RUSH: Jeffrey Lord was on CNN with Anderson Cooper last night and talking about the Ninth Circuit ruling. (interruption) Don’t worry; I know they’ve started. We’ll JIP this thing. We won’t miss the press conference. Here’s Jeffrey Lord making an argument about how Trump could proceed here after the Ninth Circus continued the stay on his executive order.
LORD: Newt Gingrich when he was running for president in 2011, talking about the Hamdan v. Rumsfeld case involving Guantanamo and the rights of prisoners. And Speaker Gingrich said, “I would instruct the national security officials in the Gingrich administration to ignore the recent decisions of the Supreme Court on national security matters, and I would interpose the presidency in saying, ‘As the commander-in-chief, we will not enforce this.'” This is called departmentalism. And this goes back to Thomas Jefferson, who wrote in 1819, “Each department of the national government is truly independent of the others and has an equal right to decide for itself the meaning of the Constitution in the cases submitted to its action.”
RUSH: Okay, were you following that? Now, this is an admitted Trump supporter, Jeffrey Lord. He writes for the American Spectator, and he’s citing actual and true American history. He’s reciting what Jefferson wrote, and he is quoting Newt Gingrich. Now, he’s talking to Jeffrey Toobin. He’s a legal analyst CNN. As far as these people are concerned, there is no coequal branch business. The judiciary runs this country.
Yes, there’s separation of powers, but whenever a court speaks — whether they are condemning the constitutionality of a law from Congress or whether they are condemning a presidential action — the Supreme Court is it. The Supreme Court is the last word. Here comes Jeffrey Lord saying (summarized), “No, no, no. Thomas Jefferson said it’s up to each branch to decide how in the world they are going to define the Constitution’s separation of powers,” and he quoted Gingrich as saying (summarized), “Look, in matters of national security, the court can go to hell. I’m gonna ignore what the court gets wrong because they don’t have all the information I have and I’m gonna implement what I think best.”
Well, now, you can imagine the reaction this got on CNN.
TOOBIN: God sakes, Jeff —
LORD: Well —
TOOBIN: — that’s ridiculous.
LORD: Well —
TOOBIN: The idea —
LORD: Jeff —
TOOBIN: — that the president of the United States can ignore judgments of the court? You know, Andrew Jackson did it regarding the Cherokee Indians.
LORD: And Abraham Lincoln did it! Abraham Lincoln did it.
TOOBIN: Yeah, Abraham Lincoln did it during the Civil War —
TOOBIN: — which is a little different from what’s going on now. The idea —
LORD: Well, according to all my liberal friends, we’re in a Civil War. (chuckling)
TOOBIN: The idea (sputtering) that a president… You know, much credit to Donald Trump, frankly, for saying —
TOOBIN: “See you in court,” rather than saying, “I’m ignoring the court.”
TOOBIN: Newt Gingrich’s lunacy —
TOOBIN: — is not something that —
LORD: Jeff, all I’m saying —
TOOBIN: — anyone should look up to.
LORD: I’m not —
RUSH: Wait a minute, kudos to Donald Trump? “Much credit to Donald Trump for saying, ‘See you in court'”? You know, it’s fascinating. Andrew Jackson… By the way, Lincoln did more than what Jeffrey Lord is attributing to him. Abraham Lincoln actually put a sitting member of Congress in jail. He sent the military out to roust the guy up, put him in jail. Roger Taney was a chief justice of the Supreme Court and he gave a ruling that Lincoln didn’t like on habeas corpus, and he almost put Taney in jail. The fact it was a Civil War…
You know, folks, I gotta tell you something.
I don’t think we’re that far from a Civil War in this country right now. I’m not talking about armed conflict, North v. South, but we clearly have a divide in this country that is in no way gonna be bridged. It isn’t gonna be bridged by compromise. It’s not gonna be bridged by walking across the aisle and getting along with people, and it’s not gonna be bridged by persuading people to agree with us and vice-versa. The only way this is ever gonna end is when one side gets defeated — politically defeated — and becomes a demonstrable minority.
That’s the only way any of this is gonna end. The left does not want this to end! This is normalcy for the left. You must understand this. This is what they want life in America to be day in and day out. Remember, they are victims. They are not happy. As victims, it is impossible to be happy. It’s impossible to be content. They think there are no reasons to be happy. Even when Obama was winning and he was in the White House, they were still livid and angry every day! Over what? The fact that there was opposition to Obama!
Absolutely Rush is correct... this is war and Pres. Trump had best realize there is NO NEGOTIATION that will work... the Left lies and any attempt to bring them to the table of reason will only result in their turning the tables on Trump the minute they can. We must totally defeat them..
Begin by installing the NUCLEAR OPTION PERMANENTLY... in the US Senate. We must isolate and or get rid of Sen. McConnell, by expelling him or censuring him, indicting him for political corruption or he must permanently change the 'rules' of the Senate... to allow a simple majority vote on all issues that require a vote... No more filibustering... NONE. That will strip the Democrats of any power, they believe they have, or are attempt to exercise. If the Democrats want to participate... they MUST COMPROMISE not the GOP.
The GOP needs to start functioning as the Majority Party... and they need to take on the MSM as part of the opposition party now... They need to empower the FCC to strip the networks that create FAKE NEWS... of their licenses to broadcast... Force the networks to sell to owners who will operate their businesses using the best of Journalistic ethics... In fact, Congress should pass strict ETHICAL STANDARDS, for those who want a license to broadcast and if these standards are violated, they loose their license.
The GOP needs to embrace Trump as their leader... and HELP him too fulfill his campaign promises... they must stop fighting him. The RINO's in the Party need to be ID'd and eliminated ASAP... they can be censured, stricken from all committee assignments, and totally isolated from the exercise of their political office forcing them to resign for the benefit of their constituents.
We are at war and the left... including many in the GOP leadership... are out to remove TRUMP from office... Make no mistake, they are playing for keeps, and Trump had better wise up. Trump use the powers of his office to defend his right to be President, and to protect the rights of those who elected him President. The GOP Establishment had better wake up... They are about to create a civil war within the GOP... One, they will loose at great cost, if Trump uses all his powers to remove them... including those criminal investigative powers of the DOJ... to round up and prosecute political corruption.
We take the down now. There is no other choice. It really has become them or us.
As a Tea Party member, I support President Trump all the way.
Permanently exile Obama to Kenya for unAmerican activities and treason and extradite Soros to Russia where he is wanted DEAD OR ALIVE. That will go a long way to normalize America!
Both actions deserve Merit, and would cool the heels of this dissent.
Impound all their monies too!
YES = GIVE SOROS TO RUSSIA !
Soros need to go to the middle east so that he can die there
I agree with Rush
I would just be ecstatic to have President Trump sent law officers and round up those asinine judges and toss them in the callabose!!
Impeach them for violating Article 1, Article 2, Article 3 and 1952 Immigration law.
Article 1--it is Congress's jurisdiction over immigration.
Article 2--it is the POTUS's jurisdiction to execute laws.
Article 3--nowhere does it say the courts have license to hear immigration cases. It spells out what they are allowed to hear and it isn't there.
...'Controversies between two or more states; between a State and Citizens of another State; between Citizens of different States; [or] between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States.' ---nothing on immigration.
THAT would teach the Constitution and set the kind of example and stage for further actions, like nothing else would.
There is very little that Th. Jefferson wrote with which I disagree. However, this quote is not in keeping with the ideal of a limited federal republic.
"Thomas Jefferson, who wrote in 1819, 'Each department of the national government is truly independent of the others and has an equal right to decide for itself the meaning of the Constitution in the cases submitted to its action.'”
I understand the argument. This is an argument that the Supreme Court has repeatedly rejected (exception: when the Court has determined the matter is a "political question" not subject to the "cases and controversies" power.")
I don't know how a limited government could function without a final arbiter of the meaning of the law. If we have three final arbiters, the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches, we have the basis for chaos and tyranny.
Jefferson was not happy that his term in office started with the famous Supreme Court case of Mabury vs Madison, wherein the Court declared that only the high court can interpret the meanings of the words used in the Constitution. That includes Congress' power over immigration.
In a limited federal republic, such a rule is needed to preserve the rule of law.