The chair reserves the right to recess at any time. The president ial oath of office requires the president of the United States to do two thing things, faithfully execute his or her office, and protect and defend the constitution. That oath cannot be honored if the president does not first defend the country. If our National Security is jeopardized or undefended then to successfully execute the office is moot there is no country, there is no office to execute. And so the duty to defend the nations foundational for the president ial responsibilities. But of the second responsibility to defend the constitution quicks what does that really mean we are not speaking of a piece of parchment parchment with the institutions of our democracy to defend the system of checks and balances the constitution and trying to defend the rule of law upon which the idea america was born to be a nation of laws. We do not defend the nation there is no constitution. But if we do not defend the constitution, t
Journal, michael allen, author discussesng red, allegations of cia spied on senate staffers. Then Politico Health to reporter kyle cheney looks at the Obama Administrations effort to get young adults, africanamericans, and hispanics to sign up for health care insurance. Former assistant treasury secretary phillip swingle talks about the fiveyear anniversary of the home affordable modification program. We will be looking for your calls, and you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. At 7ington journal, live a. M. Eastern 7 00 a. M. Eastern on cspan. On wednesday, british deputy Prime Minister nick clegg answered questions from members of parliament on behalf of premised or David Cameron who was on his First Official visit to israel. Labour leader Harriet Harman represented the opposition side. The deputy Prime Ministers spoke about humanitarian efforts in syria and urged allies to continue working with the u. N. On russia and ukraine. He also answered questions on the Nation
Candidates, nominees from president republican president s have learned a lot about how to deal with the hearings. When you heard kavanaugh say as he did, talking about the parties to the case that theyre Flesh And Blood Human Beings and we need to have empathy for them and real world consequences of the court are very important. As a political matter, great stuff. A legal matter, its nonsense. Were youre an Appellate Judge and an issue comes before you, the issue is not the parties. Youre to resolve the legal issues. Its a purely legal matter. The parties may happen to be the case that they pick to do that. Now, obviously its as well as a human being to say you care about the parties, yes, you should, but thats smart to say that. Bork said when he was asked about why he wanted to be on the court back then, he said among other things, he said it was an intellectual feast. His critics got all over that. To him its a theoretical matter
kavanaugh. One is cory booker and kamala harris. No
Cảnh nhạy cảm bị cắt trong phim zingnews.vn - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from zingnews.vn Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
public. of course, i think think all should be maybe public, the ones that and i don t like this committee classification, what happened, but the chairman did allow me to make those public. and in those documents, in one e-mail from march 2002, you discuss limits on contributions to candidates saying, and i have heard very few people say that the limits on contributions to candidates are unconstitutional. although, i for one tend to think those limits have some constitutional problems. i just want to know with the buckley case from 76 being settled law, it seems like you have some issues with those rulings. how do you view the precedent creat creat created by buckley, and would you respect it? the buckley divide, as you know, senator, is that expenditures on the one side, congress does not have substantial authority to regulate contribution limits. on the other side, congress does have authority to regulate and has done so.