America's retaliation against Russian hacking.

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

I was hoping you would be bold enough to tell me what I missed. Apparently you can't, huh?

Hope on, Ollie. I'm not going to bother myself with correcting such fundamental ignorance. Such attempts are generally hopelessly doomed, given the nature of the recipient.

If this was something you cared to know and understand, you would have learned it decades ago. If you care to educate yourself in the least, do a simple online search, don't take my word for it.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

Georgeob, did you see Baldimo's remarks? He admits he's the one calling this a debate. Now will you stop accusing me of being confused or having a bad day?

0 Replies

@layman,

layman wrote:

Olivier5 wrote:

Also try and 'splain how a 1993 piece of legislation could possibly date from "10 years ago" and depend on Obama for its implementation, as opposed to Bill Clinton (who signed the bill into law) and then George W Bush.

YOU are talking about laws designed to increase voter registration. I am not. I am referring to more recent legislation (after 2000) which set minimum standards for voter identification (not registration)

Hey, I googled up "national voter registration act" because those were the terms YOU had used in your post. If you quoted it incorrectly, then pray tell what precise bill are you talking about, and when precisely was it voted and signed into law? No fluffy wordy snowflaky answer please. Only verifiable data.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Once again, Ollie, do your own research if you doubt what I'm saying. I don't care to take time to educate you just because you will dispute anything and everything you don't want to be true, with or without any conceivable basis for dispute.

I've made the mistake of trying to help you in that way before. It doesn't work. You can't read, you can't understand, and you won't even consider any information which does not comport with your a priori, ideological "knowledge."

1 Reply

@layman,

In other words, you know that you made a mistake and that you are unable to correct it.

Maybe somebody else can correct me then... In my understanding of the US system, if a bill is voted and signed, it becomes the law of the land. From there on, anyone not abiding to this law can be prosecuted by the judiciary, and that's how laws are enforced. US laws are not enforced by the POTUS personally forcing you, me and your wife to comply.

5 Replies

@layman,

Oh come on! You asserted something that was proven to be incorrect. Take it in the chin. Be a man. Stop behaving like a baby.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

There is no evidence that Russian hacks had any influence on the election, or how the votes were counted.
Russian hackers, and hackers by other countries did NOT hack our election, only FAKE NEWS says otherwise.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Maybe somebody else can correct me then... In my understanding of the US system, if a bill is voted and signed, it becomes the law of the land. From there on, anyone not abiding to this law can be prosecuted by the judiciary, and that's how laws are enforced. US laws are not enforced by the POTUS personally forcing you, me and your wife to comply.

Anyone care to help this poor boy? He claims that it is the judicial branch, NOT the executive branch of government, which is established for the purpose of ENFORCING laws enacted by the legislature.

He evidently thinks that the FBI, for example, is an arm of the Supreme Court. In my experience, it is very difficult to overcome such fundamental ignorance and confusion.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

In other words, you know that you made a mistake and that you are unable to correct it.
.., anyone not abiding to this law can be prosecuted by the judiciary, and that's how laws are enforced. US laws are not enforced by the POTUS personally forcing you, me and your wife to comply.

I'll break down and give you a hint if you care to do any research, eh, Ollie?

Find out if the US Attorney General's office, which generally "prosecutes" criminal cases and represents only ONE side in a disputed legal matter is a branch of, and controlled by, the judicial or the executive functionaries, eh?

I think children's TV program, "Seasme Street," produces simple cartoons designed to explain such elementary notions to children. That show probably has some online archive which would be accessible to you.

1 Reply

Ukraine interfered with 2016 election to help Hillary - coordinated with DNC operative

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C1_Tdh8VEAExSwd.jpg

1 Reply

@Frugal1,

Frugal1 wrote:

Ukraine interfered with 2016 election to help Hillary - coordinated with DNC operative

No photo necessary.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Yeah, people are probably eating.

0 Replies

@layman,

Okay so you mean that the Justice Dprt under Obama has been unwilling to bring to court those states unwilling to implement this yet unknown federal law on voter registration. This is litigation more than enforcement, but that's okay. As far as I can understand the claim being made, your point is well taken. Now for the evidence.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

In other words, you know that you made a mistake and that you are unable to correct it.

Maybe somebody else can correct me then... In my understanding of the US system, if a bill is voted and signed, it becomes the law of the land. From there on, anyone not abiding to this law can be prosecuted by the judiciary, and that's how laws are enforced. US laws are not enforced by the POTUS personally forcing you, me and your wife to comply.

"In the criminal justice system, the people are represented by two separate yet equally important groups. The police (executive branch) who investigate crime and the district attorneys (judicial branch) who prosecute the offenders."

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

US laws are not enforced by the POTUS personally forcing you, me and your wife to comply.

That's true but increasingly over the last few decades Presidents and AGs have exercised rather broad discretion, sometimes beyond what is granted to them in the law, to issue policies severely limiting enforcemernt of existing law. Immigration issues are a prime example, as is Federal interference in the States' exercise of their sovereign rights to establish voter qualifications and election procedures.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Although many states now have their own laws addressing voting procedures and ID requirements, at the federal level the Help America Vote Act, or HAVA, was passed in 2002 in response to some of the controversial issues that arose during the 2000 presidential elections...

The Help America Vote Act covers a number of different aspects relating to elections, and specifically imposes voter identification requirements under certain circumstances....

Individuals or officials who would like to register a complaint about local election procedures, improper application of voter identification rules, or other voting issues related to HAVA should direct their concerns to the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice.

http://civilrights.findlaw.com/other-constitutional-rights/federal-voter-id-requirements-the-help-america-vote-act-hava.html

Quote:

There is no systematic review of voter registration rolls by states to find non-citizens, and the relevant federal agencies-in direct violation of federal law-refuse to cooperate with state election officials seeking to verify the citizenship status of registered voters. Federal immigration law requires these agencies to "respond to an inquiry by a Federal, State, or local government agency, seeking to verify or ascertain the citizenship or Immigration status of any individual within the jurisdiction of the agency for any purpose authorized by law, by providing the requested verification or status information," regardless of any other provision of federal law, such as the Privacy Act.[24] However, examples of refusal to cooperate are legion:...

These incidents show that the CIS and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE),[30] the successor agencies to the INS, are either ignorant of federal legal requirements or deliberately ignoring them...The refusal of federal agencies to obey the law compels local election officials to rely almost entirely on the "honor system" to keep non-citizens from the polls....

Some non-citizen registrations can be detected through the jury process. The vast majority of state and federal courts draw their jury pools from voter registration lists, and the jury questionnaires used by court clerks ask potential jurors whether they are U.S. citizens....

In 2005, the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that up to 3 percent of the 30,000 individuals called for jury duty from voter registration rolls over a two-year period in just one U.S. district court were not U.S. citizens.

The Census Bureau estimates that there are over a million illegal aliens in Florida..Yet there is no reliable method to determine the number of non-citizens registered or actually voting because most laws to ensure that only citizens vote are ignored, and/or are systematically undermined by government officials

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2008/07/the-threat-of-non-citizen-voting

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

Quote:

"In the criminal justice system, the people are represented by two separate yet equally important groups. The police (executive branch) who investigate crime and the district attorneys (judicial branch) who prosecute the offenders."

Where did that unsourced quote come from, Gent? Prosecuting attorneys are NOT part of the judicial branch, by every common understanding I've ever encountered.

Quote:

Executive Branch
This branch includes federal, state and local agencies that create and administer regulations and government cabinet departments.

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
The Cabinet of the President of the United States includes the Vice President and the heads of 15 federal departments: the Secretaries of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Health & Human Services, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, Labor, State, Transportation, Treasury, and Veterans Affairs and the U.S. Attorney General (who heads the Department of Justice).

http://www.law.unc.edu/career/public/government/executive/

1 Reply

@layman,

I think he is referring to regular DA's that work either for a city, county or state. He was also quoting the opening from Law and Order.

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

Olivier5 wrote:

US laws are not enforced by the POTUS personally forcing you, me and your wife to comply.

That's true...

Not really, George. The President is the head of the executive branch, which is charged with enforcing the laws. Of course he doesn't personally make every arrest (or any) or file charges in court, etc., but Ollie is claiming that's not even a function of the executive branch. He says the obligation to enforce the law falls on the judicial branch.

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

Baldimo wrote:

I think he is referring to regular DA's that work either for a city, county or state. He was also quoting the opening from Law and Order.

OK, that explains it.

The division amongst branches is the same in every state as it is with the feds, too, of course.

Needless to say, TV scripts are not necessarily the most accurate sources of information.

0 Replies

America's retaliation against Russian hacking.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know