Executive Order Creates Political Officers for all US Regulatory Agencies

[Sandman]

Originally posted by Berzerker
they would, they'd just be outnumbered and have even less experience than the rebels.

Why would they? Furthermore, the loyalists would probably have more money and therefore better equipment.

[Patroklos]

The explosion liquefies the metal,

Please explain to me how liquid penetrates armor 300 yards out? Unless it explodes in to 5000 water lathes (sp?), or however many it would take to fill a half shere with a radius of 300 yards.

This is obviously fantasy, or perhaps you just explaned it wrong.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
wtf Oerdin?

I'm quoting from Alberto Gonzales's testimony before Congress earlier this week.

Gonzales' hearing:

SPECTER: Where you have the Constitution having an explicit provision that the writ of habeas corpus cannot be suspended except for rebellion or invasion, and you have the Supreme Court saying that habeas corpus rights apply to Guantanamo detainees — aliens in Guantanamo — after an elaborate discussion as to why, how can the statutory taking of habeas corpus — when there’s an express constitutional provision that it can’t be suspended, and an explicit Supreme Court holding that it applies to Guantanamo alien detainees.
GONZALES: A couple things, Senator. I believe that the Supreme Court case you’re referring to dealt only with the statutory right to habeas, not the constitutional right to habeas.
SPECTER: Well, you’re not right about that. It’s plain on its face they are talking about the constitutional right to habeas corpus. They talk about habeas corpus being guaranteed by the Constitution, except in cases of an invasion or rebellion. They talk about John Runningmeade and the Magna Carta and the doctrine being imbedded in the Constitution.
GONZALES: Well, sir, the fact that they may have talked about the constitutional right to habeas doesn’t mean that the decision dealt with that constitutional right to habeas.
SPECTER: When did you last read the case?
GONZALES: It has been a while, but I’ll be happy to — I will go back and look at it.
SPECTER: I looked at it yesterday and this morning again.
GONZALES: I will go back and look at it. The fact that the Constitution — again, there is no express grant of habeas in the Constitution. There is a prohibition against taking it away. But it’s never been the case, and I’m not a Supreme —
SPECTER: Now, wait a minute. Wait a minute. The constitution says you can’t take it away, except in the case of rebellion or invasion. Doesn’t that mean you have the right of habeas corpus, unless there is an invasion or rebellion?
GONZALES: I meant by that comment, the Constitution doesn’t say, “Every individual in the United States or every citizen is hereby granted or assured the right to habeas.” It doesn’t say that. It simply says the right of habeas corpus shall not be suspended except by —
SPECTER: You may be treading on your interdiction and violating common sense, Mr. Attorney General.
GONZALES: Um.

I'm of course assuming you really didn't know and weren't just trolling.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Oerdin
I'm quoting from Alberto Gonzales's testimony before Congress earlier this week.

I was giving you a wtf because the Gonzales tangent had nothing to do with my post.