitutional-crisis-averted-judge-throws-arpaio-case-pardon/

    “Thus ends what might have been a veeeerrrrry interesting constitutional debate over the limits of presidential pardons. Despite calls from members of Congress to continue pressing a contempt charge against former Maricopa County sheriff Joe Arpaio, the federal judge dismissed it with prejudice. However, the case may not be fully over:

    Acceding to a controversial pardon from President Donald Trump, a federal judge has dismissed the criminal contempt of court case against former Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio for defying a court order to stop profiling Latinos, multiple local news reports said.

    U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton tossed out the case against the 85-year-old ex-lawman with prejudice, meaning it cannot be reinstituted.

    Bolton ruled that the pardon is “valid” in applying to the contempt charge, a decision that disappointed a coalition of House Democrats and liberal groups that had petitioned the court to ignore it. They argued that a presidential pardon infringed on the separate and equal power of the judiciary, an “intentional usurpation of the Court’s authority by the President.” Upholding the pardon would create an impermissible power for the executive branch to rob the judiciary of the authority to enforce its orders, they argued.

    That might have been a compelling case to make, especially to higher courts that would see the risk of an executive overreach into their jurisdiction. The counter to that argument would be twofold. First, such pardons would be infrequent and subject to political accountability, as all pardons are. Second, if the authority for pardons is plenary — and that has long been the precedent for executive clemency actions — then it has to apply to criminal contempt charges as well as all other crimes.

    Fortunately for Arpaio, that debate is over, but the case itself isn’t — at least not entirely. Bolton still has not decided whether the pardon vacates all of the earlier rulings in the case, including a harsh condemnation of Arpaio for defying the court’s authority:”

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s