Gov & Law Events
Follow
Find
19 views | +0 today
 
Scooped by Shalyssa Musolf
onto Gov & Law Events
Scoop.it!

TSA Directly Violated US Constitution By Detaining Senator Rand Paul

TSA Directly Violated US Constitution By Detaining Senator Rand Paul | Gov & Law Events | Scoop.it

In preventing Kentucky Senator Rand Paul from flying to Washington this morning, the TSA directly violated the law as written in the US Constitution.

Shalyssa Musolf's insight:

Written in the US Constition, it is against the law to be detained. Rand Paul was claimed but doesn't agree and denies that he never was.

more...
Abby Bisgard's curator insight, February 6, 2013 1:40 PM

Senator Rand Paul claims that he was detained, and that is against the U.S. Constitution. TSA officials insist that he was never detained, but simply asked to sit in a cubicle.

Tim Hogan's comment, February 7, 2013 12:54 PM
This kind of situation will just keep going back an fourth. If he was detained, this would bring up yet another constitutional violation. We might as well just throw it in the trash since no one seems to follow it.

From around the web

Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by Shalyssa Musolf
Scoop.it!

Political Parties and the Union.

Political Parties and the Union. | Gov & Law Events | Scoop.it
The Boston Courier has an able editorial condemning the spirit, in which Senators HALE, of New-Hampshire, and IVERSON, of Georgia, opened a discussion of the subject of secession last week.
Shalyssa Musolf's insight:

If there is a civil war, there should be a issue that it solves. There shouldn't be any fights between the political parties.

more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Shalyssa Musolf from Finland
Scoop.it!

Political Parties Reveal Priorities

Political Parties Reveal Priorities | Gov & Law Events | Scoop.it
Following next month's Finnish parliamentary elections, key issues such as social benefits, taxation and NATO membership are coalition deal-breakers for the different parties. Despite their diverging priorities, very few coalitions appear impossible.
Via Ulla M. Saikku
Shalyssa Musolf's insight:
This article explains the different priorities that each party needs.
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Shalyssa Musolf
Scoop.it!

The Insiders: Empowering campaigns and political parties

The Insiders: Empowering campaigns and political parties | Gov & Law Events | Scoop.it
The Supreme Court should overturn the contribution limits. Our current campaign finance system has it exactly backwards.
Shalyssa Musolf's insight:

The Supreme Court is undergoing a case that limits individual contributions to political parties. There decision is still under construction to end this.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Shalyssa Musolf
Scoop.it!

Arkansas Lawmakers Weigh Constitutional Amendments - www.ktts.com

Arkansas Lawmakers Weigh Constitutional Amendments - www.ktts.com | Gov & Law Events | Scoop.it
37 Proposals To Amend The State Constitution
Shalyssa Musolf's insight:

Little Rock is going to plan to make an amendment to set a pay for elected officials. They will get to decide if they should add it or deny the amendment which it depends how long they will take to be a lobbyist.

more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Shalyssa Musolf from AC Affairs
Scoop.it!

Constitutional Court closes lid on Civil War papers feud

Constitutional Court closes lid on Civil War papers feud | Gov & Law Events | Scoop.it

Justices rule that Catalonia is the righful owner of the so-called Salamanca papers after controversial decision to move archive

Spain's Constitutional Court last week closed the lid on a bitter regional row that had been raging since the transition to democracy in the 1970s.

On Friday the country's highest court ruled that Catalonia, rather than Castilla-La Mancha, was the rightful owner of the so-called Salamanca papers - 500 boxes of documents seized from Catalan political parties, unions and individuals by Franco's troops at the end of the Civil War.

In making its ruling, the court dismissed the appeal presented by Castilla-La Mancha, arguing that the law supporting the transfer of the documents from the General Archive of the Spanish Civil War in Salamanca to the Catalan regional government was unconstitutional...


Via @AngloCatalans
Shalyssa Musolf's insight:

This article is about how Spain closed the raging paper fued of the Civil War. They got escorted from Salamanca by police to Catalonia. They have been at this for so long, it's time they get it back.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Shalyssa Musolf
Scoop.it!

TSA Directly Violated US Constitution By Detaining Senator Rand Paul

TSA Directly Violated US Constitution By Detaining Senator Rand Paul | Gov & Law Events | Scoop.it

In preventing Kentucky Senator Rand Paul from flying to Washington this morning, the TSA directly violated the law as written in the US Constitution.

Shalyssa Musolf's insight:

Written in the US Constition, it is against the law to be detained. Rand Paul was claimed but doesn't agree and denies that he never was.

more...
Abby Bisgard's curator insight, February 6, 2013 1:40 PM

Senator Rand Paul claims that he was detained, and that is against the U.S. Constitution. TSA officials insist that he was never detained, but simply asked to sit in a cubicle.

Tim Hogan's comment, February 7, 2013 12:54 PM
This kind of situation will just keep going back an fourth. If he was detained, this would bring up yet another constitutional violation. We might as well just throw it in the trash since no one seems to follow it.
Scooped by Shalyssa Musolf
Scoop.it!

America's Five Political Parties | RealClearPolitics

America's Five Political Parties | RealClearPolitics | Gov & Law Events | Scoop.it
Shalyssa Musolf's insight:

This article explains that America now has five parties. Which consists of moderate to liberal democrats, liberal democrats, semi-moderate Republicans, Socially conservative Republicans, and Libertarian Republicans.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Shalyssa Musolf
Scoop.it!

Political parties must cooperate to make this a productive budget session - The Times of India

Political parties must cooperate to make this a productive budget session - The Times of India | Gov & Law Events | Scoop.it
The budget session of Parliament beginning today is significant for more reasons than one. First, the annual budget presentation will provide parliamentarians with a valuable opportunity to debate the government`s financial proposals and policies.
Shalyssa Musolf's insight:

This article is about the annual budget for the Parliament.

more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Shalyssa Musolf from The Amendments of the Constitution
Scoop.it!

19th amendment - Government

19th amendment...

Via Bethany Hintze
Shalyssa Musolf's insight:

The 19th Amandment is the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation

more...
rbrown18's curator insight, February 6, 2013 10:28 PM

This video talks about the 19th amendment of the US Constitution. The 19th amendment enfranchised women allowing them to vote. The amendment was ratified between 1919 and 1920.

Andrew Root's comment, February 16, 2013 8:17 PM
It is interesting to see all the people who suffered or got arrested for something that is taken for granted today.
Erika Mathias's comment, February 18, 2013 9:53 PM
It's weird seeing how a simple right for women changed many things. I can't believe how big of an issue this used to be, and now thinking about it, how much of a privilege it is that I got to vote in the recent election.
Scooped by Shalyssa Musolf
Scoop.it!

Rick Nolan calls for campaign-finance constitutional amendment

Rick Nolan calls for campaign-finance constitutional amendment | Gov & Law Events | Scoop.it
WASHINGTON -- Nolan has no illusions the bill will pass this year, but said:
Shalyssa Musolf's insight:

This article is about Rick Nolan who will try to introduce a resolution for an amendment. The amendment is to narrow down protections of the Consitution to give people the opportunity to give power to lawmakers for spending/funraising.

more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Shalyssa Musolf from War Against Islam
Scoop.it!

DOJ Memo:”strikes against Americans does not violate constitutional protections"

DOJ Memo:”strikes against Americans does not violate constitutional protections" | Gov & Law Events | Scoop.it

A confidential Justice Department memo concludes that the U.S. government can order the killing of American citizens if they are believed to be “senior operational leaders” of al-Qaida or “an associated force” -- even if there is no intelligence indicating they are engaged in an active plot to attack the U.S.

 

The 16-page memo, http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/020413_DOJ_White_Paper.pdf ; a copy of which was obtained by NBC News, provides new details about the legal reasoning behind one of the Obama administration’s most secretive and controversial polices: its dramatically increased use of drone strikes against al-Qaida suspects abroad, including those aimed at American citizens, such as the  September 2011 strike in Yemen that killed alleged al-Qaida operatives Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan. Both were U.S. citizens who had never been indicted by the U.S. government nor charged with any crimes.  

 

Attorney General Eric Holder specifically endorsed the constitutionality of targeted killings of Americans, saying they could be justified if government officials determine the target poses  “an imminent threat of violent attack.”

 

“The condition that an operational  leader present an ‘imminent’ threat of violent attack against the United States does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future,” the memo states.

 

The undated memo is entitled “Lawfulness of a Lethal Operation Directed Against a U.S. Citizen who is a Senior Operational Leader of Al Qa’ida or An Associated Force.”  It was provided to members of the Senate Intelligence and Judiciary committees in June by administration officials on the condition that it be kept confidential and  not discussed publicly.

 

“This is a chilling document,” said Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the ACLU, which is suing to obtain administration memos about the targeted killing of Americans.  “Basically, it argues that the government has the right to carry out the extrajudicial killing of an American citizen. … It recognizes some limits on the authority it sets out, but the limits are elastic and vaguely defined, and it’s easy to see how they could be manipulated.”

In particular, Jaffer said, the memo “redefines the word imminence in a way that deprives the word of its ordinary meaning.”  

 

It  also discusses why such targeted killings would not be a war crime or violate a U.S. executive order banning assassinations.

 

In one passage in Holder’s speech at Northwestern in March,  he alluded – without spelling out—that there might be circumstances where the president might order attacks against American citizens without specific knowledge of when or where an attack against the U.S. might take place.

 

“The Constitution does not  require the president to delay action until some theoretical end-stage of planning, when the precise time, place and manner of an attack become clear,”  he said.

“The Constitution does not  require the president to delay action until some theoretical end-stage of planning, when the precise time, place and manner of an attack become clear,”  he said.

 

The white paper also includes a more extensive discussion of why targeted strikes against Americans does not violate constitutional protections afforded American citizens as well as   a U.S. law that criminalizes the killing of U.S. nationals overseas.

It  also discusses why such targeted killings would not be a war crime or violate a U.S. executive order banning assassinations.

 

 “A lawful killing in self-defense is not an assassination,” the white paper reads. “In the Department’s view, a lethal operation conducted against a U.S. citizen whose conduct poses an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States would be a legitimate act of national self-defense that would not violate the assassination ban. Similarly,  the use of lethal force, consistent with the laws of war, against an individual who is a legitimate military target would be lawful and would not violate the assassination ban.”


Via littlebytesnews
Shalyssa Musolf's insight:

I don't think it's right that they just think they can kill any human being. They have a chance just like anyone else.

more...
littlebytesnews's curator insight, February 5, 2013 1:43 PM

Isn't this nice to know....while I felt Awlaki was an enemy of the US and denounced his citizenship through his actions and involvement in terrorism activities, I don't think the killing of his 16yro son can be considered justified. There were no videos or proof he had involvement in terrorism, other than being the son of a terrorist suspect. While Awalki was a terror suspect, I believe we had enough intelligence and video evidence that he was an enemy of the US and thus declaring terror attacks against us and influencing others such as Nidal Hasan, who killed 13 Americans at Ft. Hood in 2009.

 

In a previous post I shared an interesting couple articles I came across on Esquire.com of all places. While the author appears somewhat libertarian in their views, they may also be a liberal because he blames Obama's mass drone strikes on General Patraeus, even though prior to Patraeus nomination to the CIA Obama was still conducting more drone strikes and killing more civilians than he was capturing terrorists in Afghanistan. 

 

The first article, entitled the "Lethal Presidency of Barack Obama" is clipped below....I am only sharing portions of the first page of a five page article: 

The Lethal Presidency of Barack Obama--And An American Story http://sco.lt/995JjN.


This post discusses Obama's drone and kill list, along with another article, by the same author on the Patraeus Scandal and CIA drone attacks. 

 

The second article refers to the sex scandal of Gen Patreaus and his downfall at the CIA. In this article he points out how Obama manages a 'kill list' and puts blame on the CIA, particularly Gen Patraeus for militarizing the CIA, and JSOC. The article says the CIA and JSOC is actually responsible for carrying out drone strikes in several countries, rather than the military, which led to the death of American terrorist Anwar Awalki and his son in 2011. 

 

The same author of "The Lethal Presidency of Barack Obama", writes in Esquire:

The revelation that President Obama managed a “kill list” from the Oval Office rightly drew a great deal of attention; but just as remarkable were the killings in which the President had no direct hand. It has been estimated that the White House has ordered about a third of the targeted killings that have taken place under the Obama Administration; the rest have come at the behest of JSOC and the CIA. The President was consulted about the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki, and ordered it to be carried out on September 30, 2011; apparently he was not consulted about the drone strike that two weeks later killed al-Awlaki’s son Abdulrahman, a 16-year-old American citizen never associated with terrorism.

 

Read more: David Petraeus Scandal - CIA Drone Attacks - Esquire http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/petraeus-scandal-drone-killings-14735709#ixzz2CLXdmGg8

 

I don't know how accurate his accusations are that the CIA and JSOC are responsible for the majority of drone strikes around the world, including Yemen, Libya, Pakistan, Africa and Latin America. However, as President and Commander in Chief I would still put all responsibility and liability against Obama. Just as he is responsible for successes of our military/intelligence actions ie: the killing of Osama, he is also responsible for the failures ie: Benghazi and the attacks in Afghanistan against our troops by Afghanistan 'allies' and the recent attack on Camp Bastion. 

 

Related:

Code Pink Protests Killing Of Al-Qaeda Leader Anwar Al-Awlaki Outside White House… http://sco.lt/5XWrcP

 

More: http://www.scoop.it/t/war-against-islam?q=drone

 

http://www.scoop.it/t/war-against-islam?q=military

 

 

 

Scooped by Shalyssa Musolf
Scoop.it!

President Obama Signs Arkansas Disaster Declaration - Whitehouse.gov (press release)

President Obama Signs Arkansas Disaster Declaration - Whitehouse.gov (press release) | Gov & Law Events | Scoop.it
President Obama Signs Arkansas Disaster Declaration Whitehouse.gov (press release) The President today declared a major disaster exists in the State of Arkansas and ordered Federal aid to supplement state and local recovery efforts in the area...
more...
MsHaeussinger's comment, January 30, 2013 7:50 PM
Not to discount the disaster in Arkansas but I wonder how a storm of this magnitude compares with a blizzard here in the Midwest?
Erika Mathias's comment, February 6, 2013 10:29 AM
Yeah I agree with that. I wonder if that storm would be worse than a lovely Minnesota storm or maybe they just weren't prepared for that or haven't experienced a storm of such magnitude.