Critics Tell GOP Rep. Lauren Boebert What To Do With Her ‘Prayers’ After Boulder Shooting | HuffPost UK


Yet another shooting and loss of life in America, when will it stop?

The gun lobby feel it will when everyone carries a gun, but was that not the case before ‘so called’ Law and Order was established in America. This was referred to the ‘Wild West‘, when virtually everyone carried a gun.

WShen it did not stop gun killings then and it will not know. Since then the range of firearms has increased considerably, as had the fire power of these weapons, for now instead of the six shot gun, the weapon of favour is the AR-15 semiautomatic rifle, a weapon with so much more fire power as the old six shot guns, a weapon of ultimate destruction, which is put forward as a weapon of defence. With a weapon of that nature there is no defence, just killings.

The only sure way of bringing the killings down is for very tight gun control, a ban on personal use of semiautomatic rifles and a removal of ‘open carry’ for the general population, this is what we do in the UK and our gun killings are no where the numbers of in America.

The referred defence is the, The Second Amendment, one of the ten amendments to the Constitution comprising the Bill of Rights, states: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”.

Which means ‘The right to keep and bear arms (often referred to as the right to bear arms) is a right for people to possess weapons (arms) for their own defense.’.

It was adopted on 15 December 1791, this is well before the development of semiautomatic rifles and should therefore only relate to the firearms of that time and not of the current time.

For today , in certain areas, is back to pre 1791, they have learnt nothing over the years, so the killings go and on.

Where is the Human right to Life in America, for it appears to not exist.

Source: Critics Tell GOP Rep. Lauren Boebert What To Do With Her ‘Prayers’ After Boulder Shooting | HuffPost UK

Appeals court dismisses emoluments clause case against Trump involving Washington hotel : NBC News


A federal appeals court on Wednesday dismissed a case brought by the state of Maryland and the District of Columbia that argued President Donald Trump is violating the Constitution by accepting profits through foreign and domestic officials who stay at his Washington hotel.

The three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit said the two attorneys general did not have standing to sue Trump and questioned whether they were “appropriate” in their litigation.

“The District and Maryland’s interest in enforcing the Emoluments Clauses is so attenuated and abstract that their prosecution of this case readily provokes the question of whether this action against the President is an appropriate use of the courts, which were created to resolve real cases and controversies between the parties,” Judge Paul Niemeyer wrote in his opinion on behalf of the panel.

Trump celebrated the decision on Twitter soon after.

 

Source: Appeals court dismisses emoluments clause case against Trump involving Washington hotel : NBC News

Trump Again Calls For Changing Libel Laws After NYU Professor’s Faked Quote [Updated] | JONATHAN TURLEY


President Donald Trump has previously — and unwisely — called for changing libel laws to combat what he calls “fake news.” I have previously criticized  Trump for his calls for greater liability of the media for its coverage of the controversies surrounding his Administration, including his desire to sue Saturday Night Live.  Now, due to the publication of a false quote from Trump by New York University Professor Ian Bremmer, Trump is again calling for a change in the law and ignoring that our defamation standard is anchored in the first amendment. Ironically, Trump himself was recently accused of posting a doctored clip of Nancy Pelosi and has repeatedly retweeted false or defamatory statements.

Bremmer peached “professional studies” at NYU and is the founder of the Eurasia Group, a political risk research and consulting firm. For some reason, Bremmer decided to post a false quote from Trump: “Kim Jong Un is smarter and would make a better President than Sleepy Joe Biden.”

 

Source: Trump Again Calls For Changing Libel Laws After NYU Professor’s Faked Quote [Updated] | JONATHAN TURLEY

Robert Mueller should charge Trump with committing the one crime only a president can commit : Raw Story


The number of times Trump has used Twitter to corruptly influence the administration of justice is so large, it’s hardly even worth recounting this week’s Trump tweet storm. It seems that every time his little fingers fly across the keys of his iPhone, he commits another felony. This week, it was obstruction of justice and witness tampering when Trump simultaneously tweeted out an attack on his former personal attorney, Michael Cohen, and praised his former campaign adviser, Roger Stone for saying that he would “never testify against Trump.” Trump’s tweets may have crossed a legal line, according to many legal commentators, including Norman Eisen, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution who was quoted in the Washington Post.

This article first appeared in Salon.T

 

Source: Robert Mueller should charge Trump with committing the one crime only a president can commit : Raw Story

Trump Will Lose CNN’s Acosta Suit. Does It Matter? – Bloomberg


CNN is going to win the First Amendment lawsuit it filed Tuesday against President Donald Trump’s White House for taking away reporter Jim Acosta’s press pass. And the sad truth is that Trump won’t mind at all.

As the president has shown repeatedly, he doesn’t especially care if, after he violates the Constitution, the courts reverse his action. Instead of understanding judicial repudiation as a defeat, Trump sees the whole episode as a victory.

Worse still, taken in this political context, he’s right. The Constitution is working. But Trump has found a way to subvert it anyhow.

Last week, the White House revoked the pass that allowed Acosta, CNN’s chief White House correspondent, to work in and around the building unescorted. Press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders announced that the administration had done so because Acosta had placed his hands on an aide when she tried to take a microphone from him during a news conference. Acosta and the president had been clashing over a question about immigration and the midterm campaign.

The law governing the Acosta case, filed in Federal District Court on behalf of the reporter and the network, is relatively straightforward. The president doesn’t have any constitutional obligation to open the White House to the press. He can choose which reporters he would like to meet with privately, and he can prefer certain networks, like Fox News, for his own appearances or for exclusive interviews.

Once the White House has opened itself up to all accredited reporters with press passes, however, the government has created what is in effect a forum for free speech in interaction with the president. It’s black letter law that, in such a “limited-purpose public forum,” the government isn’t allowed to discriminate based on a speaker’s viewpoint.

That’s exactly what’s happened to Acosta. Trump made clear during the news conference that he doesn’t like the reporter, calling him a “rude, terrible person” and “the enemy of the people.” Trump doesn’t like Acosta’s viewpoint, so Acosta was banned from using White House press facilities.

There’s a judicial precedent on this point. In a 1977 case, Sherrill v. Knight, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, whose jurisdiction includes the White House, held that the First Amendment applies to reporters seeking press passes. And it specifically concluded that the White House couldn’t deny a press pass to a reporter without explaining what the criterion was and telling him how he violated that criterion.

At the time, the doctrine of the limited public forum wasn’t fully in place. But the D.C. Circuit opinion effectively foreshadowed the same idea. The court said it was “presented with a situation where the White House has voluntarily decided to establish press facilities for correspondents who need to report therefrom. These press facilities are perceived as being open to all bona fide Washington-based journalists.”

 

Source: Trump Will Lose CNN’s Acosta Suit. Does It Matter? – Bloomberg

American Psychiatrists Fear Trump Mentally Ill, Unsuited for Presidency


They could be right for does any sane person conduct themselves as Trump does. If they do not act soon it may be too late.

Beastrabban\'s Weblog

They aren’t the only one, and this is serious.

In this video from The Young Turks, The Ring of Fire’s Farron Cousins reports that three professors of psychiatry, one from Harvard, the other two from the University of California San Francisco, have written a letter to Barack Obama requesting that he step in and force Trump to take a psychiatric examination. They are concerned that he suffers from psychological defects that render him not just unsuitable, but actually too dangerous to be given the job of president. They believe that Trump’s grandiosity, his impetuousness, the way he takes offence and responds aggressive at even the mildest criticism point to mental illness. He may just suffer from Narcissistic Personality Disorder, perhaps something rather more serious than that, or perhaps even be a full-blown sociopath. Cousins states that it could just be affluenza. Trump comes from an extremely wealthy background, and has…

View original post 128 more words

Stand with Rep. Cummings: Investigate Trump’s massive web of potential corruption | CREDO Action


No one knows the full extent of Trump’s foreign financial and business entanglements because of his unprecedented secrecy and refusal to release his tax returns. Government ethics experts have already said Trump is poised to violate the Constitution by personally profiting from the presidency. On top of it all, we still do not know whether he is indebted to foreign interests that would give them influence over the commander in chief.

Source: Stand with Rep. Cummings: Investigate Trump’s massive web of potential corruption | CREDO Action

The Pro-Slavery Origins of the Electoral College


Beastrabban\'s Weblog

The role of the electoral college in the election of Donald Trump has come under a lot of scrutiny and debate over the past few days. Killary won the popular vote by about 1/2 million or so more votes than the orange-tanned Nazi. But Trump was ahead in the electoral college, and so won the election. Many Americans now are discussing abolishing the electoral college as an anti-democratic institution.

They’re right. It is anti-democratic. It was meant to be from the very beginning. In this piece from Outdate Democracy, the American constitutional lawyer, Paul Finkelman, explains how the electoral college was deliberately invented by James Madison, in order to preserve the power of the slave states. The Founding Fathers discussed various methods by which the present could be elected, including restricting his election to the governors. This was rejected. Madison believed that the ‘fittest thing’ would be for American citizens…

View original post 232 more words

What would a Trump presidency mean for the rest of the world?


It would be wrong to hope that either domestic or international checks and balances will constrain Trump abroad. Geopolitically, the result would be unpredictable – at best.

Source: What would a Trump presidency mean for the rest of the world?