Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, November 13, 2018

The state of Maryland plans to ask a federal judge on Tuesday for an order declaring that Rod Rosenstein is the acting attorney general -- not Matt Whitaker, who was appointed to that position last week after the forced resignation of Jeff Sessions.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Howls about deep state swamp creatures in 3..2..1.

#1 | Posted by bored at 2018-11-13 08:23 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

He is the proper choice Constitutionally. Allowing Trump to openly violate the Constitution is a dangerous precedent, both the Senate and the SC should object to this open power grab sidelining them from their Constitutional duties and powers. A King or a dictator would not need Senate approval and could appoint an ideologue who doesn't believe the SC should have the powers it has exercised since 1803. If Trump can appoint Whitaker as AG, without Senate approval, then he can appoint all of the Cabinet members without Senate approval. The Advise and Consent process was put into the Constitution to prevent a sitting President from so consolidating his power without input from outside (the Senate) to such a degree that he could become a tyrannical dictator similar to crazy King George III. It is not by accident that this attempt to ignore the Constitution comes from a man equally crazy who is virtually ignorant and has no understanding of the Constitution whatever. He clearly sees it as a document designed by the founding fathers, 200 years ago, specifically designed to allow those evil Democrats to ruin his Presidency. Amazing how those Founding Fathers knew what they were doing when they wrote it and added in the requirement for Senate Advise and Consent. Now is the time that even a conservative, corporate court needs to stand up to this wannabe tyrant.

#2 | Posted by danni at 2018-11-13 09:26 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 5

trump is the stalking horse for republican leadership and special interest groups. can't possibly believe that trump is capable of any sort of cogent political strategy. at any time mcConnel and ryan could have nixed the AG fiasco but better to let it play out and try to make democrats look like obstructionists. maybe

#3 | Posted by 1947steamer at 2018-11-13 11:50 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#3

Best post, by far, you have ever made.

Well done.

#4 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-13 11:57 AM | Reply

It looks like Maryland may be right.

#5 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-11-13 11:57 AM | Reply

#5

Agreed, but I am not sure how they have standing to bring this action not having read the suit.

#6 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-13 12:01 PM | Reply

Not agreeing or disagreeing, but just remember Dems that what you do will come back to haunt you. Don't start whining and crying when a Dem POTUS does something similar and Reps start going nuts over it and request the same due process.

#7 | Posted by humtake at 2018-11-13 12:09 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

What if Bill Clinton had fired his AG and then replaced him with an unqualified hack, not confirmed by the Senate, who had previously openly talked about defunding the Whitewater investigation, called it a witch hunt, etc. and indicated he was going to undermine it as acting AG? Republicans would have lost their minds. It was so important for the nation to get to the bottom of that BJ. Compare that scenario to one that involves collusion with Russia.

#8 | Posted by danni at 2018-11-13 12:21 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

"The state's motion comes in a lawsuit over the future of Obamacare, seeking a ruling that the Affordable Care Act remains enforceable despite attempts by the Trump administration to shut it down. The case is the mirror image of a lawsuit filed by Texas and 17 other states. It asks a different federal judge to declare that the health care law is no longer enforceable."

I think that is what gives Maryland standing.

#9 | Posted by danni at 2018-11-13 12:34 PM | Reply

Don't start whining and crying when a Dem POTUS does something similar and Reps start going nuts over it and request the same due process.

#7 | Posted by humtake

Don't worry your little (two sizes too small) Deplorable revenge seeking black heart, Hummer.

It will never be an issue after we remove Humpy because the Dems don't plan on nominating a criminal and a traitor like the the Republicans did.

#10 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-11-13 12:53 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

Seems to me he is one of the guys they should be investigating. He signed the search warrant applications and he recommended that comely be fired.

#11 | Posted by Sniper at 2018-11-13 01:07 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Not agreeing or disagreeing, but just remember Dems that what you do will come back to haunt you. Don't start whining and crying when a Dem POTUS does something similar and Reps start going nuts over it and request the same due process.

#7 | POSTED BY HUMTAKE

You say that but it never ends up happening.

You still go nuts over a lot less though.

#12 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-11-13 01:38 PM | Reply

You say that but it never ends up happening.

Because, when you don't nominate a criminal for public office you don't have to worry about such things.

#13 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-11-13 02:56 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

I think that is what gives Maryland standing.

Just because there is a lawsuit over the ACA doesn't mean that the State has standing to make this motion. There has to be a reasonable nexus between the claim made in the lawsuit and the remedy requested in the motion.

Like I said, I have seen neither so don't know what the basis for the request is other than what is in the article.

#14 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-13 04:07 PM | Reply

Like I said, I have seen neither so don't know what the basis for the request is other than what is in the article.

#14 | Posted by Rightocenter

Fortunately you are not the deciding judge so basically who gives a crap what you know or don't know about it!

Allowing Humpy to violate the Constitution is a no-go, partner.

#15 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-11-13 06:50 PM | Reply

What's the matter DBoy, still butthurt over your little lesson on how the House works?

Try reading #5 and try again.

#16 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-13 07:03 PM | Reply

#5=> #6

#17 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-13 07:03 PM | Reply

per capita Maryland's wealth dwarfs any state that supports Trump.

#18 | Posted by Tor at 2018-11-13 07:18 PM | Reply

What's the matter DBoy, still butthurt over your little lesson on how the House works?

Whats a matter for you numbnuts?

Still think Nancy Pelosi is the "Boss"?

#19 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-11-13 07:37 PM | Reply

Although not directly addressed in the motion, I think Maryland's standing is speculative and insufficient. It asserts that potentially litigating against the wrong party, the AG, it will be irreparably harmed, a basis for an injunction. See motion at pg. 28 (pdf pg. 34) int.nyt.com

Ordinarily speculative harm is insufficient for an injunction and certainly would not constitute an "injury in fact" which is (a) concrete and particularized and (b) actual or imminent for standing purposes.

Otherwise I agree with their argument just question whether they will get to make it.

#20 | Posted by et_al at 2018-11-13 08:32 PM | Reply

Just want to ask ROC, is the appointment of Whitaker an obvious violation of the Constitution or not? Seems pretty obvious to me that it is, why don't you care about that? Partisan much? If a Democratic President did the exact same thing, as I described in #8, you'd be apoplectic. You know it, I know it, we all know it. Get off your high horse and realize we don't see you as a legal scholar as much as a partisan hack.

#21 | Posted by danni at 2018-11-14 09:00 AM | Reply

President Obama placed Sally Yates as United States Deputy Attorney General January 10, 2015. The Deputy Attorney General is a political appointee of the President of the United States and takes office after confirmation by the United States Senate, just like the AG. She wasn't approved by the Senate for the job she was already doing until May of 2015 www.politico.com

Once again the same actions as the last president are being spun as both illegal and unethical when done by this president. Filling a position in a Senate approved position while awaiting Senate confirmation is normal, accepted and correct...unless there's a Republican president, it seems.

#22 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-11-14 09:23 AM | Reply

"Once again the same actions as the last president are being spun as both illegal and unethical when done by this president"

wasn't that your angle with OBAMA

Everything OBAMA did was illegal, a detriment to democracy, a constitutional crisis and un-American

why the change in your tune, when you yourself say it's just what his predecessor did?

#23 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2018-11-14 09:44 AM | Reply

Danni,

This appears to be Constitutional so long as he serves no longer than 210 days.

Matthew Whitaker joined the Trump Justice Department as Sessions's chief of staff in October 2017. The date is relevant. The president has named him as acting attorney general under the Vacancies Reform Act of 1998 (the relevant provisions are codified at Sections 3345 and 3346 of Title 5, U.S. Code). There has been some commentary suggesting that because Whitaker was in a job (chief of staff) that did not require Senate confirmation, he could not become the "acting officer" in a position (AG) that calls for Senate confirmation. Not so. The Vacancies Act enables the president to name an acting officer, who may serve as such for 210 days, as long as the person named has been working at the agency or department for at least 90 days in a fairly high-ranking position. Whitaker qualifies.

www.nationalreview.com

#24 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-14 09:49 AM | Reply

"This appears to be Constitutional "

see, it says so right here at the National Puteo

they are practically the Constitution, IMO

toodles

Jeffyj

#25 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2018-11-14 10:00 AM | Reply

"This appears to be Constitutional so long as he serves no longer than 210 days."

Jeff, that is a law passed by Congress, not a Constitutional Amendment. You do understand the difference?

#26 | Posted by danni at 2018-11-14 10:04 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

#24 JEFFJ

Assuming the National Review is correct in interpreting the Vacancies Act, Whitaker needs to recuse himself from a bevy of cases. Regardless of legality, Whitaker is such a blatant partisan he should have never been appointed in the first place. If people can't see the tyrannical dictatorship correlations as it relates to Trump appointing a lapdog to the acting AG's office, I fear for America's future. Congress and the media need to force his recusal from the investigation into his prior company and Mueller's case immediately.

#27 | Posted by gavaster at 2018-11-14 10:09 AM | Reply

Gavastar,

Most AG's are partisan hacks. Gonzales and Holder certainly were.

#28 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-14 10:15 AM | Reply

wasn't that your angle with OBAMA
Everything OBAMA did was illegal, a detriment to democracy, a constitutional crisis and un-American
why the change in your tune, when you yourself say it's just what his predecessor did? - #23 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2018-11-14 09:44 AM

No, I never played that tune; it is entirely within your head. Why would you pretend that I've done something I didn't do to avoid reflection on your hypocrisy?

#29 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-11-14 10:17 AM | Reply

Whitaker is being investigated by the FBI so why not appoint him to be acting AG? Conflict of interest? Ya think?

"FBI Is Investigating Florida Company Where Whitaker Was Advisory-Board Member"

www.wsj.com

"he Federal Bureau of Investigation is conducting a criminal investigation of a Florida company accused of scamming millions from customers during the period that Matthew Whitaker, the acting U.S. attorney general, served as a paid advisory-board member, according to an alleged victim who was contacted by the FBI and other people familiar with the matter."

#30 | Posted by danni at 2018-11-14 10:17 AM | Reply

Danni,

Law is what governs a temporary appointment like this, not the Constitution. Again, so long as he serves no longer than 210 days in this capacity it appears as if this temporary appointment is within the proscribed legal framework.

#31 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-14 10:17 AM | Reply

Jeff, nothing Holder ever did rose to the level of partisanship of Gonzalez.

#32 | Posted by danni at 2018-11-14 10:18 AM | Reply

"This appears to be Constitutional so long as he serves no longer than 210 days."

JeffJ is right. I read the same thing in Spotlight which is now called The Buffalo Chip Gazette.

#33 | Posted by Twinpac at 2018-11-14 10:20 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Law is what governs a temporary appointment like this, not the Constitution"

Show me that article in the Constitution Jeff. Allowing a partisan hack, who openly has spoken about undermining the Mueller investigation as "acting" AG is an open attempt by Trump to obstruct justice and he should be charged with that crime for it. Whitaker is an accomplice. Can you imagine if Ken Starr had been so undermined by Clinton?
You really are a hypocritical political partisan hack. You don't even care about justice, just winning. You are a true 2018 Republican. Eisenhower would be ashamed of you.

#34 | Posted by danni at 2018-11-14 10:21 AM | Reply

Could Congress have limited Presidents to only two terms by passing a law?
Could Congress have ended the prohibition on alcohol by passing a law?
Could Congress reinstitute slavery by passing a law?
No, you can't overrule the Constitution by passing a law. 210 days is an irrelevant number someone thought up which has no relevance to the Constitution at all.

#35 | Posted by danni at 2018-11-14 10:23 AM | Reply

This appears to be Constitutional so long as he serves no longer than 210 days.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

The 210-day limit on temporary appointments is in the Federal Vacancy Reform Act, not the Constitution. The FVRA governs "inferior officers," which Whitaker is not, because Article 2 Section 2 Clause 2 of the Constitution only permits Congress to pass laws allowing the President to bypass Senatorial advise and consent for inferior officers. To the extent any strained reading of the FVRA is applied to Whitaker, it is unconstitutional when applied in that manner. He is not an inferior officer. He is a principal officer.

"Generally speaking, "inferior officers" are officers whose work is directed and supervised at some level by others who were appointed by Presidential nomination with the Senate's advice and consent." 520 US 651.

This is not Whitaker. The AG is not an inferior officer so his appointment cannot bypass Congressional advise and consent.

#36 | Posted by JOE at 2018-11-14 10:32 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Danni,

Calm down. You are strung WAY too tight.

Based upon my understanding of the Vacancies Act POTUS can do this.

I don't like it, to be honest. I would rather Sessions stay in his role until his replacement go through the nomination process and the Senatorial advise/consent role.

#37 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-14 10:40 AM | Reply

#32

Holder was actually worse than Gonzales and I didn't think that was possible.

#38 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-14 10:41 AM | Reply

"Based upon my understanding of the Vacancies Act POTUS can do this"

Two years ago this was a "CONSTITUTIONAL CRISES" in jeffyj world.

today not so much

#39 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2018-11-14 10:48 AM | Reply

The DOJ just released a 20-page memo justifying Whitaker's temporary role from a legal/constitutional standpoint.

#40 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-11-14 11:05 AM | Reply

Whitaker's own agency says his appointment was legal. News at 10.

#41 | Posted by JOE at 2018-11-14 11:23 AM | Reply

The DOJ just released a 20-page memo justifying Whitaker's temporary role from a legal/constitutional standpoint.

They can put lipstick on the pig but it is still a pig.

Whitaker needs to step down and let Rosenstein do the job until someone gets appointed.

#42 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-11-14 08:18 PM | Reply

"The DOJ just released a 20-page memo justifying Whitaker's temporary role from a legal/constitutional standpoint."

A Fordham law professor claims the report is shoddily written. Way above my paygrade but for those who might be interested:

Jed Shugerman @jedshug

I think I caught a major legal error on p. 5 of the OLC memo on #Whitaker.
OLC argues that the Vacancies Act applies to DOJ statute 28 USC 508, because the DOJ statute cross-refers to the VRA.

twitter.com

Jed Shugerman @jedshug

My bottom line on Whitaker:
1. OLC's major error below is a sign of an embarrassingly sloppy OLC.
2. That said, the VRA statute, though messy and full of inconsistencies, would give president discretion to appt Whitaker...
3. But Whitaker's appointment is still unconstitutional.

4. This memo is a deep embarrassment for the OLC, once the most respected legal institution in the DOJ & the govt. An error this obvious is a sign that Stephen Engel and his staff were motivated more by politcal results than by getting the law right.

twitter.com

#43 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-11-14 10:14 PM | Reply

Why not?:

The Acting Attorney General Helped an Alleged Scam Company Hawk Bizarre Products

Matthew Whitaker lent his name and status as an ex-US attorney to a firm touting time travel cryptocurrency and a toilet for the "well-endowed."

In November 2014, a Miami Beach-based firm, World Patent Marketing, announced the "marketing launch" of a "MASCULINE TOILET," which boasted a specially designed bowl to help "well-endowed men" avoid unwanted contact with porcelain or water. "The average male genitalia is between 5″ and 6″," the firm's press release said. "However, this invention is designed for those of us who measure longer than that." In the same release, World Patent Marketing also touted the recent appointment of "Matthew G. Whitaker, former Iowa US Attorney and Republican candidate for United States Senate to the company's advisory board."

www.motherjones.com

#44 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-11-14 10:35 PM | Reply

boasted a specially designed bowl to help "well-endowed men" avoid unwanted contact with porcelain or water. "The average male genitalia is between 5″ and 6″," the firm's press release said. "However, this invention is designed for those of us who measure longer than that."

Well mine hangs over the rim, so it can't fall in the water while sitting. I have to pee standing up, careful not to let it drop down into the water.

At least that is what I tell the chicks wearing MAGA hats, they will believe anything.

#45 | Posted by bored at 2018-11-15 02:57 AM | Reply

#45

Reminds me of one of the times my redneck country boy buddys and I were cruising the back roads drinking beer. We stopped on an old wooden bridge to take a leak. As we're standing there my friends says, "The water's cold." "Yeah, and deep," I replied.

#46 | Posted by et_al at 2018-11-15 03:36 AM | Reply

An Exhaustive Timeline of Our New Acting Attorney General's Astoundingly Crooked Career

Year by year, the onetime Iowa tight end descended into grifting and scamming. He's a perfect match for his new boss.

www.esquire.com

Oops:

"An earlier version of this article referred to Whitaker as a football "star." With 200 yards and two touchdowns in three seasons at Iowa, it appears he was an unspectacular player. We regret the error."

#47 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-11-15 08:18 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort