You keep forgetting about Article I, Section V which says in part: "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings"
That's not just a "the founders didn't require Congress to act" statement, but a full on "the founders decided to give Congress the ability to act on what it chose to... deliberately" statement.
Given that the President is required to make sure that the laws are faithfully executed, a Chinese invasion likely would violate quite a few laws so yes... POTUS would be required to act... but then who would force his hand if he refused?
It's their duty to do their Job just like it's my duty to go to work tomorrow.
Utter bollocks and unrelated.
The reason you show up to work each day and do the work that is expected of you is because your boss and company set the terms, if you meet them, you'll probably get to keep coming to work, if you don't, you'll be let go.
Senators are on a six year contract that only ends with death, resignation, expulsion or a non-renewed contract. What they do during that time is 100% up to them, if you don't like it, don't renew their contract.
but the fact is that it is their duty to particpate in this processes
They are, by withholding their consent.
Remember, we live in a country where growing wheat on your own property in violation of federal law is deemed as affecting interstate commerce because you AREN'T selling your wheat and not buying as much from interstate commerce.
To quote Obama and plenty of Democrats back in 2009: "elections have consequences"
The fact is they're threatening the stability of our government
How exactly are we they doing that? There are 8 other justices on the court, fully capable of handling the remaining load. This is not the first time we've had a vacancy on the court or an even number of justices and will probably not be the last time.
Many senior Republicans in congress even have quotes from years past talking about how important it is not to let the court nomination process come to this.
Lets just ignore the quotes from senior Democrats in the Senate who advocated for just what we are seeing now... but apparently that is only acceptable when they are the ones doing it.
As a resident of North Carolina, we didn't give congress to the republican's, our say-so was ripped from our hands forcefully and given to the republicans against the will of the people of North Carolina due to gerrymandering.
Let's just ignore the fact that this story is about the Senate opting not to hold a vote... A body whose members are elected on a statewide basis and not on congressional districts which you may disagree with.
Then again, these are peopel who were frothing at the mouth about the Kenyan terror baby's not being elegible to be president, while finding Dominionist Teddy Cruz a perfectly acceptble candidate.
Aside from your atrocious spelling, your delusions and impending meltdown are absolutely delightful to witness.
You and Hillary are free to keep on telling yourselves that... however the State Department Inspector General and FBI seem to disagree... and no offense, I trust their interpretations much more than I do yours or hers.
While Cruz has touted his hard earned anti-Washington bona fides, his campaign is straight from the Republican Party playbook. His stump speech and voter targeting has adhered with absolute fidelity to Grover Norquist rules. He pounds on the Second Amendment, religious liberty, reigning in entitlements and reducing the debt. He attacks federal intervention in education, gay marriage, and eminent domain. At the same time, he has offered a tax plan that is music to the ears of his largest donors in the hedge fund and oil and gas worlds. His proposal to replace the current progressive income tax system with a 10% flat income tax and a 16% value added tax would constitute a massive shift in the distribution of the income tax burden from the wealthiest Americans to the rest of the population.
... none of which is too far out of line of the mainstream republican view (oh right, the paragraph even says that).
So again, how/why is Cruz evil?
Or are you just one of those Democrats who has a hard time labeling anyone on the right as anything other than stupid or evil?
No 'but', just because property is public doesn't mean it is free from law or control.
If the FCC decides (or is required to by an act of congress) that an allowing unhackable phones to be emit radio signals is not (to use your words) "for the public good", just as simple as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration decreeing that all new cars after 86 must have a center high-mounted stop lamp.
Precisely, and something that most who didn't pay much attention to the first crypto war don't recall.
Perhaps one of the greatest examples of this were the export controls over higher encryption, including source code... which eventually saw the PGP source code getting published into a book as part of a dare towards the government to see if they would actually seek to ban a book.
Except they already do in other forms... and no I'm not talking about *falsely* yelling fire in a theater.
Pictures & drawings are also avenues of free speech... and while the government prohibits some expressions, it actually mandate others.
Should a car company be compelled into having to add government mandated components (air bag, seat belt, side mirrors, headlights, etc) to their designs which are eventually made into real and tangible objects?
I'm sure someone in the Army has read the Hague Convention of 1899, Declaration III which prohibits "the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body".
Unless these things have a built in kill switch which causes them not to explode upon entering a human body, I'd think these things would be illegal for normal warfare.
I'd focus on eating land-based foods for now (like the popcorn)... as with sea levels rising there will be less arable land for agriculture, thus forcing us into either becoming vegetarians or primarily eating what comes from the sea which will suddenly have a far greater production area.
Mental note: Eat steak & baked potato tonight while I still can.
Not quite, the FBI is asking for help on this particular phone... for which it may or may not be too late. I'm pondering future cases, where if you end up say on the no fly list, the FBI orders Apple to opt you into the low-sec update patch which supports pre-emptive monitoring & trivial encryption bypassing if your phone happens to end up with the FBI during an investigation.
You realize this is nothing new, right? Telephone companies for ages have been required to install mechanisms that allow law enforcement the ability to tap your line. The same has existed for many ISPs & online services as well.
The whole Microsoft battling the US government over data stored in Ireland is just one notable example of this.
However the law (as well as the judge) compels Apple to assist with law enforcement investigations.
While Apple has designed things so far in a way that makes it rather hard for the government to unlock a phone after it's been seized, one has to wonder at what point they attempt to compel Apple to deploy a modified version of the OS (without all of the safeguards) to subjects who are under investigation... and with a warrant in hand.
Slashdot Mirror
You keep forgetting about Article I, Section V which says in part: "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings"
That's not just a "the founders didn't require Congress to act" statement, but a full on "the founders decided to give Congress the ability to act on what it chose to... deliberately" statement.
Given that the President is required to make sure that the laws are faithfully executed, a Chinese invasion likely would violate quite a few laws so yes... POTUS would be required to act... but then who would force his hand if he refused?
Utter bollocks and unrelated.
The reason you show up to work each day and do the work that is expected of you is because your boss and company set the terms, if you meet them, you'll probably get to keep coming to work, if you don't, you'll be let go.
Senators are on a six year contract that only ends with death, resignation, expulsion or a non-renewed contract. What they do during that time is 100% up to them, if you don't like it, don't renew their contract.
They are, by withholding their consent.
Remember, we live in a country where growing wheat on your own property in violation of federal law is deemed as affecting interstate commerce because you AREN'T selling your wheat and not buying as much from interstate commerce.
To quote Obama and plenty of Democrats back in 2009: "elections have consequences"
How exactly are we they doing that? There are 8 other justices on the court, fully capable of handling the remaining load. This is not the first time we've had a vacancy on the court or an even number of justices and will probably not be the last time.
Lets just ignore the quotes from senior Democrats in the Senate who advocated for just what we are seeing now... but apparently that is only acceptable when they are the ones doing it.
Let's just ignore the fact that this story is about the Senate opting not to hold a vote... A body whose members are elected on a statewide basis and not on congressional districts which you may disagree with.
Aside from your atrocious spelling, your delusions and impending meltdown are absolutely delightful to witness.
You and Hillary are free to keep on telling yourselves that... however the State Department Inspector General and FBI seem to disagree... and no offense, I trust their interpretations much more than I do yours or hers.
Not to mention that same DoJ recently granted immunity to the staffer who originally setup the server.
Clearly also just smoke and no fire... as they hand out those immunity cards like free condoms on a college campus.
Again... because... ?
The 'worst' I read about Cruz seemed to be:
So again, how/why is Cruz evil?
Or are you just one of those Democrats who has a hard time labeling anyone on the right as anything other than stupid or evil?
Because... ?
You forgot the part about policies regarding classified information... the laws regarding which she is being investigated for
Oops!
Sorry to destroy your narrative.
No 'but', just because property is public doesn't mean it is free from law or control.
If the FCC decides (or is required to by an act of congress) that an allowing unhackable phones to be emit radio signals is not (to use your words) "for the public good", just as simple as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration decreeing that all new cars after 86 must have a center high-mounted stop lamp.
The airbag itself isn't... however it's inclusion in the design plans could be argued as compelled speech.
I agree, it's a stretch, which is my point. We accept compelled/banned speech in some areas but not in others.
No, Geneva doesn't apply to the detainees as unlawful combatants are expressly not protected, same generally goes for spies and saboteurs.
Precisely, and something that most who didn't pay much attention to the first crypto war don't recall.
Perhaps one of the greatest examples of this were the export controls over higher encryption, including source code... which eventually saw the PGP source code getting published into a book as part of a dare towards the government to see if they would actually seek to ban a book.
Thankfully, the government lost that battle.
Except they already do in other forms... and no I'm not talking about *falsely* yelling fire in a theater.
Pictures & drawings are also avenues of free speech... and while the government prohibits some expressions, it actually mandate others.
Should a car company be compelled into having to add government mandated components (air bag, seat belt, side mirrors, headlights, etc) to their designs which are eventually made into real and tangible objects?
Given how much your average social media user shares, I'm pretty sure the NSA knew who you were planning to vote for before you did.
Yup, which is why most PD shops and civilians use hollow point bullets.
Scratch that... it seems the US opted not to ratify the specific part of the 1899 agreement relating to flattening bullets.
The United States is a signatory to the Hague Convention of 1899 but not the Convention on Cluster Munitions.
I'm sure someone in the Army has read the Hague Convention of 1899, Declaration III which prohibits "the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body".
Unless these things have a built in kill switch which causes them not to explode upon entering a human body, I'd think these things would be illegal for normal warfare.
I'd focus on eating land-based foods for now (like the popcorn)... as with sea levels rising there will be less arable land for agriculture, thus forcing us into either becoming vegetarians or primarily eating what comes from the sea which will suddenly have a far greater production area.
Mental note: Eat steak & baked potato tonight while I still can.
Not quite, the FBI is asking for help on this particular phone... for which it may or may not be too late. I'm pondering future cases, where if you end up say on the no fly list, the FBI orders Apple to opt you into the low-sec update patch which supports pre-emptive monitoring & trivial encryption bypassing if your phone happens to end up with the FBI during an investigation.
You realize this is nothing new, right? Telephone companies for ages have been required to install mechanisms that allow law enforcement the ability to tap your line. The same has existed for many ISPs & online services as well.
The whole Microsoft battling the US government over data stored in Ireland is just one notable example of this.
However the law (as well as the judge) compels Apple to assist with law enforcement investigations.
While Apple has designed things so far in a way that makes it rather hard for the government to unlock a phone after it's been seized, one has to wonder at what point they attempt to compel Apple to deploy a modified version of the OS (without all of the safeguards) to subjects who are under investigation... and with a warrant in hand.
How cute, you think the government is that responsive to the people.
Really? Cite them.