President Donald Trump has asked the DC Circuit Court of Appeals to rehear his attempt to stop a subpoena of his longtime accounting firm, this time with Trump asking the full appellate court to reconsider his case. read more
"There hasn't been a blood test or a breath test that can determine if you're impaired by marijuana." Now there is. read more
A federal judge's ruling on Friday temporarily blocked a Florida law giving felons who have completed their sentences their voting rights back only after they've fully paid their fines, fees, and restitution. read more
In this extremely well written analysis, Lawfare's experts present the Trump-Zelensky memo piece by piece, explaining the context and implications of the U.S. President's phone call with another world leader: This time it's different. The misconduct cannot be dismissed as unproven; it screams off the plain text of the White House's own memorandum detailing the president's phone conversation with his Ukrainian counterpart. read more
"The Bill of Rights protects everyone, including undocumented immigrants, to exercise free speech, religion, assembly, and to be free from unlawful government interference."
Can government bar illegal aliens from possessing firearms?https://www.heritage.org/firearms/report/appeals-court-ruling-could-threaten-the-second-amendment-
Four different U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals have answered this last question in the affirmative. The first three decisions reached this result by concluding that illegal aliens were not among "the people" covered by the Second Amendment. The fourth and most recent decision, Meza-Rodriguez, handed down in August 2015, concluded that illegal aliens were among "the people" but that they nevertheless could be barred from gun ownership consistent with the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
rights-american-citizens#_ftn1
UPDATED: The Supreme Court's Public Information Office reported on Sunday afternoon that Ginsburg had been discharged from the hospital; she is "home and doing well." www.scotusblog.com
... as I stated to Et_Al ...
#55 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS
As I stated to you, "Odd, I don't recall ever making "claims" about the "Dossier." Perhaps you can correct me.
#15 | Posted by et_al" drudge.com
Still waiting.
#18 | Posted by gtbritishskull
Look at the definition of "official act." Then look at this case interpreting that definition. www.scotusblog.com
The definition of bribery at the Founding is much broader.
"If #3 isn't bribery according to the now fashionable Democrat definition .. I don't know what is.
#4 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS"
Bribery now has a statutory definition, www.law.cornell.edu
However, the statute is irrelevant to bribery espoused in the impeachment clause of the Constitution because it or an equivalent did not exist. The Founders had a much broader conception of the term based on the common law, violation of the public trust for private gain.
Is that more descriptive of the reporting of Biden's actions or of the Buffoon's?
... Republicans NEVER hold theirs accountable for anything.
Before your birth date so it "NEVER" happens? Ridiculous hyperbole.
"... a Republican delegation led by Barry Goldwater told Richard Nixon he had lost almost all his remaining support in Congress. The next day, he resigned." www.csmonitor.com
Sage advice from a mentor, "Never assume. Never say never."
The fact is anything on a government phone or computer is government property. There is no expectation of privacy on a government device, ...
That means the government can collect the information without the user's consent. However, once collected private information about the user cannot be cannot be disseminated to third parties except as provided by the Privacy Act. There is no provision in the Act permitting dissemination to the media.