Turley: Trump has complied with the law

[FakeNews]

Monday on Fox News Channel’s “Fox & Friends,” George Washington University law professor downplayed the suggestion President Donald Trump has acted above the law as commander-in-chief.

According to Turley, despite what The New York Times had suggested over the weekend with its annotated version of the U.S. Constitution, Turley said Trump has actually complied with the law.

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017...hat-he-has-done-he-has-complied-with-the-law/

 

[adrina]

Yeah cuz Breitbart is a trusted news source and neither they nor Fox have an agenda.

 

[phrodeau]

He legally drove his golf cart onto the green. What's your point?

 

[FakeNews]

Yeah cuz Breitbart is a trusted news source and neither they nor Fox have an agenda.

He legally drove his golf cart onto the green. What's your point?

From the article...

But, when you separate the rhetoric from what the president has actually done, he actually has complied with the law. You know, when immigration orders went against him, he complied. He appealed. When the sanctuary cities cases, rulings went against him, he complied. So his history is actually staying within the navigational beacons of the constitution. So, you do have to separate in terms of what is actually happening to what has been said. That doesn’t excuse what’s been said. But, when you look at what The New York Times has suggested in its editorial, it, I believe, gets way ahead of its skis in terms of where we are in this country.”

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017...hat-he-has-done-he-has-complied-with-the-law/

 

[adrina]

From the article...



http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017...hat-he-has-done-he-has-complied-with-the-law/

Yes cuz, once again, Fox nor Breitbart have an agenda and the opinion of one of their guests is sacrosanct.

The constant non-stop pro-active defense of Trump speaks volumes.

Even you guys believe he's a piece of shit. Else you wouldn't feel the need to post eight million articles in his defense.

 

[FakeNews]

Yes cuz, once again, Fox nor Breitbart have an agenda and the opinion of one of their guests is sacrosanct.

The constant non-stop pro-active defense of Trump speaks volumes.

Even you guys believe he's a piece of shit. Else you wouldn't feel the need to post eight million articles in his defense.

Look past the messenger and concentrate on the message.

Are you suggesting Turley is wrong?

 

[adrina]

Look past the messenger and concentrate on the message.

Are you suggesting Turley is wrong?

I'm saying that anything presented on Breitbart needs a hypercritical eye and anything from Fox deserves it as well. That's just the reality.

I'm also point blank saying that all you guys posting this massive amount of in-defense of Trump stuff shows just how much of an asshat he really must be. His words and actions need continual defense and ya'll show up to do it. You know he's an ass. All of you do. Otherwise, you'd let the man sink or swim on his own.

 

[FakeNews]

I'm saying that anything presented on Breitbart needs a hypercritical eye and anything from Fox deserves it as well. That's just the reality.

I'm also point blank saying that all you guys posting this massive amount of in-defense of Trump stuff shows just how much of an asshat he really must be. His words and actions need continual defense and ya'll show up to do it. You know he's an ass. All of you do. Otherwise, you'd let the man sink or swim on his own.

Look past the messenger and concentrate on the message.

Are you suggesting Turley is wrong?

 

[adrina]

Look past the messenger and concentrate on the message.

Are you suggesting Turley is wrong?

Apparently you have comprehension issues.

Sorry I don't dredge through the sludge at Breitbart going down your rabbit holes.

I've said what I believe.

I'll leave it to the experts to dissect Turley.

You already seem to have made up your mind on his opinion however.

 

[FakeNews]

Apparently you have comprehension issues.

Sorry I don't dredge through the sludge at Breitbart going down your rabbit holes.

I've said what I believe.

I'll leave it to the experts to dissect Turley.

You already seem to have made up your mind on his opinion however.

You didn't answer my question because you can't.

 

[adrina]

You didn't answer my question because you can't.

Why should I answer your question?

Like I said, you've already made up your mind.

Just keep defending Trump. He seems to need it.

 

[Que]

Apparently you have comprehension issues.

Sorry I don't dredge through the sludge at Breitbart going down your rabbit holes.

I've said what I believe.

I'll leave it to the experts to dissect Turley.

You already seem to have made up your mind on his opinion however.

"Haven't read it; won't read it."

...but has made up her mind.

 

[adrina]

"Haven't read it; won't read it."

...but has made up her mind.

You're cute when you're closed minded and arrogant. Oh wait... no.

 

[Que]

You're cute when you're closed minded and arrogant. Oh wait... no.

Pointing out that you "made up your mind" based on no information has nothing at all to do with me being "closed minded."

 

[adrina]

Pointing out that you "made up your mind" based on no information has nothing at all to do with me being "closed minded."

'Cept that's not what I said.



But why would reality and facts stop you from making unfounded assumptions and then acting like an asshole based on those assumptions...

 

[water505]

Why should I answer your question?

it.

You won't answer the question honestly because you'd make a fool of yourself. It's right out of the Frodough/Spidey playbook.

 

[about_average]

Apparently you have comprehension issues.

Sorry I don't dredge through the sludge at Breitbart going down your rabbit holes.

I've said what I believe.

I'll leave it to the experts to dissect Turley.

You already seem to have made up your mind on his opinion however.

The "article" is actually only one paragraph of Turley's that's just a statement of opinion, nothing of substance and nothing specific.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

"Haven't read it; won't read it."

...but has made up her mind.

A case of cat, meet laser pointer...





The laser pointer I'm using is on the Queen's .38 and when the cat catches the red dot...

http://cdn.quotesgram.com/small/32/28/1180176444-Curly-Bill-Quote_zps41ac24af.png​

 

[adrina]

Only AJ is fucking dumb enough to grab an inaccurate statement and take it as"proof".

Well not only, but right up there.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

The "article" is actually only one paragraph of Turley's that's just a statement of opinion, nothing of substance and nothing specific.

Which is exactly the same "fault" with the editorial entitled "The Lawless Presidency." It cites a litany of Trump's departures from "traditional" policies and processes with regard to judicial independence, publication of personal tax returns, etc., but not one specific violation of LAW.

But, hey, it's just an editorial, right?

 

[Que]

'Cept that's not what I said.



But why would reality and facts stop you from making unfounded assumptions and then acting like an asshole based on those assumptions...

Oh?

Apparently you have comprehension issues.

Sorry I don't dredge through the sludge at Breitbart going down your rabbit holes.
Have not read it, will not read it. -Because Brietbart

I've said what I believe.
Made up your mind


I'll leave it to the experts to dissect Turley.

You already seem to have made up your mind on his opinion however.
which makes this ironic ^^^

As I pointed out..

 

[adrina]

Oh?



As I pointed out..

Jesus fucking christ you're dense. Is it too much to read the entire topic?

I'm saying that anything presented on Breitbart needs a hypercritical eye and anything from Fox deserves it as well. That's just the reality.

I'm also point blank saying that all you guys posting this massive amount of in-defense of Trump stuff shows just how much of an asshat he really must be. His words and actions need continual defense and ya'll show up to do it. You know he's an ass. All of you do. Otherwise, you'd let the man sink or swim on his own.

That's what I believe. I don't believe there is a definitive statement to my personal judgment as to the accuracy of Turley's statements in there.

But keep trying.

Fucking imbecile asshat.

 

[about_average]

Which is exactly the same "fault" with the editorial entitled "The Lawless Presidency."

I haven't read that so can't speak to it.

It cites a litany of Trump's departures from "traditional" policies and processes with regard to judicial independence, publication of personal tax returns, etc., but not one specific violation of LAW.

Funny you should mention those, after Trump's recent tweet about states not wanting to send the feds all the state voter information.
"What do they have to hide?" he asks.
People are asking the same thing about his tax returns. Not that it's against the law for him to not release them.

But, hey, it's just an editorial, right?

A lot of people don't know an editorial when then read one. Or at least don't know what the word means.

 

[water505]

Jesus fucking christ you're dense. Is it too much to read the entire topic?



That's what I believe. I don't believe there is a definitive statement to my personal judgment as to the accuracy of Turley's statements in there.

But keep trying.

Fucking imbecile asshat.

Is it too much to answer a simple question?

You're a leftist coward who lacks the courage of your own convictions, because you have neither.

Intellectual honesty farts in your general direction.

 

[adrina]

Oh look... speaking of flatulence.