Prosecutorial Discretion

Prosecutorial Discretion (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

KenDckey -> Prosecutorial Discretion (2/28/2015 5:15:01 AM)
What if the next Republican President said "We will no longer fund Obamacare, anti-gun enforcement, anti-banking system enforcement for "dubious" banking, and transfer those funds to enforcement of our immigration laws banning certain types of entry into the United States." He would be exercising the same type of prosecutorial discretion that Obama is using in my opinion.

bounty44 -> RE: Prosecutorial Discretion (2/28/2015 5:40:45 AM)
if what you are saying is a parallel truth ken, then I suspect the liberals would be screaming bloody murder... actually, i think either all, or all but one of the people sean Hannity interviewed for fox at cpac (paul, cruz, walker, Jindal and carson) said that repealing obamacare would be one of the first orders of business and one or two of them suggesting the defunding route for the present time.

Lucylastic -> RE: Prosecutorial Discretion (2/28/2015 5:54:00 AM)
what do they have to replace the ACA>>>> after six years and 56 attempts to defund it.....they have NO "suitable" replacement. All they do is whinge that its bad.... Republicans have been screeching for 6 years, yet you expect Liberals should not?? why?

DesideriScuri -> RE: Prosecutorial Discretion (2/28/2015 6:48:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey What if the next Republican President said "We will no longer fund Obamacare, anti-gun enforcement, anti-banking system enforcement for "dubious" banking, and transfer those funds to enforcement of our immigration laws banning certain types of entry into the United States." He would be exercising the same type of prosecutorial discretion that Obama is using in my opinion. What would happen? I can tell you that I would stand up in opposition of those actions.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Prosecutorial Discretion (2/28/2015 6:50:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic what do they have to replace the ACA>>>> after six years and 56 attempts to defund it.....they have NO "suitable" replacement. All they do is whinge that its bad.... Republicans have been screeching for 6 years, yet you expect Liberals should not?? why? Maybe, just maybe, they don't think the Federal Government has any Constitutional authority dictating health care? If that's the case, then there isn't any need for a replacement...

Lucylastic -> RE: Prosecutorial Discretion (2/28/2015 6:52:12 AM)
If you really believe that, there is nothing more to say

DesideriScuri -> RE: Prosecutorial Discretion (2/28/2015 6:55:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic If you really believe that, there is nothing more to say That's been my statement all along, Lucy. That hasn't stopped you before. I've said I do think it would require an Amendment to the Constitution for it to be Constitutional to have nationalized health care.

mnottertail -> RE: Prosecutorial Discretion (2/28/2015 7:07:32 AM)
I think it is extremely clear to most of the world that it does not.

cloudboy -> RE: Prosecutorial Discretion (2/28/2015 11:05:16 AM)
Republicans are hurting people and the country ----- if they want to exert executive power -- WIN THE FUCKING PRESIDENCY. Playing games in Congress to appease bigoted, nativists who want to toss the heritage of the USA overboard is not leadership. This issue is a non-productive ball-and-chain leading everyone nowhere (probably where Republicans right now want to go, anyway.) Tying powerless wants to lawsuits and a homeland security gambit is childlike.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Prosecutorial Discretion (2/28/2015 2:05:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy Tying powerless wants to lawsuits and a homeland security gambit is childlike. What about tying education reform and health care reform?

cloudboy -> RE: Prosecutorial Discretion (2/28/2015 2:18:20 PM)
Blackmail ain't gonna work and it sets a bad precedent. It's also a white-collar, terrorist tactic, something lost on the proponents of this shit.

KenDckey -> RE: Prosecutorial Discretion (2/28/2015 3:48:42 PM)
Sorry guys The thread isn't about Obamacare. it is about PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION Obama is using it. What if the next Republican President undid it and the next Democrat after him put it back in place yada yada yada

DesideriScuri -> RE: Prosecutorial Discretion (2/28/2015 7:08:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy Blackmail ain't gonna work and it sets a bad precedent. It's also a white-collar, terrorist tactic, something lost on the proponents of this shit. Like the Democrat Senator (Nebraska, I think) that wanted a special carve out for Nebraska for his vote in support of the ACA? Or, the Democrat in Michigan that required language guaranteeing no Federal funds would be used for abortions before he voted in favor? Is that the kind of black mail that is a "white-collar, terrorist tactic?"

DesideriScuri -> RE: Prosecutorial Discretion (2/28/2015 7:09:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey Sorry guys The thread isn't about Obamacare. it is about PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION Obama is using it. What if the next Republican President undid it and the next Democrat after him put it back in place yada yada yada My first post was on topic! [:D]

Zonie63 -> RE: Prosecutorial Discretion (3/1/2015 7:15:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey What if the next Republican President said "We will no longer fund Obamacare, anti-gun enforcement, anti-banking system enforcement for "dubious" banking, and transfer those funds to enforcement of our immigration laws banning certain types of entry into the United States." He would be exercising the same type of prosecutorial discretion that Obama is using in my opinion. I don't think it would be any different than what usually goes on. Ford pardoned Nixon. J. Edgar said "there is no mafia." Kissinger managed to avoid prosecution. For quite a long time, many have suspected malfeasance in the military and intel communities, as well as corruption and impropriety in the business community, which does not get adequately addressed or prosecuted by government (both parties are ostensibly guilty of this). I would also be suspicious of any Republicans saying that they're transferring funds to fight illegal immigration. The Republicans were never serious about enforcing immigration law, since Republicans are pro-business, and the business community benefits from illegal immigration.

MercTech -> RE: Prosecutorial Discretion (3/1/2015 7:28:21 AM)
Meh, we could always get rid of the complicated finagling and bring back the Public Health Service clinical services. Remember, the PHS was done away with by a Democratically controlled congress when they sold Medicaid as a cost saving measure that would assure access to decent health care by all Americans. It ended up being a huge money pit bureaucracy that did little to increase access to basic health care. Now, we have mandatory health insurance that still doesn't do much for getting basic health care available to the majority.

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.1875