Charles Fried was a fervent, superior officer on the frontlines of the Reagan Revolution. As solicitor general of the United States from 1985 to 1989, he urged the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the reining liberal orthodoxies of his day—on abortion, civil rights, executive power and constitutional interpretation.Newsweek
The Q&A then commenced, with Fried completing his introductory remarks about Trump's basic misunderstandings of presidential power.The first thing, which sets the context, is the rhetoric of the president, both when he was running and ever since. The famous statement that he could shoot somebody on Fifth Avenue and get away with it. The assumption he makes is that by virtue of the November election of 2016, he has a mandate to be the leader of the country.
Now there are a number of other powers. The power of nomination, with advice and consent. The pardon power. And the commander in chief power. Commander in chief means that he is the superior officer of all the officers in the military. But it doesn't mean he can do things which no general or colonel could do. And as Justice Jackson said in the Steel Seizure Case, he is the commander in chief of the Army and Navy. But not of the nation, its industries and its people.
There are laws about this. The laws are meant to prevent what happens in Third World countries and in gangster regimes, where contracts are given to your friends and denied to your enemies. That's what competitive bidding is for. Interference with that is unlawful. In any case, to do that for political punishment is, again, corruption and, again, impeachable.
One remaining question about Barr. It's been reported that federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York are criminally investigating Rudolph Giuliani, the president's personal lawyer. Almost any scrutiny of Giuliani will draw into scrutiny of Trump's conduct, too. Are you confident in Barr's willingness to let the prosecutors go wherever the facts lead them?
Rielle48138098 It could be argued there were no admirable people in his Cabinet, ever. Mattis, et. al, have never called him out, they write books for profit or work for for profit prisons, while denying the country the truth. Honorable, my ass. TheResistance
Integrity is a 9 letter word. Few have it, and fewer still, know not what it means.
Who was the honorable to begin with? The great man Kelly who drafted the current immigrant policy while DHS sec. Who resigned and now sits on the board of the largest private prison contractor of immigrants or 1 of the other pieces of sh!t
That’s exactly what he wanted!
🥃
That’s truly sad.
CHRIS MATTHEWS: They're hearing a guy running for president of the United States talking of maybe using nuclear weapons. Nobody wants to hear that about an American president. TRUMP: Then why are we making them? Why do we make them? [MSNBC, March 30, 2016]
🥃
He’s already done serious damage!
🥃
We need more checks and balances. 🥃
That must mean realDonaldTrump is DrainingTheSwamp
Hay, pal, those 'honorable people' still let Trump do whatever the hell he wanted. There were never any adults in the room.
Trump's cabinet had ANY honorable people at some point in time? I'm confused...
DrGJackBrown Wait... Trump allowed honorable people into his Cabinet? Is that why he more/less chased out most of his cabinet staff?
DrGJackBrown ETTD
JilWaters Yes we know that!
DrGJackBrown I dispute that any honorable person would ever have joined it. But I guess there’s a spectrum
DrGJackBrown He's been DOING considerable damage--ever since fucking DAY ONE.
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: YahooNews - 🏆 380. / 59 Read more »
Source: AP - 🏆 728. / 51 Read more »
Source: CNN - 🏆 4. / 95 Read more »
Source: BusinessInsider - 🏆 729. / 51 Read more »
Source: CNN - 🏆 4. / 95 Read more »