Obamagate

Very quiet on this topic.

From the Guardian...

"An audit of thousands of old case files by Ukrainian prosecutors found no evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Hunter Biden, the former prosecutor general, who had launched the audit, told Reuters."

Some of these guys have two black eyes, but keep telling the police they bumped into the door.

Won't turn against their boyfriend for nothing.

These S&M Mofos!

I see what you did there.

But still. no sources for either.

"It keeps the bed wetters obsessed, mission accomplished."

I guess some people would view that as a "good result". Lol

"Trump keeps tweeting and re-tweeting this noun, or is it also a verb?

Anyways, yet to define or explain."

I think it's disturbing that you seem to believe that he's viewing these forums and should feel compelled to respond to your demands that he define words for you. Do you see him as omnipresent and all-knowing?

Calm down, lil fella, you're getting all worked up again.

Mission Accomplished like It's All Under Control?

Like 15 ppl with covid-19 that would soon be close to zero?

Remember he has no responsibility, it's all Obama's fault.

Like that wall that Mexico is going pay for?

You mean like, "Lock Her Up"? And her emails?

Like health care to replace Obamacare?

Like the tax returns he said he'd show if he won?

Like Giuliano's super duper secret investigations?

It keeps the bed wetters obsessed, mission accomplished.

He can't explain what it means but it's easy for him to remember.

Well....

Trump keeps tweeting and re-tweeting this noun, or is it also a verb?

Anyways, yet to define or explain.

The word is just as ambiguous today as the first day he used his scapegoat term.

Yes. Meaning they do not make a decision. They wait for the new administration to take power and let them make their own decisions.

It doesn’t mean that an incoming administration tells the outgoing what to do. Read your review. That information is in the last three paragraphs.

Onehell.....” It does state that a current administration should yield significant foreign relation decisions to new administrations.”

There ya go. You answered your own question.

Your review is more of a do and don’t for the outgoing administration it does not grant anything to the incoming administration.

It actually goes into great detail about the length of an administration. Which works both ways. They have to relinquish power in January 20th after a November election. It does not mention anywhere that they relinquish power any sooner.

So Perry Mason. Where in this law review does it state that the incoming administration has the power to negotiate with a foreign government? It does state that a current administration should yield significant foreign relation decisions to new administrations. It says nothing about new administrations acting on significant decisions.
It is part of the Take Car Clause in order to prevent “Midnight” foreign relations deals from accruing. As they can be more detrimental than domestic decisions.

Onehell..... “I ask you for a law. You give me a law review. Amateurish. At best.”

Amateurish? I cited a law review that explains the laws and reasons behind them while it footnotes case law, legal statutes and Supreme Court opinions that apply. I’m not going to do all your research for you.

Mario you’re citing a Law Review. You’re not citing an actual law.

Do law reviews have a place in how certain laws are interpreted? Yes. But, it is far from a law.

A law review is an opinion. Plane and simple.

I ask you for a law. You give me a law review. Amateurish. At best.

Onehell.....” https://scholarship.law.unc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=4209&context=nclr”

Read pages 1270-1290

You have to be President in order for the Take Care Clause to come into play. It clearly states that it is the President not President-Elect.

Onehell..... “ Apples and Oranges Mario. Back to fruit class. Every newly elected President has contact with all kinds of world leaders. But, they do not have the authorization to negotiate with any of them.”

They most certainly do have that authorization. They are limited in scope. An example would be not being able to sign a treaty until sworn into office, however, they may negotiate. Reference to this is plainly written in the “Take Care Clause”.

“So when Trump met with the Japanese Prime Minister in November of 2016, he was not yet sworn into office. Would that not meet your definition of breaking the Logan act? FYI..... during the transition, Trump (and many of his transition team) met with foreign leaders. For that matter, the Obama, Clinton and Bush transition teams all met with various foreign diplomats. Are they all guilty of a Logan act violation?

Apples and Oranges Mario. Back to fruit class. Every newly elected President has contact with all kinds of world leaders. But, they do not have the authorization to negotiate with any of them.

“ Look up constitutional law of presidential transition. It’s not hard to find.

You are the one staying that the incoming administration has the power. I cannot find it anywhere. I’m just curious as to where you’re finding it.

“ What's he's saying is, until you're actually the president of the American Dental Association, you're not the president.

Quote of the day right there!

Onehell...... Look up constitutional law of presidential transition. It’s not hard to find.

So when Trump met with the Japanese Prime Minister in November of 2016, he was not yet sworn into office. Would that not meet your definition of breaking the Logan act? FYI..... during the transition, Trump (and many of his transition team) met with foreign leaders. For that matter, the Obama, Clinton and Bush transition teams all met with various foreign diplomats. Are they all guilty of a Logan act violation?

Mario,

What's he's saying is, until you're actually the president of the American Dental Association, you're not the president.

President Elect is not the active/acting president.