ONE THING....where's the outrage from Democrats? This is Trump's beginning moves to kill the investigation...there should be at least a dozen Democrats screaming from the roof tops....it's as obvious as the orange mop on Trump's head what he is doing, no need to wait for another shoe to drop. Make Mueller safe, now !!!
3
Whitaker legal views are “internally contradictory” and “ignorant.” Great! Perfect Trump pick to lead Department of Justice and serve as top US law enforcement officer. Since Trump and McConnell don't have justice on their minds it won't matter. All Whitaker has to do is find the most radical Trump supporters for nomination to the federal court system; Trump will nominate and McConnell will see to confirmation. What are the odds that Richard Spencer, Jason Kessler and David Duke get onto the nomination list?
3
Reads like Mr. Whitake is unfamiliar with Judicial Review. Perhaps his Iowa law school class on Constitutional Law skipped over the Marshall decisions in Marbury, Fletcher, Cohens, Dartmouth, and Gibbons decisions.
It is unfortunate that a man with such limited view and apparently limited capabilities is now the acting AG. I suggest a permanent return to Iowa City, although I don't want those folks to have to live with him.
Is he friends with Steve King?!
5
What's the surprise? Just par for the this administration!
2
“I’m going to surround myself only with the best and most serious people. We want top of the line professionals.”
4
This man is obviously not qualified, just like Trump and his spawn for positions in high government, a government
FOR the people.
1
I just finished reading the piece by Goldman and Robles about Whitaker's involvement with the defunct patent company for which he was an advisor. He sent an e-mail to a disgruntled client suggesting the client could be subject to criminal charges as a result of his complaints. As far as I know this it is clearly unethical for an attorney to threaten criminal consequences under these circumstances. Someone should file an ethics complaint against him in Iowa where he is presumably registered.
4
The newfound respect and defense of the US Constitution by the left is gobsmacking. That massive Blue Wave last Tuesday really cleaned up that heretofore "deeply flawed document".
Last Monday, the very Constitution itself was the vile concoction of a racist white oligarchic patriarchy.
Last Monday, the Electoral College was the stuff of the suppression of true democracy. It was anachronistic, undemocratic and down right unfair [except when Democrats win the Presidency].
Most of the First and all of the Second Amendments had no place in the progressive 21st Century. The Fifth needed some remedial attention to the "due process" clause. Innocence itself became a matter of opinion, not principle.
But, all of these flaws, and much more, have been remedied. The Constitution is now the unquestionable buttress of American Democracy. Every word, every phrase, every original intent of this "sacred" document must be adhered to or the tenuous threads upon which democracy is suspended over the abyss will be severed and we shall plunge into authoritarianism [read that - Trumpism].
Thank Goodness. The Blue Wave cleansed the Constitution just in time to thwart catastrophe.
So sayeth the Left.
2
Whitaker appointment was Trump's not-so-subtle plan to starve Mueller investigation to a slow, painful death. The Senators could move to protect Mueller. We the people took to the streets last night in protest.
1
Mr. Whitaker and the red state AGs may accomplish something liberals have been mostly unable to do, peal off a SC justice from the conservative block (now 5). They are likely to bring positions to the Court so rabidly conservative, partisan and unconstitutional as to require that the conservatives the Court make it a joke. The Chief, protecting his place in history, may refuse to play along. Of course, once Trump can appoint a replacement for RBG, that won't matter.
1
The concept of judicial review goes back not just to Marbury v Madison (1803) but to Rutgers v Waddington (1784). It is an idea first espoused by Alexander Hamilton & is older than the Constitution itself. To deny it is to deny American history. This man has no business being an officer of the court at all, much less acting Attorney General.
4
whitaker is an "off the charts" right wing ideologue. "ignorance" is the least of his problems.
let's hope rosenstein and mueller and others impacted by whitaker's decisions immediately sue to seek an injunction prohibiting whitaker from exercising any authority of the attorney general.
trump republicans don't realize how destructive trump and ignorance can be to our country.
1
There are many reasons to be concerned with Matt Whitaker in the AG post, but to suspect that he will suddenly wind up the Mueller investigation without its final report is among the over-the-top opinions heard here. Whether he has received an order or would respond to an order from the President to subtly pressure it to conclusion or otherwise quickly wrap it up, before Mueller's team can do its fullest work, is of greater concern.
My uninformed (but wise?) guess is that the president, who seems preoccupied with Mueller to the exclusion of other DOJ concerns--"rightly so" I've heard journalists say, without explaining it--is using Whitaker's appointment as a threat to the investigation. If he doesn't like what he sees developing, and reads the politics in his base favorably, he's more likely to do something rash and extra-legal with Whitaker as AG. This still is very concerning, but not rising to the level of an imminent threat to Mueller.
Best solution: Congress should take the investigation out of DOJ hands. Without an imminent threat to Mueller, this won't likely happen, at least not soon enough. So is it true Mueller is feeling the pressure and beginning to write his final report? And what of Rod Rosenstein? Journalists seem to have forgotten him.
1
i suggest you may want to tone down your coverage, which is exemplified in the following excerpt: "George T. Conway III, a conservative lawyer who is married to Mr. Trump’s adviser Kellyanne Conway."
i think most readers would agree that Mr. Conway is conservative. he is married to one, but that does not qualify.
@edward murphy
sorry...i meant to say NOT conservative.
1
He sounds like a very intelligent man who is not subject to the all-encompassing leftist brainwashing going on.
2
Indeed! His ability to parrot Right-Wing-Noise-Machine talking points is unsurpassed.
3
Matthew Whitaker, the new Attorney General is acting as an experienced politician when records show he is nothing more than one of the million political attorneys practicing in this country. He served as a State Attorney for the Southern District of Iowa and in September of 2017, was Chief of Staff to Attorney General Jeff Sessions.
The new Attorney General is questioning special counsel Mueller ' investigation of possible collusion between the Trump’s Campaign and Russia. Mr. Whitaker has no idea of what’s been happening with this investigation nor has he ever seen any records, and yet, he claims it’s been a “hoax.” President Trump appointed Matthew Whitaker as Attorney General because he’s his fervent supporter; a “copycat” always copying Trump’s behavior an ideas.
President Trump feeds on discord and thus far he’s been successful dividing this nation. Sadly, all people around him and the Republicans in Washington worship him; maybe out of fear or out of adulation. Is it considered a cult?
President Trump has vowed and I quote: “warlike posture” if Democrats investigate him. He can 't ignore how this country responded last night by having a walk in support of the work special counsel Mr. Robert Mueller is doing.
Let’s hope no more damage is done before Democrats Take over the House of Representatives on January 21, 2019.
6
The newly installed head of the Justice Department, Matthew G. Whitaker, espoused views that a constitutional scholar called “internally contradictory” and “ignorant.”
So, it seems Matthew Whitaker exactly meets the standards of this administration's appointees.
7
This guy is one of Trump's "best people." In other words, his understanding of the US Constitution is ignorant, according to Lawrence Tribe. Heaven help us. No wonder Trump waited until after the election to fire Sessions. Had he done so on Monday or Tuesday afternoon the Senate would have flipped to blue.
2
Whitaker is NOT the Acting Attorney General! The appointment is illegal not because “other people say so” (to quote Trump of all people) in an Editorial yesterday, but because it is illegal in accordance with the clear language of the Constitution.
I submit that calling Whitaker “Acting Attorney General” is editorial malpractice on the part of the Times.
3
Besides the obvious things that make Whitaker unfit to serve as even the office boy bringing in office supplies to the Attorney General's office, is that he doesn't realize by stepping in and doing Trump's bidding, that it may not turn out so well for him. He wouldn't be the first AG to end up in prison for trying to obstruct justice for a criminal president.
4
This man does not deserve to the in the Justice Department at all. He obviously believes that the Judicial branch of government is not equal to the executive or congressional branches. What socialist society did he grow up in? It seems to me that the Supreme Court is the last voice in a court ruling. Who does he think he serves - Trump or the American People?
2
According to a column by Ruth Marcus in today's Washington Post, Matthew Whitaker is also on public record as supporting a religious test for the appointment of federal judges. He reportedly stated that he would consider religious Christians to be well qualified to be federal judges, but would automatically view any secular nominee with great skepticism.
The third clause of Article VI of the US Constitution reads as follows: "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
In order to serve as Acting Attorney General, a person must swear to uphold the Constitution. Matthew Whitaker has made it clear, by public statements, that he does not respect or support Article VI of the US Constitution. This is the kind of issue that would normally be examined in a Senate confirmation hearing. In bypassing the Deputy Attorney General, confirmed by the Senate and designated by statute to serve as e Attorney General when there is a vacancy in that position, and instead appointing an ey General who has not been reviewed or confirmed by the Senate, President Trump is circumventing the constitutional and statutory framework for filling that position.
13
Whitaker is inexperienced, unconfirmed and was sued for fraud at his last employment position. And to top it off, he has stated biased opinions of the ongoing Russia investigation without even knowing the facts.
He should be reminded that even though he is too young to remember, there were 69 indictments in the Special Prosecutor's Watergate corruption scandal in the Nixon administration.
Of those, 2 attorney generals were indicted. Attorney generals are not above the law.
John Ehrlichman, Counsel to Nixon
Egil Krogh, aide to counsel John Ehrlichman
John W. Dean III, counsel to Nixon
Herbert W. Kalmbach, personal attorney to Nixon
Charles W. Colson, special counsel to Nixon
John N. Mitchell, Attorney General of the United States who resigned
Frederick C. LaRue, Advisor to John Mitchell
Richard Kleindienst, Attorney General
Jeb Stuart Magruder, Deputy Director of Committee to Re-elect the President
Herbert L. Porter, aide to the Committee to Re-elect the President
H. R. Haldeman, Chief of Staff
Maurice Stans, United States Secretary of Commerce
12
Is Iran's theocracy any different than Whitaker advocating for judges with a New Testament perspective? Iran has an elected president, Hassan Rouhan, but Iran's supreme leader has at least equal power and is appointed to interpret Islamic or Sharia law and apply it to government and judicial decisions. I see no difference between Whitaker and Trump's conservative Christian cabal and Iran's supreme leader Ali Khamenei's enforcement of Sharia law.
10
The Courts are the decisive branch. What legislative function that they do serve is as the State’s foremost body of arbitration.
There’s a reason that the Federal Supreme Court has traditionally been conservative-leaning. Change wasn’t ever intended to occur as rapidly as it can when money is considered speech.
Trump’s brand of “conservatism” is neoliberalism on a meth binge.
2
He knows more than anyone else and he's right. trumps kind of guy.
2
an ignorant, wrong-headed, and retrogressive bootlicker: a perfect Trump loyalist appointee.
on the bottom of his right foot he has tattooed: "when the President does it" and on his left, "it's not a crime."
7
An Attorney General nominee completely lacking in qualifying credentials for the job. Does anyone think this is new?
Pretty much like other Trump nominees to head up some of our most influential and powerful agencies. Anyone surprised?
Unqualified status is the first requirement of every Trump and Republican nominee.
Nothing here. Just move along folks.
3
I think Mr. Whitaker took too many hits to the head in college football.
5
The real question in my mind and probably the minds of many of my fellow citizens is whether Donald Trump selected Mr. Whitaker to be the Attorney General because he would do the best job for American Justice or whether he would be Mr. Trump's personal protector against judicial interference in Trump's personal and presidential business?
7
I can’t believe- don’t want to believe- what I just read about this man.
Another pickaxe swing into the nation of laws we have enjoyed.
The people who put this regime in power have done terrible harm.
And this guy sounds like a zealot of the extreme fringe.
So what was the big deal in re-taking the House when Trump can keep injecting concentrated rot into the highest offices in the land?
This guy is scary.
5
have we no recourse? trump has exploded the holes in our constitution and is throwing it in our faces...
4
Um, you really need to ask? Obviously the republican leadership serves party and ideology only. His backbone is already there, it’s his ethics that are in need of growth and I wouldn’t be holding my breath on that one. McConnall believes in power and domination, the rule of law is not even a blip on his radar and obstructing justice serves his agenda very well indeed.
2
Having one's own political views is the right of all citizens, whether one agrees with them or not. But what's disturbing about this fellow is his propensity to express highly partisan views in public that strongly suggest a conflict of interest and raise serious questions about his ability to carry out his public duties in a professional, nonpartisan way. Moreover, if Tribe is correct, then he's really no more than a political soldier of the right armed with legal skills. That's very dangerous.
"He seems to think much of the fabric of federal law that is part of our ordinary lives violates the Constitution of the United States to which he is evidently going to take an oath,”
3
Trump appointing a known scammer to the highest law enforcement position in the land would seem to indicate he doesn't really care about optics anymore, as long as he thinks there is a chance he can kill the Mueller investigation.
9
So now Trump administration officials can never have ever expressed a thought in the past.
Forcibly suppressing the speech of someone with whom one disagrees is a quintessentially fascist act.
THAT is today's Democratic Party and it's massive media propaganda machine.
4
You are missing the point - Freedom of expression is one thing. Judges also have a professional duty/ obligation to be impartial, follow the law, and keep their personal point of view out of their decisions. Republican or Democrat would want this where they to come before the court and the judge / attorney general whose job it is to follow the law... take a civics course and learn , Fox news is not a source for education, only a source for opinions
3
The more I learn about Mr. Whitaker tells me that the only world he can comfortably exist in is the world of Donald Trump. A perfect hatchet man for President Trump. How he got this far as a lawyer is astonishing. People really must be afraid to challenge him. He is truly a danger to our country. I do wonder, though, how long it will be before President Trump denigrates Mr. Whitaker for having gone to the University of Iowa Law School rather than one in the Ivy League.
1
What can one say?
A 4th rate legal mind from a 3rd rate law school.
And, bizarrely, he was able to pass that state's bar exam.
3
Is this guy really an attorney or a vigilante? He is trump's new go to guy...accused of bilking customers in a scam operation...trump's kind of guy. What has happened to Rudy the Mouth? Is he still in South America running a scam with the new dictators down there? trump leaves for Europe as protests mount in US against his self-serving actions. Why did he go anyway when the US did not want to enter WWI in the first place? He hates those Europeans as much as he hates the American people who oppose him. Guess he just needed time away to regroup his hate & anger. He will come back mad about perceived something some European said or did to him. If the US was smart, they wouldn't let him back in.
5
Kellyanne’s husband speaks the truth. Unconstitutional appointment.
3
Nothing quite like installing your own, personal person to oversee an investigation into your actions. A person, moreover, who has already stated that he doesn't accept that such an investigation should be done at all. Whittaker's only qualification for the post of AG, in any capacity, is loyalty to Trump. Not to the nation, not to the Constitution, but to Trump. This is an attempted coup and must not be allowed to continue.
8
Trump--in his selections of Cabinet officials, diplomats, senior staff--has only one requirement: loyalty to him. It's a cult. The Constitution isn't even referenced. Trump is attempting to distract from the Democratic takeover of the House, but the American people know how they felt in the voting booth: choosing someone who could be a check on Trump's autocratic ways. The choice of Whitaker is an attempt to control another news cycle. It's the Trumpian way. The American people are smarter than the con man in the White House. Trump knows the bell is tolling for him, sooner rather than later.
5
More evidence that Trump only hires the best people? So much for Trump's claim to being the Law and Order President. If only there was a Deep State that could neutralize Acting AG Whittaker. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, talks like a duck and obstructs justice like a duck it must be an impeachable duck. Let's hope Katyal's and Conway's argument finds some traction in the courts. Thank you Mr. Savage for showing us how dangerous Acting AG Whittaker is to our democracy.
2
I wonder how much damage can be done between now and January when the new Congress is in session. I’m also wondering who in the U.S. government would follow orders from this AG and who will not.
2
Well! Isn't this a coincidence. Kavanaugh, being chosen off a "C" list, and, with the help of McConnell, lands in the Supreme Court, and Whitaker, who is on record pushing the arrogant view that the Executive Branch (read: Donald Trump) is above the courts. What a scheme in the dreams of Trump & Co to insulate themselves from the Mueller Investigation. More brazen and bald moves to obstruct justice. The problem is not a metaphorical "draining of the swamp" -- it is how to detoxify a Chernobyl-like meltdown of our Constitutional Democracy. The notion of "impeachment," sounded shrill a half-year ago; today its sounds imperative.
6
Whitaker sounds worse than Sessions. The only thing I did not see him commenting on is marijuana. He looks the age group of people who condone smoking marijuana. So he has no comment on that unlike Sessions who was out to crack down on states with new marijuana for personal use laws. Everything he says in this article makes him a gadfly. Trump apparently likes firebrands and those who challenge the system going back to 1803 Marbury v. Madison.
1
Stating your misguided opinion as fact doesn’t make it so. Trump undoubtedly thinks that his proxy at justice can undermine the Russia investigation before congress is back in session. That way he can portray the resulting investigations as political witch hunts. Whitaker no more beliefs in the rule of law than Trump does. We’re back to the idea of an imperial presidency unaccountable to other branches of government and assisted by a federalist society stooge illegally put in charge of the Justice Department. That’s my “opinion” and Whitaker’s record and statements does nothing to refute them. Time and a great deal fuss will tell whose opinion is supported by “facts” but Whitaker’s unfitness for AG is already self evident based on his record alone.
3
What a musical comedy this is going to make. Casting directors and producers will be swamped. Popcorn prices will skyrocket. Our grandkids will still be seeing it on Broadway, and asking, "Were you in that war, grandpa?" Art lives forever. Tyrants, less.
2
It’s amusing to read criticism of Mr. Whitaker for questioning the immense power of the judiciary when over the last two years we’ve witnessed time and again activist federal judges block executive orders issued by President Trump. Never mind that their decrees have been routinely overturned by the Supreme Court, the ability of ONE unelected judge to temporarily at least, negate the constitutional authority afforded the president should be the concern of Mr. Whitakers critics, not his criticism of it.
In todays edition of the NY Times we read of another blatant example of judicial overreach as District Court judge Brian Morris blocked construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline on the basis that it failed “to address the Obama administration’s arguments about climate change, including the need to keep rising global temperatures at safe levels as a basis for denying the pipeline permit”. Not coincidentally, judge Morris is an Obama appointee. That might explain his embrace of the flawed “reasoning” behind President Obamas denial of the permit. It probably also explains the hubris of judge Morris if he believes his decree will have even an infinitesimal impact at regulating global temperatures, or that it won’t be overturned by the Supreme Court.
The judiciary may not be an “inferior” branch of government but one can certainly argue that it has become populated with inferior judges. I suspect that was the point Mr. Whitaker was trying to make.
4
Of course this would Trump's guy. Donald Trump believes no authority is higher than his. Donald Trump believes no branch of government is as important as the branch of government over which he presides. This is just the same theme over and over again.
It is little wonder why Donald Trump gets along so well with Vladimir Putin. They are aligned perfectly in their demand for total, unquestioned control. Mr Whitaker is just another example of an individual with a limited knowledge of the constitutional law, conspiring with Donald Trump to subvert it.
5
Democrat OR republican OR Independent ... the Constitution of the USA is in jeopardy! It is time to mobilise! Call your Senator or Representative. Tell them to:
Bring the Special Counsel Independence and Integrity Act to a vote in the Senate and introduce it in the House. This proposed law would protect the Special Counsel from firing, except for cause.
Call for Matthew Whitaker to recuse himself from oversight of the Mueller investigation, given his clear and public conflict of interest.
4
Mr. Whitaker looks and acts like a professional wrestler.
President Trump has long been an admirer of professional wrestling.
This is perhaps the reason why this country is now being run as if it were an offshoot of the World Wide Wrestling Federation.
5
But unfortunately not as efficiently.
4
Mr. Whitaker looks and acts like a professional wrestler.
President Trump has long been an admirer of professional wrestling.
This is perhaps the reason why this country is now being run as if it were an offshoot of the World Wide Wrestling Federation.
But unfortunately not as efficiently.
2
Well Donald Trump found his Roy Cohn at last. Federalist society trained and among the most radical of reactionary legal conservatives Mr. Whitaker will serve Trump well, for justice (both the department and the concept) and the nation as a whole, not so much.
3
How many of the protesters were paid to protest (e.g., mercenaries) this past Thursday?
2
“We cannot tolerate such an evasion of the Constitution’s very explicit, textually precise design,” they wrote, adding, “For the president to install Mr. Whitaker as our chief law enforcement officer is to betray the entire structure of our charter document.”
People who try too hard to impress are rarely very persuasive, people know a snow job when they read it.
3
There were over 1000 demonstrations to Stop The Con Don and protect the Mueller investigation and THIS is all the news the NY Times can muster up?
Fortunately the march/demonstration in Seattle was large enough that it messed up rush hour traffic and got quite a bit of television coverage.
It is past time for the media - especially newspapers - to stop kowtowing to the Robber Barons and cover what average citizens - WE THE PEOPLE - are doing to protect/preserve/restore true democracy in OUR United States of America - Social and Economic Justice for ALL citizens.
Thanks to everyone who showed up to protest the corrupt and unconstitutional actions of The Con Don and his Robber Baron brethren. WE THE PEOPLE are the only ones who can/will stop them and NOW is the time.
14
Neither the AG, nor a Supreme Court nominee, is above the law, and this appointment screams possible "conspiracy to obstruct." And we must not let Kavanaugh's multiple perjuries (unless you suspend belief) taint our Supreme Court's every decision for the next 30-40 years without a decent investigation into the truthfulness of his Senate hearing testimony. This is supposed to be a democracy, not a kingdom. Grow a backbone, Mitch McConnell, your country or your party?
11
Re: Mitch McConnell
Your last question he has answered many times. Two significant ones.
1) Obama was elected and faced a financial crisis and two fronts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
McConnell? Rather than support the country, which would mean support Obama, his stated goal was to make Obama a one term president.
2) Russian cyber attack
McConnell? Rather than join with Democrats in a bipartisan manner to decry these attacks he did not. The fact it was proven Republicans were helping Trump did not matter.
When push comes to shove McConnell chooses Power over Country. His donors over the people of the United States. The country is based upon the constitution, so you could say he is not upholding his oath.
3
I don't know of anyone questioning McConnell's intention: McConnell, like most Republicans, wants to circumvent our Constitution's protections of rule of law.
1
@JRH Do not worry too much, Mr. Robert S. Mueller III is not going anywhere but to continues doing the job he was asked to do and so far has been done very well. Just wait until he has finished it. We all see and feel happy about it.
Some days I despair. I used to wonder how Germany let itself be turned into a fascist, racist, genocidal state while simultaneously being chock-full of Good People. And how so many people could claim to not know about the death camps. I have concluded it was willful ignorance in the face of all the signs and the insanity around them, feeding into the worst of the human psyche. It was a willing act and an incapacitation of empathy. It was an appeal to fear and a manipulation of reality. And, except for the death camps, I see those same factors at work here in my country. I also see massive incarceration and tent cities for migrant children, lost to their families, possibly forever. I see hatred. I see wickedness. I see evil. And I see willful ignorance and willing blindness. And the darkness of despair.
Yet I won't give up and I won't give in. I believe in a God whose love for all people - all creation - is limitless, despite our inability to open our own hearts. And I will persevere, and I will preach, and I will speak, and I will march. And I will vote every chance I get.
9
He's never even passed a bar exam? Being a bona fide attorney isn't a requirement for being Attorney General? Whatever. Does Mr. Whittaker appreciate that the law applies to him also? If he hasn't already committed or participated in a conspiracy to obstruct justice, would this appointment have occurred?
Only if his name was picked out of a hat. Logic still exists, and there's only one way this choice is logical. The idiot behind the curtain doesn't seem to realize he's only wearing his birthday suit
9
These are the worst times when a White House that does not read nor vet and the rest of us are left to suffer the consequences.
Mr. Whittaker (as was Sessions) is scary.
5
I would like to know why an educated man would put his future on the line to support Donald Trump's desire to be king. Like most people, Marbury v Madison has not been on my mind until now.
Read it, everyone!
Without that decision, Donald Trump would be the sole arbiter of laws in this country.
And, that's scary.
5
I thought that Luca Brasi, Vito Corleone's fixer, was "sleeping with the fishes," but now I see him reincarnated as Donald Trump's hitman in the person of Matthew Whitaker.
5
I will comment in the language of Whitaker's ilk. This person Trump has placed to take Attorney General Jeff Session's place is a "thug", plain and simple. He is "hired" not appointed by Trump to do his dirty work of violating, and to preform the violation of the rule of law in our Democracy.
4
There has to be a name for this mental illness: That one moves heaven and Earth to gain employment in a profession that one thinks is "inferior".
Just because this man is Supremely Unqualified is beside the point.
This is like the Republicans appointing someone Sec. of Education.... and they swear that they are going to get rid of the Department. How many times has THAT happened?
Who does that?
There is not one member of the trump Cabinet that has a drop of respect for the position that they occupy.
Why were they chosen - and why did they accept?
This Whitaker does not believe in the legal system of the United States.
No problem: Ship him over to the Vatican State to be with Newt, or ship him down to Saudi Arabia.
Neither one of those places (one could hardly call them 'countries') believes in our legal system, either.
There - we've found his place!
Ship him out (How did that go....? "AMERICA: LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT!!!"), but never, ever put anyone at the head of a group that they are openly saying that they neither respect nor do they know anything about.
That is mental illness.
Both from the appointer....
and the appointee.
And, there is another "mental illness" in the persons sitting back and not stopping this.
Sure, that's just what this country needs more of: People who hate Constitutional Law......
1
The synchronicity of Whitaker's background as a scam artist who bilked scores of Americans out of millions of dollars appointed as the top law-enforcement official by this criminal con-man is just...too comedic for words.
A massively corrupt "president" with direct ties and overt subservience to a hostile power that intervened in our elections; the attempted assassinations of two former presidents, two senators, a congresswoman, a secretary of state, an attorney general; yes, America, we are definitely in the middle of a crisis of "banana republic" proportions.
4
I anticipate the following scenario:
Act 1: A clearly illegitimate Whitaker stops the Mueller investigation in its tracks by defunding the effort, then placing Mueller's forthcoming report in a drawer marked "dead files".
Act 2: Once Act 1 is completed (and before January) Trump names a permanent AG replacement - somewhat equally unqualified and compliant, but perhaps slightly more salable (think Pam Bondi).
Act 3): The Epilogue, in which we need to unspool the unconstitutional actions just taken, which have left us with no ongoing investigation and a quashed Mueller report.
I am really not sure where this would leave us procedurally, but I am quite sure that this is not called due process...
2
This was probably said somewhere earlier, but he is NOT the acting Attorney General. He has not been confirmed by the Senate per the Constitution.
2
In addition to the separation of powers, the framers of the Constitution built a system of checks and balances designed to guard against tyranny by ensuring that no branch would grab too much power.
In the world of Constitutional law, Whitaker’s beliefs go far beyond being described as a sect (small group that separated from a larger group to follow a different doctrine) and go way out into the category of a cult (small, quasi-religious group with very unorthodox ideologies, rituals, and practices).
The AG’s Oath of Office is to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. Mr. Whitaker’s background gives a strong indication that he has no intention of taking this oath seriously. Possibly – hopefully – a large bipartisan congressional group will deter this obvious ploy to subvert Justice and the Constitution.
6
Mr. Whitaker is a fake, a conspiracy addled right wing extremist who auditioned for a job with the Trump Administration's DOJ by doing the talking head bit on cable tv.
Another example of Trump's demand for loyalty over ethics (or intelligence or competence).
2
2nd best November ever!!!!
2
It is quickly becoming obvious that the only qualification Matthew Whitaker has to becoming A.G. is a 100% loyalty to Donald Trump. This is becoming a Shakespearean farce of epic proportions. Trump is anything is more unhinged than ever giver the fact that he now faces real checks and balances; that he has never had to deal with his whole life. Being told he is now actually accountable to a branch of government he does not control is obviously beyond his childish emotional level of dealing with being told NO. Like the demagogue he is; Trump responds with fits of anger at anyone who dares to challenge him. The U.S. had better brace itself; Agent Orange is only getting more tyrannical by the day. Impeachment should be on the bases of mental and emotional irrationality if nothing else!
2
@Greg Hodges:Sorry for the spelling errors. It should obviously read : Trump "if' anything is more unhinged than ever "given" the fact that he now faces real checks and balances ; that he has never had to deal with his whole life. "This is what happens when you rush and fail to check for little writing mistakes before hitting SUBMIT.
Based on his level of ignorance yeah, there are lots of people who could educate his kids better than he.
Once again, the distraction game is played.
And where is the Senate, usually so easily offended when their authority is superseded?
They are complicit enablers of this criminal mob family illegitimately installed in our White House. If history survives, they will be impaled on it for their traitorous conduct.
Pretty sure Mueller has a Plan B, and also that there are true patriots out there who will send out his reports and findings to the world if and as necessary.
1
As the companion article shows, Whitaker was part of a company that scammed millions of dollars from thousands of people, which explains why he is a pal of the scammer-in-chief. If the Senate approves this nominee, the corruption in government will have reached all new heights.
5
I'm sure this is, truly, Capitalism at its very best!
Appointing Whitaker removes Justice from the DOJ. It's his job to enforce existing laws, to investigate and prosecute those who break said laws.
While he's entitled to his own opinion, his job description does not say he may act on it. He cannot denigrate the Constitution, and worse, take an oath to officially support it, when he does not believe in it.
When he does that, it will be with a smirk, and with hypocrisy. He views the Constitution as so much toilet paper.
In this, he puts himself above the law, much like the president who appointed him. Together, the two don't know the law, and Trump ignores it altogether.
Robert Mueller is investigating Trump's election and finding out if he had help from Russia. Now, Trump has appointed what he's always wanted--someone to protect him from Justice, and to support his having more power than the Constitution and the law give him.
Trump has said he will block any efforts by the new House to investigate him, and will use House Republicans, the Senate and the Supreme Court to block further investigstion of him, and to block any House legislation they put forth. Congress is supposed to check the Executive, not the other way around.
The U.S. is becoming increasingly less democratic, with government driven by a narcissistic tyrant, and those who obligingly overlook the Constitution and U.S. laws in favor of uncharitable, cruel ways of treating those they're supposed to serve. 2020--Trump out.
2
Please, please, please, for the love of all that is good and right in this world, stop referring to this man and his views as "conservative." Conservatism, by definition, generally respects institutions and seeks to maintain the established order. Whitaker is a dangerous extremist whose ideas represent an existential threat to civic and social order, the laws and Constitution, and the mechanisms in place to preserve and protect them.
8
Well put BKLYNJ. I consider myself fiscally conservative but as one who strives for social fairness I avoid that term, Conservative. It is also cover for racism, sexism and every other antisocial noun which some believe would make America great again.
Add the over-the-top appointment of Whitaker to Trump's list of acts constituting interference of justice and abuse of power. How does this play with GOP Senators? Were they surprised by Whitaker's appointment as acting AG? Were they even consulted?
8
Whitaker is right. He’s not disrespecting the courts by stating their original purpose.
The constitution did not envision the Supreme Court as the arbiter of constitutionality, and it wasn’t until Marbury v. Madison that it acquired such power. This makes sense. A court of nine (or fewer) justices, appointed through a non-democratic process and slated to serve for life, should not be given the unparalleled power of approving or striking down laws.
Whitaker may have other flaws, but I don’t feel like a bad progressive when I find myself in agreement that the judiciary should be an inferior branch.
1
@Matt S--You are not a progressive. Marbury was decided in 1803. That is not far removed from the writing of the Constitution. And the Court was recognized as the sole authority as to whether Congressionally passed laws or dictates of the President are Constitutional.
Without this decision, Matt, Trump could declare the Constitution just a statement of ideals, nothing more.
3
This is not a progressive view, at all. This is as far right as it gets.
2
If my memory serves, I think it was Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., who stated that he cared less about the Supreme Court's power to exercise constitutional review of Acts of Congress than the power to review state statutes. If the Court does not have at least the latter power, then the meaning of the U.S. Constitution will vary from state to state, subject to the whims of each individual state legislature. (And then, say hello to the likes of Jim Crow laws again.)
2
Chaos and financial liability from a lawless regime. Supreme court oversight is more than a liberty issue. Any citizen who suffers private harm from an unconstitutional law can sue for compensation. If the corrupt Trump and his minions pass such laws, people, businesses, and States suffer financially. Once the laws fail in supreme court, and the country must pay up.
... assuming, of course, that the constitution is still in effect.
2
A partisan hack bypassing the AG and the Deputy AG to fire a Special Counsel? It does sound like Robert Bork and Watergate.
GOP morals being what they are, in 5-6 years Mr Whitaker can expect to be nominated to the Supreme Court.
Get ready for Trump legal trench warfare. The truth will eventually come out. Go Adam Schiff!
8
Typical Trump move to install a low skill, easily molded, loyalist. Its obstruction of justice in broad daylight. Americans should (and are) rising up in outrage. The president does not understand or care about our constitution. He suffered a huge defeat on Tuesday. One that is going to expose a ton of corruption that was being covered up by flunkies like Devon Nunes. Hiring Whitaker was a desperate act by a guilty president and we cant let it stand.
7
I would think Mr Whitaker's criticism of the Supreme Court would be viewed as an asset in the Trump Administration. Trump also feels the courts - any courts - are inferior to his own whims and vindictive needs. The fact that Mr. Whitaker also was a board member and legal muscle for World Patent Marketing, a Florida company that was shut down last year and fined nearly $26 million for bilking thousands of consumers out of millions of dollars, is also seen as positive in TrumpWorld. No one without this kind of past could hope to advance in Trump's administration.
3
It is beyond obvious to the most casual observer that the Supreme Court is fundamentally a POLITICAL body. It is also obvious that any law enacted by a democratically elected congress should not be struck down as unconstitutional unless every member on the court agrees on that consideration.
As it stands now a simple majority on the court can declare a law unconstitutional. This means that this is a democratic rather than a legal finding.to. To strike down the constitutionality of a democratically enacted law, the vote by the SC should be unanimous.
All we really need to know about Mr. Whitaker is that Trump sees him as loyal to HIM, not the rule of law. That he fully participated in the fraud scheme of a company just makes him a friend of our fraudster in chief.
Mr. Whitaker has been picked to defend Trump as his personal lawyer for free and oh yeah, he will also head the Justice Department. The Attorney General of the United States is now a Trump loyalist first, conservative second and lawyer third.
And apparently Mr. Whitaker has no problem assuming this role. He sees no conflicts of interest and has no integrity of personal character. He doesn't care if people will view him as a stooge for Trump.
5
You quote Matthew Whitaker’s rhetoric on illegal immigration and infusion of illegal of drugs as “What do I think the solution is? We need to secure the border first and then look at ways to reform the system, whether that’s getting rid of chain immigration,” in which migrants trace the paths of relatives or others they know to come to the United States, “or increasing the number of skilled-worker visas.”
Wow! What a revolutionary statement!
As a legal immigrant who painstakingly went through the US immigration system towards securing a permanent resident status and then citizenship, welcome Whitaker's position wholeheartedly.
The media has elevated the illegal entrants to a status of holy piety from the abject criminality that it really is. For the cultural, fiscal and political integrity of this country, we need our top lawyer to fearlessly resonate with the law abiding segment of the population.
The support provided by the Democratic Party and its elected officials to the recent media-sponsored events ranging from the creepy caravans to the Kavanaugh circus, shows that there is a large number of law-breaking anarchists in the US.
We need the Attorney General to enforce our laws and thus preserve our freedom by forcefully engaging the thugs out there. Mr. Matthew Whitaker appears to fit that bill.
2
This is no surprise, however this was before Kavanaugh got onto the supreme court.
Now he will use the power of the court while acting as AG for the worst president we've ever had.
This administration has to go.
4
It's clear the only "qualification" required to be in the Trump administration is to be a submissive subordinate, another piece of a jigsaw puzzle that ends with a picture of himself looking back at himself, reassuring himself he's as great as he's always thought he's been.
6
Trump and Whitaker should work well together, as they are both ignorant and neither care about the rule of law. I check the news daily to see what new infringements on our freedom the Trump gang have wrought, and I almost never fail to find something despicable to recoil from.
A large swath of the American public is ill informed and easily lead, which pretty much guarantees a dysfunctional democracy. Into this void step charlatans to enrich themselves at our expense, and most people don't even understand what is going on or how they are being abused.
3
The perfect choice for Trump - climate change denier, against abortion rights, thinks only Christians should be running the legal system, no understanding of the Constitution, and long history of failures including participation in a fraudulent scheme to fleece inventors by promising patents. And that isn't all of it. What a guy to enforce the law!
7
Come now, folks, you don't really think that Trump appointed Whitaker for any reason but to obey his orders, do you? I'm sure he was selected for his willingness to eliminate the Mueller investigation, and shove its findings into a locked drawer, far from the public's eye.
4
Trump caught his act on tv and was impressed. What convinced the president to appoint him was the fact that Whitaker was on the board of a company that scammed people. Whitaker will fit right in with this administration.
6
The more I read about Whitaker the more I think that he may well be the 'bridge too far' even for the Republicans.
1
All presidents recommend for confirmation those who can serve the president, and the country, in the best possible manner and promote the vision of the president.
However, with this current “president” we see him as assembling a fan club, loyalists and toadies who would never enter into a dispute with Trump.
I believe the latest Trump lackey will not serve the people save one deranged despot who believes the Justice Department is his personal law firm, and he has a willing participant to satisfy that vision.
In time perhaps Trump will engineer his own undoing and really make my country great again.
3
All Ii can say is 'where do these folks come from?' The AG is not the personal attorney for DJT, his family and the Republicans, bit rather it exists to defend the rule of law as it relates to the USA. I know that, and I ain't a lawyer or judge, I merely have common sense!
4
Whitaker sounds perfect for the job:
He has already shown how partisan he is. Impartiality is so over-rated in legal matters. He’s buddies with Sam Clovis and the prez. He worked for a scam company, just like Trump University. He thinks Marbury v. Madison belongs in the dustbin or ashes of history. He is willing and READY to echo and affirm whatever Trump tells to.
Perfect! You’re hired, Mr. Whitaker.
The Evangelicals already know and love you.
2
Whitaker is a Faux Attorney General. He has no constitutional authority. Rosenstein is actually in charge at the Justice Department under US law. Whitaker can’t tell Mueller what to do unless he’s confirmed by the US Senate. Not an opinion... that’s the law, it’s in the US Constitution.
3
Matthew Whitaker needs a lesson in constitutional law. Marbury v Madison has been the law of the land since 1803 when Chief Justice Marshall wrote, it is uniquely the province of the judicial branch to decide what the law is. Far from being the least dangerous branch, the judiciary is the most powerful branch in that it has the ultimate say on whether acts of Congress and the executive branch are unconstitutional and therefore null and void. Mr. Whitaker, an interim appointee whose own appointment as acting attorney general is of questionable validity, and his sponsor, Mr. Trump, will experience first hand the power of the judiciary if they attempt to undermine the Russia probe and defy efforts by the Justice Department and the House to complete their important work.
2
There needs to be term limits AND age limits on Supreme Court Justices. I’m sorry, but a 90 year old person should not be making important decisions regarding the Constitution. I think a 20 year term limit and/or 75 year old age limit, which ever comes first should be implemented. This is not a huge turnover considering the length of time and lends to a better check and balance system to compliment the Seperation of Power between the Legislative, Executive and Judicial.
6
Another in a line of “best people” that Trump has invited into the administration.
10
I am a fed. If I didn't believe in my agencies mission, I wouldn't be able to get out of bed in the morning.
I don't understand Mr. Whitaker at all.
21
Is our country lost? Can we recover? Can we get back to normal?
I've been wondering whether after the excesses of Trump, McConnell, and Ryan where the bars have been set so low as to have been buried in the ground and were precedent has been established for authortarian rule if anyone will have courage and strength to reset back to what was consider the norm for the Presidency, the Senate, and the House (and possibly the Supreme Court).
Will anyone have the strength to resist the tempation and say - yes, my predecessors did such and such, but you know, and I know, that isn't how we run this country and I won't stoop to that level even though the temptation is strong and the cause is just because the end doesn't justify the means. Or is this the new baseline what we will accept?
14
Yes. But it must be everyone with a conscience. Where's the lawsuit against every Trump appointee who took an oath of office and then blatantly disregarded and violated it and legal obligations to execute that office, beginning with Trump himself and including every Republican who allows him to trample all over Constitution and our established laws?
2
seems pretty cut and dry that he's just another individual who only likes the rules of law when they help his agenda.
16
How was Matthew Whitaker ever employed in the Justice Department to begin with? Clearly, he does not believe in the laws of this land or of the role of the Supreme Court as final arbiter. How then can he act to investigate and enforce the laws that govern the American people and shape our identity as a nation? As head of the Justice Department, Whitaker would investigate and enforce a parallel set of laws, his own, no doubt aided and abetted by the conspiracy theorists' handbook.
This appointment is yet another absurdity.
21
Trump already does this every day, violates the. Constitution and appoints only people like himself. Is there a legal recourse for this? If not, the only way would be a campaign of civil disobedience.
1
If I were a betting man, I'd call a bookie to place a bet that this turkey Whitaker is out by next week. If he is not, it sets a horrible precedent for Trump going forward and for any President thereafter. Republicans in Congress and sitting judges and Justices, think about that and stop being a spineless firewall. Our Nations integrity bound in our Constitution depends upon it whether Trump is found top have conspired with the Russians and committed obstruction, or not.
4
The appointment seems illegal, but why let that get in the way. It's never stopped Trump before.
13
And never will. How can it be contested as such? Why isn't it?
1
Ill-conceived and potentially disastrous but not likely illegal.
"For the president to install Mr. Whitaker as our chief law enforcement officer is to betray the entire structure of our charter document," aka the Constitution.
And you bury this in the middle of the article?
9
The print media have to put quotation marks around "acting" when referring to Whitaker. From what I've read so far his appointment is illegal because he never received Senate confirmation for a post. Rosenstein is the legal appointee. Is there no law firm or wealthy lawyer willing to go to court about this post haste? If I were a lawyer I would do that. The country is dead in the water without the rule of law.
10
Another crooked individual with a dubious past. How’s possibly that this man was able to climb to a such powerful position, and being able to publicly voiced his disdain for the law? Trump has such a talent to recruit crooks. Interesting, an staunch Republican and Trump supporter, publicly discrediting the Russia-investigation.
14
How? He told us how. He got himself on CNN as a "commentator" knowing that Trump watches. spouted opinions he knew Trump would like in hopes of being noticed by Trump and secure an appointment to some government post. And Viola! it worked! And beyond even his expectations.
5
Hmmm....I guess public health officials don't know more about water sanitation,communicable diseases, or vaccination than Whitaker does. I guess an astrophysicist doesn't know more about the Universe than Whitaker does. I guess Primary care physicians don't know more about Whitaker's and his family's health than he does. "I know more than the General's do, I am a stable genius--I know more than anyone else--I hire only the best people". Sound familiar? Wake up people--I mean you--Trump's base--before it is too late!!!!
15
Jeff Sessions needed to go - it’s interesting how most of the Country was opposed to his nomination. Good riddance. His way of thinking was archaic and extreme - he was more fightening to me than the President. No one knows what Mr Whitaker will be like - everyone’s expecting the worst and trying to criticize him before he even takes office. Everyone needs to relax and chill out - it’s not as bad as it seems.
2
@JMS - Everyone needs to relax and chill out - it’s not as bad as it seems.
I am pretty sure that is what they say to the cattle on the way to slaughther. And exactly what we heard as Trump took office. Now we know - it was worse than we expected.
13
@JMS Whitaker was involved in a huge "scam" in the past and threatened investors when they wanted their money back. This is why a thorough investigation of his past is in order, and is required
5
Matthew G. Whitaker is a crook who belongs in jail for fraud and has already been caught.
20
I predict that Whitaker will be named Attorney General. He sounds like a perfect choice for Trump: affiliated with a corrupt business and disrespectful of the courts. And Trump will relish the opportunity to select and get Senate approval of his clone even if Whitaker is unqualified.
11
Keep reporting. We'll keep marching. Somebody has to do the heavy lift, since our current Congress won't do anything. And, after last night, The Public showed we're more than up to it.
9
Finally, maybe, at this “end of history” time that trump has delivered to us, enough members of the sc will get to determine, for once and for all, whether they are politicians’ appointments... or Americans..l and believe this... there IS a difference!
1
Simply another step in the dictatorial drive of Trump. Living in the moment makes it difficult to see the big picture of the incremental steps in this drive to thwart the democratic process. Also, most people don't believe it could happen here which makes this process all the more dangerous.
It seems like there is no way to stop any president who has the backing of his party and SCOTUS to enforce the rule of law contained in the Constitution.
Future historians will examine the current coup and wonder why citizens and Congress to sit back and allow the coup to take place. This is just another step which , if left unchallenged , will result in greater abuses of power.
Think that I'm overstating the case? Think again.
10
If this country is based on the "rule of law" and "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish." and the Supreme Court's "judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;" how can it be inferior?
For Trump, Whitaker, Kavanaugh, and McConnell (and we have to include Ryan since his actions don't back up his talk) the "Administration" doean't refer the Executive Branch alone any more, but to all branchs of the government. They are all part of the President's administration.
4
It seems almost certain that Whitaker will be nominated and confirmed as AG. He is, after all, from Iowa, the home of Chuck Grassley, Judiciary chair and the man who snuck Whitaker in as US Attorney when W was president. And Whitaker is notoriously anti-immigrant, having conducted several raids in Iowa in his time as US Attorney and making him a favorite of That Man in the White House. When Whitaker is confirmed we can look forward to at least 2 years of abuse of the justice system by a party which has shown itself to be more interested in maintaining power than in maintaining the rule of law.
4
The more you learn about Whitaker it become obvious that he is Trump’s kind of guy. A promoter of phony products. Not very bright. Personal fealty to Trump. Decisions based on feel or instinct. Will not let facts interfere with a predetermined conclusion.An ideal AG in the mad mad world of Trump.
10
You say, "Past statements suggest that Mr. Whitaker has already made up his mind that the investigation will fail to show that Mr. Trump or his advisers aided Russia’s disruption."
I would change one word there. Mr Whitaker does not think that the investigation WILL show no collusion. I'm sure that the thinks that a political witch-hunt might well show that.
No, Mr Whitaker thinks that it MUST show no collusion - because that's what he believes and Trump wants.
7
What? Trump appoints someone who doesn’t believe in the co-equality of the 3 branches of the gov’t? What next? An EPA Secretary who doesn’t believe in protecting the environment? Or an Interior Dept. head who wants to sell public land?
14
So he's pre- (and anti-) John Marshall. I don't think even Nixon's cohort were this extreme -- and they went to jail.
Challenging Judicial Review -- sure to please the Courts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marbury_v._Madison
2
Is Whitaker a real person? Or was he created in a lab by a mad-scientist Republican??
When will these crazy town republicans stopped being foisted upon us?
I really hope the Dems can do something about this guy or at least take his battery out before he does too much damage.
Someone with such an impressive collection of bad ideas and ignorance can’t be safe to have at this high level of government.
Oh wait...
9
Oh, good lord.... what's next? Pardoning Bernie Madoff and installing him as the new Sec. of the Treasury?
Curse me for giving trump the idea.
9
'The Courts are inferior...(to Trump)' is of course what he meant even though he did not know it at the time. He's too smart to say it again now, but of course obviously still thinks that. Maybe that's why he became the board member of a gigantic scam that got fined for $25,000.000, he's better than the Courts.
3
Mr. Whitaker's brain function, or in this case lack thereof, suggests that he may be afflicted with CTE from his football-playing days.
8
I hope it's apparent to everyone that Trump is terrified. He knows it's just a matter of time and he's flailing hopelessly.
8
So why was this dude working in a high level position at the Justice Department in the first place?
7
This guy Whitaker, is in trumps vernacular, "A Loser". He was last seen selling the functional equivilent of a "vegamatic" because he could not keep up as an assistant district attorney.
This is one of Grassley's "boys", planted in Justice as a mole.
If he issues one instruction that negatively effects an investigation he will be part of a conspiracy to obstruct justice because he is not constitutionally qualified for the job. Ask the Watergate crew how that turned out.
12
I’m beginning to think AAG Whitaker doesn’t plan to follow the Constitution and he doesn’t believe in “equal branches.” I think the Supreme Court Justices will be surprised they’re an ‘inferior’ branch. Oh my!
6
The courts ARE an inferior branch of government. Unfortunately they have unfair leverage over our lives.
1
@Reggie - only if you don't accept the Constitution.
2
Out from under his rock comes yet another Trump appointee, a man with no moral compass who doesn't mind ripping customers off, who sees no reason why the Constitution should be referenced when personal loyalty to Trump will do, an ignorant fool who's without qualification or experience to lead a justice department, and whose beliefs are *not* conservative but are extreme.
His most positive qualification is that he agrees with the President about the Russia investigation, although he very likely knows next to nothing about the findings by Robert Mueller, so how can he know?...the answer is, he doesn't and worse still he doesn't care to...like most of the GOP and their supporters across the country, the truth just doesn't matter.
We are living in a slow motion coup.
12
Whitaker is obligated to endure a Senate hearing before he can take charge. And once he's questioned about his multimillion dollar World Patent scam, the Senate may well reject him. The con artist in the White House cannot be allowed to install another con artist in the Justice Department.
Trump's own powers will be severely limited after the new and improved Democratic House opens for business in January. Trump won't like that. But elections still have consequences, and Trump ("This election is really about me") lost the House. May he lose everything else in 2020.
5
Just another morally and ethically compromised selection from The Federalist Society. There is a wonderful piece in "The Washington Post" about the honorable lawyer's board directorship in a Florida scam that ripped people off to the tune of millions: ("Justice Department, Matthew G. Whitaker promoted company accused of deceiving clients"-www.washingtonpost.com).
Now, he doesn't believe the U.S. Supreme Court should have the authority in determining the constitutionality of laws? Wonder what Justice Kavanaugh thinks about this?
4
The only thing missing from the frightening head shot of Whitaker is a bolt in his neck. But, I digress. His comments about the judiciary and bedrock Supreme Court decisions would raise in the minds of reasonable people whether Whitaker agrees with the Dred Scott decision and Plessey v. Fergerson. One may assume that Brown v. Board of Education is another decision he finds repugnant along with the series of landmark Civil Rights decisions that extended freedom and the right to vote to millions of persecuted Americans.
Just exactly where did this man gain access to information absolving Team Trump from hanky-panky with Russia? Or, more likely, is he a sycophant, a lapdog for the president?
This is a dangerous man, at best intellectually dishonest, who shouldn't even be in the Justice Department much less overseeing one of the most important investigations in American history.
5
"It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is." Marbury v. Madison (1803), 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137, 178.
1
In April 2014 Whittaker stated judges needed to have a “Biblical view of justice.” And then went on to specify New Testament. I strongly oppose the illegal installation of this man as the chief law enforcement officer of our land. He was on the board of a crooked patent company. Congress needs to get a backbone, get into session and do something about this situation. Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer please get back to DC now!
5
Republicans, restore honor and integrity to the justice department.
1
These days I wake up feeling that we are living under a tinpot regime with a tinpot dictator who is doing his best to trample on the vision and ideals upon which this democracy was founded. The saddest part is that while there are many good people who fiercely resist what is happening to us as a nation, there are many more who couldn’t care less. Our growing indifference to truth and respect for the law, will destroy us faster than will any “caravan” of migrants from Central America or “hordes” of Muslims and/or other imaginary foes from among the darker hued inhabitants of the globe.
17
There is a pattern to Trump's nominations/appointments and his firings, and it is not the pattern of someone who has nothing to hide.
9
Obstruction of justice. This has to stop now. The Dems must push with everything they've got. The Reds figure there may not be an election in 2020 if they get away with this. Why should they care about public opinion?
1
Sooner rather than later Mr.Whitaker is going to have to get himself a good lawyer.He, like Mr.Trump's first chief of staff, Michael Flynn , is an unqualified, not vetted person at the wrong place at the wrong time.Mr.Trump is good at finding unqualified sycophants to install in positions for which they are not qualified and from which they finally have to be removed.Mr.Whitaker's day of reckoning cannot come soon enough!
9
Whitaker is nothing more than a Trump stooge, completely unfit to run the Justice Department. His appointment as Acting AG is in itself obstruction of justice, and one more reason to impeach Trump. This must stop before another previously independent government agency is befouled by politicization.
7
And what happened to the actual deputy AG Mr. Rosenstein? Has he been fired, expelled, demoted ...?
This sort of work environment at the top level of the present US administration is scary and resembles authoritarian regimes - think Venezuela, Saudi Arabia - rather than western democracies.
5
This appointment is an unconstitutional power push by Trump. Congress MUST act to not legitimize this illegal appointment through their inaction. I would think that the first step is for everyone in the Justice Department to not behave as though this appointment is legitimate. No one there should comply with any directive from someone in a position illegitimately. He must either be confirmed by the Senate or leave.
Trump is pushing for a constitutional crisis. There can only be a constitutional crisis when others in government who took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution fail to act appropriately.
7
Mueller will need to interview Whittaker to assess whether Trump’s appointment of him constituted obstruction of justice. Once that happens, Whittaker would need to recuse himself since a witness in an investigation can’t oversee the investigation.
5
Can't form an opinion either way on Mr. Whitaker based on comments from critics who oppose his sudden appointment following Jeff Sessions termination. Past phone interviews or answers to a four-year old Senate questionnaire has no bearing, considering the current political climate. I do agree on a few of his view points, but disagree on some others. Looks like a done deal regardless, but if Whitaker chooses to interfere with the DOJ, or moves to shutdown Mueller's investigations, there will be consequences.
4
Matthew Whitaker needs a full investigation and background check by the FBI and intelligence groups before even being considered anywhere near the position Trump so ill-advised put him in. This is a sham democracy and it is time to stand up. If the Republican Senate does not do anything at this point they can make sure in 2020 they're going to go down. We cannot allow this to keep happening folks. We are going to find ourselves living under a dictatorship if we're not careful
14
For someone as accomplished in the FBI as Mr. Whitaker, he seems to not understand the Constitution.
None of the three branches of the federal government are inferior to the others.
A more appropriate place for him would be in middle school, watching some old school videos on our federal government, not assuming the position of acting Attorney General.
I hope this basic and fundamental ignorance is not a reflection on the University of Iowa law school.
... just another disturbing datum point in this presidential administration.
8
Whitaker is unfit by any measure. His view of the power of the courts and of the Constitution, as it has been interpreted since Marbury v. Madison, is extreme. It is part and parcel of a right wing extremist agenda to, not only shrink the federal government, but effectively destroy it. Moreover, he should be disqualified by his role in World Patent Marketing, the Florida-based company shut down and fined $26 million by the FTC in 2017 for bilking consumers out of millions from 2014-2017. Although touted as an advisor, as his emails filed as evidence in the FTC action reveal, Whitaker personally threatened customers who complained and said they were going to the Better Business Bureau. He cited his former status as a US Attorney to threaten one customer. In short, he is an extremist and fraudster who has no business working anywhere in the Department of Justice.
6
@J. - Whitaker is unfit by any measure.
Well that's it, that is why he fits perfectly with the Trump administration.
3
@J.
Unfit by Any Measure- sounds like a great title for a book about the Trump administration*
4
The overthrow of our government began before Trump was elected with the unconstitutional obstruction of Obama’s appointment of Merrick Garland. When the president appoints a loyal lackey to oversee the investigation into his own campaign and threatens congress with open warfare if they investigate anything, the rule of law spelled out in the Constitution is being threatened. Mueller needs to move quickly with inditements, unless he is part of the plan.
8
It seems to me that, even for the most casual observer, that President Trump's picks to head various agencies have been antithetical to primary mission of the agency they will be leading.
8
Matthew Whitaker would never have come so far without Leonard Leo, an ultra-conservative, devout Catholic, who is president of the Federalist Society, a network of conservative and libertarian lawyers, that has become one of the most powerful groups in the US. It had pushed for Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination. Now five of the nine Supreme Court justices are members of the Federalist Society.
Whitaker was virtually unknown to Jeff Sessions before becoming his chief of staff. Sessions chose Jody Hunt, a longtime DoJ staff, to be his top aide. But she clashed with Danielle Cutrona, another aide in the office, and left. Leo recommended Whitaker to Cutrona, hoping to improve relations between DoJ and the White House.
Trump has effectively outsourced the task of filling judicial vacancies to the Federalist Society. Leo considered Whitaker a true conservative and talented manager, who made a name for himself in Washington via TV appearances and his work with the conservative Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust.
Whitaker probably got Trump's attention, who liked what he saw. This is disastrous, because Trump prizes ideology and loyalty over the qualification of a candidate. It's time for the American people take back their country.
15
One hates to rush to judgement on anybody, including Mr Whitaker. However, before opining on what we know now, a question should be," What is the role of an "Acting" AG?" or "Acting" Secretary of State or "Acting" Secretary of ....? To me, someone in the "Acting" role is a caretaker, a competent administrator, nothing more. That person has no mandate or authority to change policy, initiate anything new etc. They are in place simply until a proper permanent candidate is nominated, vetted and approved. At this stage Mr Whitaker is none of those things and therefore has no right to interfere with the Mueller process. You could even argue that as "Acting AG" he is holding Sessions place until natural constitutional succession can take place and is therefore still bound by Mr Sessions recusal. That being said, Mr Whitaker's apparent comments about the Mueller investigation are statements of strong political bias and lack the independence and integrity a proper investigator or justice official should have. As to his views on the role of the courts in the United States, he has more a place in the Court of HenryVIII, or Stalin's USSR or 1942 Germany. They have no place in a modern democratic republic.
25
Thank you for the astute, illuminating observations. This will probably be the most intuitive posting on the subject today.
4
@Niall Firinne
Why wouldn't then the Deputy AG become the acting AG - as would be the norm in any progression? That the Deputy wasn't named means that there is an agenda for the Acting AG.
4
Trump's agenda, like that of Steve Bannon and Stephen Miller, is to destroy the structure and fabric of our nation from the inside. This guy was picked to destroy the Justice Department and all of its contiguous agencies so that trump and his cronies can continue their criminal acts against the people of this nation and the world.
20
The acting attorney general, Matthew G. Whitaker, has no place in any of the State branches, be it the Executive, the Legislative or the Judiciary. He does not believe in serving the Public Interest, but only a sectarin interest and his own individual agenda.
10
How does this nation produce such ideologues? He is no different than the shooters who take out their wrath with a gun. He takes out his wrath with ideologies. And his affect many, many more people!
16
I wonder if Donald was aware of Mr. Whitaker's involvement with World Patent Marketing. That seems to have been remarkably similar to and perhaps an even bigger scam than Trump University.
14
@Rick - Mr. Whitaker's involvement with World Patent Marketing
That alone makes him a great person, a great guy, and perfect for a position in the Trump administration where he will fit right in! Drain the swamp - it didn't mean what you thought it meant when Trump said it.
2
Cool, "in this corner, Whittaker; in the other corner, Kavanaugh. This is the WWW the Trump Undertaker v. the Trump Beer Hauler smackdown!"
2
Whitaker thinks that the Supreme Court and the Judiciary have overstepped their bounds in striking down Executive Actions and Legislative Laws. Yet, he disagrees in decisions by the Court that didn’t strike down Obama’s ACA and Roosevelt’s New Deal actions. Totally hypocritical, but not surprising.
12
Mr. Whitaker has not been confirmed by the Senate. His appointment to head the Department of Justice IS unconstitutional. But,
what will Congress do about a flagrant violation of the US Constitution? Apparently nothing.
What more proof do we need that Republicans have no respect for the Constitution or for their oaths of office?
Republicans have chosen to support Trump over the rule of law. We are no longer a nation governed by law, we are governed by tyrants.
19
Whitaker with his "pronouncements" on law, dark money recipient, and fraudulent $25 million schemer could be the latest poster boy for potential obstruction charges.
Where has this hidden "sage" been for the last couple of decades?
Typical ilk from the Trump team which continues to "dig up" candidate after candidate, from their fairy tale of the day of the living dead.
8
So is it true that the President can pick just about anyone off the street to be Acting AG for 7 months?
14
This man simply espouses what is the current version of mainstream GOP party line.
And if this line of thought doesn't scare you, even just a little bit, you really need to turn off the Fox news channel and go outside for a long walk.
9
This "acting" AG is acting out. The Supreme Court keeps government executives and an errant Congress from en"acting" bad policy, unjust laws, dictatorial whims or foolish people who think they can defy existing established law and order. This opportunistic "actor" will soon become one of those people who quickly exits stage right in disgrace.
3
What rock did all these authoritarian, democracy-hating people crawl out from under? I don't recognize this country anymore.
24
So, he's a hard right conservative who believes the Supreme Court should only be allowed to overturn laws with which he disagrees. Got it.
17
How can a lawyer with associations and actions like Whitaker's with World Patent Marketing not face disbarment action?
And to supervise Mueller, one would need a security clearance. How the heck did Whitaker ever qualify for a security clearance, given his unethical and possibly illegal actions as a director of this company?
18
It is said that the Emperor Caligula appointed his horse to the Senate. I suppose we should be grateful that Donald Trump has an antipathy to pets. Bad enough that he appoints cronies who are as ignorant and malevolent as they are subservient, some of whom actually were confirmed by the Senate. Was Matthew Whitaker also confirmed by the Senate when he first took up his post as Session's assistant in the Justice Dept? Given some of Trump's other appointees, it's all too likely that the Republican-controlled Senate would also have passed him through, if asked. If that didn't happen, which some observers say is the case, is he eligible to be Acting Attorney General? Who would have "standing" to sue in the courts to oust him? Surely that must be done if his appointment is illegal.
5
@Skeptic: No: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incitatus#Historical_accuracy “Ancient sources are clear that the horse was never actually made a consul.”
The question is not whether he could pass a bar examination. His comments demonstrate he cannot.
The question is whether he could pass an eighth-grade civics test.
"Only the best' for this Administration.
15
This once magnificent democracy of ours is in trouble.
13
To hear a legal official pass judgment on a matter that he or she is not involved in, then manage such matter at a later time is disgraceful, and yes, we would hope that openly appointing someone for personal gain to a comfirmable position is illegal and unconstitutional. This is not a democratic or republican issue.
8
Marbury established what the Founders clearly stated in the Federalist papers -- when there is a conflict over the meaning of the Constitution, it is the Court that decides the matter.
Whitaker thinks the Executive Branch can ignore judicial rulings or Legislative acts at will. A government in which each branch has the power to overturn any act of the other branches suggests that the Constitution was actually a suicide pact.
He shouldn't occupy any position in government.
17
What a drearily undistinguished CV this character has. He seems to have alternated between losing runs for office and working for other losing campaigns. In between, a little legal work and administration of extremist groups funneling dark money and advocating for fringe ideology. Lately chief of staff for Beauregard Sessions, while fawning over Trump in in the media in his spare time, which finally seems to have paid off for him. No experience running a large entity like DOJ. So now we have a "Reality TV" acting AG to complement our "Reality TV" president. What a perfect pair. Soon to be, if not already, partners in crime?
8
Although inarticulate, he is right if he merely meant that the courts are not supposed to initiate legislation, or nullify it except when it is unconstitutional or preempted in some fashion by other supreme laws. Moreover, as shown by Lincoln (when he defied the courts’ habeas rulings during the civil war), and by Justice Taney (when he wrote the awful Dred Scott ruling disenfranchising blacks for all time), the courts are certainly the weakest and least authoritative branch of government. The judiciary has no real power to enforce its rulings and cannot impose its will on an unwilling populous for long through peremptory rulings. That is why the SCOTUS is often very afraid of losing its credibility and relevance, and why Democrat Roosevelt toyed with Court-packing shenanigans during the New Deal. Moreover, the lower courts’ jurisdiction can be eliminated altogether by Congress. All in all, the courts are an equal branch of government, but also inferior in power.
By the way, for all those people stating lofty things in the comments about the courts being equal in status etc. to the other 2 branches of government, what will you say when the conservative Trump judges and justices start striking down popular liberal laws as unconstitutional. Will you defer to and defend the courts then as equal to the elected officials who directly represent the people? Be careful what you ask for!
1
Flagrantly unconstitutional acts are null and void because the Supreme Court does not have the power to enforce them. And an acting attorney general has no power at all because his appointment is invalid. The fear expressed here that a whole series of unconstitutional actions are imminent is pretty far-fetched. To itemize the feared illegalities is to make explicit just how extreme the expressed fears are.
This piece raises the specter of a majority of the court nullifying numerous provisions of the Constitution. The notion that the Court will reverse Marbury v. Madison, which has never been seriously questioned, is a measure of how little sense the expressed fears make.
Essentially, this piece raises the specter of the undoing of the Constitution. No self-respecting judge is in bed with Whitaker on this. The man is an eccentric and pretty much a kook. The fear that our judicial system will be undermined by this one fruitcake lawyer -- as Professor Tribe effectively states -- is a sign that those who drafted this piece have no faith in the stability of our legal system.
The fear here is that Whitaker and Trump will be able to totally undermine our system from the word go. Those who believe that the Constitution is on its last legs fear that our system of government is on the verge of self-destruction. Anybody who foresees the end of the United States as we know it needs to take a deep breath and calm down.
1
Donald Trump has certainly accomplished one thing: He has single-handedly saved Richard Nixon from being labeled by historians as the worst president in American history. At this point I almost miss Bush and Cheney.
11
Once again, people are left in disbelief that a crazy, intolerant bully has been put in charge of DoJ without Senate consent. He is a human shield. It is also unconscionable that in 2018, people who are anti-LGBTQ are in positions of power and who have radical views on courts, Mueller and checks on power. In an age when hate has been embodied as the “new normal”, it is not acceptable to promote someone who can act as a catalyst for normalising this. Whitaker has been installed as a human shield for Trump and will accelerate centrifugal transfer of power to the White House, without probes or checks, which Sessions was at pains to avoid, saying in August he would not be improperly influenced by “political considerations”. Now we have a blatant political appointment ahead of Rosenstein, it is almost certainly a dangerous unconstitutional move. The House needs to act for the people to halt this obscene obstruction of justice, as they were clearly instructed to in the mid-term result this week.
6
The word you are looking for is not "hate" but rather "there are people who have a different viewpoint than I do"
3
Isn't this now common practice, appoint the person who is antithetical to the department to a controlling position. For example, Betsy to Education.
9
This is a temporary appointment so Trump does not does not need to have someone with Senate approval.
The debate of his legality is moot for the time being.
1
That is simply incorrect. The Constitution requires all direct reports to the President to have the advice and consent of the Senate. Rosenstein, the Asst AG, could be interim AG. Whitaker, who does not have Senate approval, cannot. Please read your Constitution before rendering opinions about it.
3
What is happening to my country?
5
Matthew G. Whitaker thinks that the rule of law should be subservient to the will of elected officials. Now, he may think that elected officials represent the will of the people but the rule of law deliberately constrains to the will of the people and their representatives to keep them from commonly understood behaviors which have proven extremely undesirable.
Lincoln put it well with his statement that, 'you can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time'.
People always consider both reason and feelings in making decisions. Emotional decisions can easily create very bad and unintentional outcomes because they are impulsive and be based upon misunderstandings and often are.
Laws exist to give reasonable decision making dominance over emotional decision making. That why courts are a co-equal branch, to keep our government reasonable.
132
@Casual Observer. Unfortunately, what Lincoln did not say, but should have said, was "You can fool enough of the people enough of the time."
11
@Casual Observer
It sounds to me like he thinks the rule of law ought to be subservient to reactionaries.
3
Note how our attention is away from the electoral defeat. Trump has taken the art of distraction to a whole new level. As a country, I fear our republic will never recover from this kind of political gamesmanship.
284
@snm I disagree - this shines a light on and is a direct response to Democrats retaking the House. Trump needs a loyalist to undermine Mueller before the Democrats arrive and begin investigations.
29
@snm the electoral win for democrats is an inevitable future fact; the news worthiness of that will come when they start investigatons and supeonas (that must be a part of their agenda), and especially when we start seeing the results. i don't think that the traitor and his band of incompetent sycophants had distraction in mind with this corrupt move; it appears to be purely desperate self-preservation and criminal cover-up.
12
@snm...Right on, snm. This is distraction, pure and simple. But, the distraction is from the extreme left. The "electoral defeat" was suffered by the left, not Trump. The House is now a herd of cats that Pelosi won't be able to control - a Tea Party of the Left. The Investigate & Impeach Inquisitions will entertain the Mob and The Times will get lots of click bait scoops, but it won't lead to any substantive legislation policies. Meanwhile, the Senate will pack the courts...Now we get all of this bluster about an "Acting" AG. Can you say Pyrrhic?
All Mr. Whitaker is doing is "acting," but he's not the Attorney General by any standards including the one that counts, our Constitution, and even according to very conservative lawyers. The Constitution and laws passed after Watergate and later, make it clear that Rod Rosenstein is the real Acting Attorney General. Mr. Whitaker has no legal standing and, as this article demonstrates, little understanding of the law. His only qualification is that he is loyal to Donald Trump and is openly opposed to the Special Counsel's investigation. His appointment is the latest attempt by Donald Trump to obstruct justice and undermine the Constitution by installing his personal political hatchet man to protect him rather than the "rule of law."
212
@Paul Wortman Yes, I completely agree. But what can we as citizens and leaders with a conscience do about it?
1
@Paul Wortman
Unfortunately, Mueller must now report not to Rosenstein but to Whitaker even if he is acting.
That means that Whitaker can pass on to Trump the details of Mueller's investigation and can block the publication of Mueller's findings. The whole point of getting rid of Sessions, aside fromTrump's personal vindictiveness, was to get rid of Rosenstein's oversight of the investigation and to put in Session's place another sycophant willing to do Trump's bidding. Trump will probably announce Rosenstein's "resignation" today or tweet from Air Force One on the way to Europe this weekend.
10
@BC Friday Night Massacre?
3
This just gets better and better. Seems like Matt Whitaker is going to provide us with a lot of interesting anecdotes from his colorful past, particularly his political career in Iowa.
I'd be very interested in hearing more about his relationship with Senator Charles Grassley, and also if he had any role in shaping the battle over Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation hearings.
10
If Mueller is as smart as everybody thinks then he must have foreseen this possibility and planned for it. If he didn't then maybe his investigation isn't as carefully constructed as we've been led to believe.
6
@Horace
Well, we don't know, do we?
1
@Horace Take the advice which Trump ignored: you underestimate Mueller at your peril.
2
@Horace
Yup, I am sure there is a contingency plan. It will be hilarious to see Trump drown in it.
1
One has to be concerned when another Federalist Society member gets placed in a position of power. Mr Whitaker seems to be more of a champion of the anti-government crowd than a good cop. Our constitution clearly has three branches and there is a reason for it.
22
SC makes loads of errors. Deed Scott. Plessy v Ferguson. Lockwood v NY. Citizens United. Shelby County v Holder. Conservatives could add a few as well. But Marbury v Madison has been good law for over 200 years and not until now is anyone questioned it.
13
Be serious. This guy has no respect for precedent. For him there is no settled no law, only his opinions, to which he is entitled.
Wonder how conservative justices on the Supreme Court will view his disparaging attitude? Also, has Whitaker considered how to avoid legal jeopardy in the conduct of his office?
14
@Frank McNeil You disagree with overturning Plessy? Do tell....
@Frank McNeil. You think it was wrong to overturn Plessy?
Do tell...
It is quite clear that this appointment violates federal law, thus making it invalid. Someone with standing to do so needs to commence a declaratory judgment lawsuit in a US district court (in DC, I presume) to conclusively establish this. Let’s not wait until this fake AG begins to do damage, which I fear might happen quite soon.
9
@LJR
It does not violate federal law. A temporary appointment does not need to be from someone who already has Senate confirmation.
Trumpeter is deflecting again...
1
Regarding Katie Benner's reporting on Session's curtailing of consent-decrees between police departments and the federal government: keep the line in there about Trump firing Sessions. Let's not play around anymore. I hope that was on purpose.
1
Who might have standing to ask Chief Justice Roberts to stay Mr Whitaker's appointment?
8
Our Father of the Constitution James Madison once said "Justice is the end of government. It is the end of civil society."
Now our justice is under assault from President Donald Trump, who just appointed his apprentice Matthew Whitaker as the acting attorney general after firing Jeff Sessions.
If the United States had not had the Constitution as we know, Donald Trump could act worse than his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, and become a dictator. His acts for the past two plus years have exemplified the trend.
While Republicans in the Senate are hesitating to confront Trump, our Constitution calls Americans to stand up defending what our founding fathers have established.
14
Mueller just needs to cut to the quick and indict Trump.
We'll never have a more appropriate candidate for testing whether a president can be indicted, or is "above the law".
14
@srwdm
Indict on what charges? There is no crime even if there was collusion. There is no obstruction of Justice because if there was Rosenstein would have had to recuse himself already. You can't challenge a POTUS decision under Article 2 of the constitution over the firing on Comey who was in fact fired under recommendation by Rosenstein.
@Mr. Chang, we have no way of knowing all the Trump crimes that Mueller might have uncovered, but conspiracy to defraud the U.S., obstruction of justice, and election fraud are a few that have some support in the publicly-available evidence.
It's pretty clear Trump has been in love with this guy for a long time and couldn't wait to put him in charge. Now he's got someone just as corrupt as himself running the show. He's perfect for the job of ending all investigations into Donald Trump.
12
Trump is such a resume kinda guy. Is Whittaker really the best he could do? Iowa BA, JD, MBA, that's hardly an elite school or program. And degrees all from one place hardly exposes you to different POV's. What an insult to the real talent in the DOJ that weren't considered.
Whitaker is third rate. Total hack pick.
16
Mr. Whittaker used to work for a patent scam company that was fined 25 million by the FTC.
Why is this man allowed into the Department of Justice building?
35
Courts remain the last hope of justice world over. Of course bad apples are there in every field and it is there in judiciary too. But that cannot make it irrelevant or inferior.
As regards bad rulings given by courts, it is true that there have been some bad judgments which have even taken away life of innocents. But there are many factors which are involved in a ruling. Investigation by police; skill of lawyers in bringing out the evidence and later putting forth their arguments. Moreover law is not static. It is a growing and expanding branch like medicine. What was law a few centuries ago may not find favour now; for example, having slaves.
Therefore, instead of commenting about judiciary, Mr.Whhitaker must concentrate on his job and try to do it better.
3
FOX and CNN agree! He has no constitutional authority. Senate did not appoint him. Whitaker is a paper tiger. Mueller doesn’t have to take orders from him. Rosenstein is still in charge under the law.
59
Whitaker may be a lawyer but he doesn't understand American history. In "Radicalism of the American Revolution", Gordon S Wood showed how the worldview of colonial Americans changed within a short period of time, ie, under ten years.
The former worldview is that the best form of government is a constitutional government headed by a benevolent monarch. The people most likely to violate a person's rights are local, eg, sheriff, judge, tax collector and nobility who may hold all three offices.
The monarch was the "court" of last resort. Marbury vs Madison provided a judicial court of last resort, at a time, when Americans still remember their former worldview.
16
@Joel Ii He may be a lawyer, but he doesn't understand the law or the Constitution.
10
Dear Mother of God!
The view of conservatives is that the courts should not create legislation or legislate from the bench. That is the role of Voters through their elected representatives.
NO! Mr Whitaker did not "[indicate] that he shared the view among some conservatives that the federal judiciary has too much power over public policy issues."
Allow me to the sentence: "Mr. Whitaker indicated that the federal judiciary is active in developing public policy." and that is not the role of the federal judges.
There.
1
@F1Driver
I'm not buying that anymore. As far as I can tell "originalist" means the Constitution without the Amendments (except the second clause of the second amendment, for "second amendment remedies,") even though the Constitution was ratified with the first ten amendments.
3
@F1Driver
So I take it you oppose Citizens United? Many states had passed legislation regulating money in politics and there was federal legislation as well. Corporations are "People" and Money is "Speech" are two conservative court opinions that don't look very "originalist" or seem to fit this political hacks views but I'll bet you he supports them.
@F1Driver
Whitaker thinks that developing policy isn't the role of federal judges unless he agrees with the policy. Then it's great. He is as ignorant of the law as is Trump, himself.
This appointment is clearly unconstitutional. Hopefully, the courts and Congress will uphold the law and do their duty.
45
In fairness, Whitaker is in agreement with Alexander Hamilton, who wrote in the Federalist that the judiciary was to be by far the weakest of the three branches. Nor was there agreement among the Founders that the Supreme Court would have the last word on the constitutionality of laws. Had there been, Marbury v Madison wouldn’t have been necessary. And Whitaker’s views on Marbury and the New Deal cases aren’t really inconsistent. Basically, he’s saying he doesn’t agree with Marbury, but if the Supreme Court does get to decide constitutionality, it should have decided the New Deal cases differently and limited Federal power. Indeed, rather than being “extreme,” Whitaker’s thinking is quite consistent with that of our wealthy white male slave owning Founders.
9
@Unbalanced
The way that the Supreme Court is weaker than the other branches is that it commands no armies or police. It relies on the honesty and integrity of legislators and the executive to carry out their decisions. That is why it makes sense for the court to be the last arbiter, even though I believe they have made serious mistakes, (like making corporations into pseudo citizens). The last recourse of We the People is the Amendment process. (Don't let them do a Constitutional Convention.)
Having a pathological liar, who can't and won't put We the People above his personal interests, in the Oval Office its a direct threat to our Constitution and Our Republic.
I have studied history all of my life. I never specialized in a particular time, except maybe or own. I take a long view of history. I've seen this film before, and is very scary.
At the time of the revolution your word was your bond. Getting caught lying was a blow to your public standing in the community. American Heritage is centered in the importance of truth, integrity, the greater good, and the scientific method. They weren't able to revolt against the king by promising a bunch of liars would work the system for profit.
The Party of Trump is against the spirit and the letter of the Constitution. I don't care how clever GOP wordsmiths are, everyone that still supports Trump has proven that they don't care about truth, logic, or science, or pretty much anything else, except tax cuts for the rich.
He has politicized view on simple legal issues, where has been settled law for at least two centuries. Such model was implied to European legal system. The Supreme Court decides on constitutionality of law passed by majority of congressmen, many of whom poorly know complicated US legal system and plays an arbiter between political gains and the US Constitution. Acting AG probably poorly educated.
13
The acting Attorney General of the United States is not an attorney. He is not licensed to practice law anywhere in the United States. Has not passed a bar exam. Let that sink in.
112
@Scott Weil Why do you think that? I see him listed as a member of the Iowa bar.
1
Iowa bar says he’s an active licensed attorney.
1
@Scott Weil, please tell us where we can read more about this.
This critique, valid as it is, is what should be presented, publicly, to the Senate in the confirmation hearings BEFORE he takes the responsibilities of AJ. Until then he is Constitutionally no more qualified to have anything to do with any aspect of management of the DOJ than the local dog catcher.
23
Too late. There will not be any hearings. Whitaker doesn't think he needs to go before the Senate at all.
Those are Trump's views. So no surprise. Here we are and unfortunately millions would agree with him. Many people haven't learned, duh, that majority rule was rejected by our Founders, and those who propounded the Bill of Rights. Checks and balances. People, even the weakest among us, have rights that courts (and only the courts) must enforce. Rule of law is good and courts are there to make sure that happens. It doesn't have to be that way (read some history) but that is one of the things that makes America great. I thought this was taught in middle school. Sad that our political leaders either missed these fundamental concepts or choose to reject them for political gain. Sadder that they don't get run out of town in shame.
11
Finally, an attorney general with the courage to express views on the constitution tha at least somewhat accords with the text and intent of the authors. Yes, much of federal law IS in violation of this constitution. Tribe is the High Priest in the Cult if the Livibg Constitution, basically the one FDR forced the court to accede to that strips the original text of its limits on federal power. So of course he labels any disagreement with his opinion as “extreme.” Fealty to that cult is a prerequisite to being considered a “scholar” so of course no scholars agree. The U.S Cinstitution is not an academic text. It is not the property of the academy or the judiciary. It is the property of the people.
The people read it and see nothing about abortion or gay marriage or federal role in education. What we see are limitations on federal power that are massively and systematically violated.
1
@KBronson Some people read it and see nothing beyond the articles and the first couple of amendments. The balance of the amendments are no less important, and perhaps more so, since they address what two centuries of American experience have proven to be glaring oversights and contradictions in the both the thinking and the language of the founders.
@KBronson, where does the Constitution say that an acting attorney general may be appointed without the advice and consent of the Senate?
I am politically far left, but I agree with Whitaker that Marburg v. Madison which gave us judicial review was a terrible precedent. SCOTUS should indeed be the inferior branch of government, as it is anti-democratic in its very essence.
@Rico Suave
Well then, so is the position of President anti-democratic, and this one didn't even earn it by popular vote.
5
The United States is supposed to be a nation of laws, isn’t it?
Well we already know that the far left helped Trump into power, so of course you agree with Trump's stooge.
Whitaker’s views are identical to trump’s on every issue. No wonder the president likes him. Whitaker qualifies not on knowledge or experience but that he is a perfect reflection of the president.
10
I believe that Rod Rosenstein can bring suit, since Whittaker would be usurping Rosenstein's lawful authority.
Not sure who else can, until such time was Whittaker does something that only the US AG could rightfully do, and which would have imply some 'injury' (in the extended, legal sense).
7
"The Department of Education should be disbanded and the resources either returned to the taxpayers or put into the schools,” he said. “Bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., shouldn’t know how to better educate my kids than I do.”
And Mr. Whitaker believes he knows nuclear physics than physicist who work for the US DOE; more about flight than the aeronautical engineers who work for the FAA a d FAA.
14
@rj1776
And don't forget climate scientists.. Like 97% of them I believe.
1
You have to wonder, what's in it for Whitaker? Can any lawyer who's actually *read* the Constitution possibly believe that Donald Trump is innocent and Mueller is the the one who should be stopped?
Does he really want to go down in history as Trump's disgraced acting attorney general? I don't get it.
History is watching.
13
@mm: Sadly, history shows that there are some men who would sell their souls for a moment of power or for a pat on the head from a crazed dictator.
1
Now that the House has some juice, it seems to me that it would be more productive for the health of this country, that the House subpoena the President's medical records....
15
@d. stonham Yes! If you watched the press conference today, you saw a completely unhinged, inarticulate, babbling excuse for a man, let alone a president. He looked absolutely nuts! Not able to advance a single coherent thought.
27
@d. stonham Is "arrested development" a diagnosis? He would not be out of place dominating . . . a schoolyard.
1
Here’s a novel idea: Let’s let Whitaker sit down at his new desk first and see what he actually does before we run out the door screaming fire! Like at school today, another ear-piercing false fire alarm going off got all my students really freaked out. I had to spend the whole rest of the day trying to get their minds back on what they’re actually supposed to be doing there.
1
John, that's a terrible idea for many reasons, only four of which I will state: (1) His appointment is arguably unconstitutional; (2) he's plainly unqualified for the job; (3) his extremist views massively disqualify him; and (4) he will not recuse himself from oversight of the Mueller investigation despite his unjustified animus toward that investigation.
Again Trump assaults our intelligence and installs a minion to destabilize the Justice Department.He has demoralized the FBI, the CIA, the State Department and has questioned the judgment of the Military.On Tuesday the people voted to put some checks and balances on his rogue presidency by electing a Democratic majority to the House.I hope it is not too late to restore the stature of the government agencies Trump has diminished and questioned.Trump thinks he is the state, he is not even a president who is willing to preserve and protect the Constitution.He is not a patriot, he is a destroyer of American values.
21
Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. Boswell tells us that Samuel Johnson made this famous pronouncement that patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel on the evening of April 7, 1775.
Whitaker will become another non-event, Trump's latest pawn brought on board to distract us and shield him. (Unless of course he is revealed as a master link in a master plan, can't rule out the insanity of it all.)
There is only one player that matters and that is Trump. And there is only question that matters and that is: What is Trump's end game?
Everything else is a distraction.
4
@PS Whitaker is now the proximal link between Trump and any target of his acts of obstruction. I don't see how that would add up to anything less than conspiracy to obstruct. Rosenstein seems to be out of the picture, doomed to either silence or resignation on principle. If Whitaker's appointment is not reason enough, no doubt Trump will soon supply a doozy.
1
Whitaker lacks the minimal competence to be AG (to judge from the devastating criticism of his legal ignorance).
He has one mission: sabotage the Mueller investigation.
His appointment is another count in the "obstruction of justice" indictment against "president" Trump.
15
If we're going to have a football player as acting attorney general can we make it Colin Kaepernick please?
37
Already neutered Congress, now to neuter the courts. Trump is following the roadmap to consolidating power in the executive branch. We'll soon wind up like other pseudo democracies where other branches of government exist, but have no power and serve at the pleasure of the executive.
All it took was one political party willing to abdicate its responsibility in exchange for a bit of power. How sad. How terribly sad.
10
What has become of loyalty to our Republic first and loyalty to the office of President second!Is Trump trying to be President for Life? Is he surrounded by second line appointees?
4
"“We need to do everything we can to repeal it, defund it, delay it — we need to do whatever it takes,” Mr. Whitaker said of the Affordable Care Act. “It’s having an incredibly negative impact on our economy."
Well, if he hasn't noticed, the economy's been doing very nicely since 2010. Is that a negative? I think it's good proof that, as Tribe says, he's ignorant of certain facts.
I guess only in situations where the Conservative-Of-His-Type Credo holds true: "Judge for me, court good. Judge against me, court bad."
8
Hmmm, John Marshall and 215 years of jurisprudence vs. a Trump toady likely suffering from CTE after too many blows to the head playing Big 10 football at Iowa. I think I'm going with Marshall on that one.
11
I understand this guy supposedly has a law degree. Where did he get it, Trump U? He doesn't seem to have a firm grasp of how our government branches work. And BTW, where has the White House Counsel been yesterday and today? Isn't he supposed to represent? the interests of the office (and not the office holder)? Why was he not counseling the President that he has the power to fire the AG but not the power to bypass Senate confirmed people in the line of succession in the Justice Dept. and install someone that has not received Senate confirmation and by doing so he risks further charges of obstruction of justice,
15
Emmett Flood is himself only Acting WH Counsel. He is there merely as Trump's impeachment lawyer, so Trump isnt going to listen to him on any other issue.
Hey, Baby! We are draining the swamp! Yeah, right. Whitaker may actually be worse than Sessions. Is that possible? Disturbing as that may be, I think so. But no worries--only six more years!
5
@Huge Grizzly . . . which is another way of saying that there's even less daylight between Trump and his new acting AG (or is that AG actor?).
I believe as with Trump, Whitaker is ignorant, sub-intelligent and glad to see Flake and his counterpart are prepared to protect Mueller. With help from Maine Senator. If Chris Christie is the choice the same problems may pertain.
5
Mr. Whitaker looks like a young enough fellow to really feel the effects of global warming before he dies. Could be man assisted. Could be natural. Whatever, let us not hamstring the economy and profit margins for the sake of a habitable planet. Inconclusive, that sounds like what his middle name should be, Matthew G. Inconclusive Whitaker.
8
Shame on me for commenting before reading the remainder.
He contradicts himself again: "On the issue of climate change, Mr. Whitaker said he was “not a climate denier,” but also said that while the globe may be warming and human activities may contribute, “the evidence is inconclusive” and “that’s very small and it may be part of the natural warming or cooling of the planet.”"
He's a denier. And from reading the entire article, this comment perhaps -should- be correct, but he proves that they probably do know better than he does: “Bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., shouldn’t know how to better educate my kids than I do.”
5
Whitaker is as unfit as the man who is trying to unconstitutionally appoint him. Mr. Tribe tells us that Whitaker is narrowly unqualified within the context of the law. We know also that he is ethically unqualified. He was on the advisory board for World Patent Marketing which stole millions, was found guilty of fraud, and was required to make restitution of $25 million. Whitaker comes across as a partisan hack. He is dead wrong on the merits. Trump's finances are very likely to be corrupt which makes him a prime candidate for Russian blackmail or control. Whitaker's comments about the Mueller investigation itself have no basis in reality. Either Whitaker has not even read Mueller's letter of authorization, and moreover does not understand obstruction of justice, or he is simply another dishonest immoral servile Trump stooge.
11
Whitaker is a real piece of work. “Only the best people, folks.” Another substandard hellion joins the fray. Let’s hope Mueller has completed his report and has it stored in multiple locations, ready for unveiling at just the opportune moment.
7
It is like a gangster movie, except it is real.
15
Investigate Whittaker; pretty shady past. Sessions was very efficient at implementing trump's horrible policies; glad to see him go. Ray Sipe
7
Being a life long democrat I found Trump’s behavior abhorrent. He will get away with everything. Democrats are pretty much useless. The first mindless step they took is make Nancy Pelosi the speaker of the house. How could they? If Nancy Pelosi can become the speaker of the house at such critical point in America why can’t Whitaker be AG. They both are equally incompetent. I’m registering as an independent.
Rank and file respect Rod. Whitaker is seen as a muscle bound tool. Weak educational background. Not fit to hold the office.
12
The words "Acting Attorney General" should be in quotes since the appointment is unconstitutional. That's according to Justice Clarence Thomas, reports your op-ed writers, who ruled that any federal officer - even an "acting" one - who reports directly to the president must be confirmed by the Senate, and Whitaker has never been.... Rosenstein could serve, as could any Senate-confirmed U.S. Attorney.
6
Whittaker, a career right wing loser, finds redemption in Trump, who values only the most loyal and shallow minded for his top Cabinet appointments.
Mike Pompeo is the prototypical Trump Cabinet Secretary, a failed business owner and Tea Party House representative who made the big time with Trump. Things have going predictably bad at State since he arrived, with both North Korea and Middle East policies in chaos.
Expect the same at Justice.
71
I recall Republican Congressional committees and internet conspiracy theorists going ballistic when emails between two FBI agents connected to the Mueller investigation disclosed their negative feelings about President Trump, even though there was no evidence these feelings influenced their judgment. These voices declared that the entire investigation should be invalidated. These agents were rightly removed from the investigation to protect the
integrity of the investigation.
Now it has been disclosed that Mr. Whitaker who is now appointed AG and who will oversee this same investigation has publicly stated that the evidence is insufficient to support collusion charges against the President. What do these Republican partisans have to say to distinguish Mr. Whittaker from the FBI agents they so loudly vilified?
40
Another ignorant ass in a position of power in the Clown Car administration. There seems to be a never-ending supply. "Drain the swamp" my foot.
138
Can you imagine if John Marshall had not established the precedent of the Supreme Court as the final arbiter of the constitution? Our new experiment in democracy would have devolved into chaos. Each state would be free to establish its own system of laws and conflicts between states or between federal laws and state laws would most likely be settled by armed clashes. The original intent of giving the President a veto power over Congressional laws was solely to ensure that each law voted out of Congress did not violate the constitution. The executive branch as chief enforcer of the law would become judge, jury, and executioner- the single greatest fear of all the state delegates convening in Philadelphia in 1787 to create a constitution. Democracy with a small “d” would have been short lived.
50
@Paul Cohen
As it turns out, it appears that our experiment in democracy HAS devolved into chaos.
5
Matthew Whitaker needs a lesson in constitutional law. Marbury v Madison has been the law of the land since 1803 when Chief Justice Marshall wrote, it is uniquely the province of the judicial branch to decide what the law is. Far from being the least dangerous branch, the judiciary is the most powerful branch in that it has the ultimate say on whether acts of Congress and the executive branch are unconstitutional and therefore null and void. Mr. Whitaker, an interim appointee whose own appointment as acting attorney general is of questionable validity, and his sponsor, Mr. Trump, will experience first hand the power of the judiciary if they attempt to undermine the Russia probe and defy efforts by the Justice Department and the House to complete their important work.
82
@Jeffrey Zuckerman
That is a power that the judiciary assigned itself an assignment with which others are free to disagree.
Andrew Jackson showed that in the end, it is the branch with the guns that is the most powerful when held by one with the will to use them. All law in the end, rests on violence or the threat of violence.
2
A Scott Pruitt for the DOJ
95
Well, at a minimum he's declared himself unfit to lead simply because he can't understand well established science. Sadly, lack of competence and intelligence are positives in Trump's ... pack.
93
Matthew Whitaker has played a lot of football in his day. I can't help but wonder if he suffers from chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), a degenerative brain disorder associated with repetitive head trauma. I say this in all seriousness, not to be snide.
127
@Kim Derderian
I suspect that Mr. Whitaker's beliefs evolved independently of brain injury. There are many non-brain injured people who share his views. But one has to wonder how he made it through law school being so ignorant of the United States Constitution.
16
How many other right-wing cranks and creeps have the trumpster minions stashed away in various Federal agencies and departments to be appointed at the president's whim to important jobs for which their main qualification is loyalty to Trump?
131
Thousands. It's one of the most evil secrets of Trumpism the American public hasn't woken up to yet.
9
Read The Fifth Risk by Michael Lewis for a terrifying answer to your question. There seems to be no bottom to the depths of ignorance now in charge of our vital institutions.
12
It's heartening to read at least the man is well informed and on the side of protecting individual citizens.
:/
6
@masayaNYC
I don't know what :/ means. Does it mean you're kidding and being ironical? If you're serious, I don't know what individual rights you think Whitaker will protect. The right of people who have pre-existing health conditions to bankrupt themselves, to suffer and die because they can't get health insurance?
1
@Linda
:/ is a face, turned sideways. (Yes. It was a comment made in irony.)
This man shouldn’t be teaching a high school civics class, let alone running the Justice Department. Almost as ill-suited for his job as his boss is.
207
"And Mr. Whitaker said he believed the federal government should play no role in public education."
If you don't teach some common values (ie the constitution) how do you unite the country; how do you have a country?
Media can't do it 'cause they're the "enemy of the people."
I guess we'll have to use physical attributes to identify real Americans. Say skin color.
51
This is what we get for sending in the Clown—the unraveling of our constitutional democracy. I was no fan of Jeff Sessions, but he had the integrity gene, along with the necessary education, to recuse himself from the Mueller investigation.
Let's hope the senate is paying attention. It looks like they could be next.
50
Nah. They have a solid majority and Mitch McConnell.
1
No surprise that Mr. Whitaker is Trumps temp Attn General. The "president" thinks all news he doesn't agree with is fake news. The acting AG thinks that all rulings he doesn't agree with are fake as well. Birds of a feather....
33
It's obvious that King Donald wants Whitaker to interfere with the Mueller investigation to get himself and his corrupt family off the hook.
Besides Whitaker's well-documented views that the Mueller investigation is a "witch hunt" (and strategies to hamper it) he has ties to Sam Clovis, a witness in the investigation.
He can't be allowed to be the acting attorney grneral. He's got to recuse himself.
48
With this nomination, just as with Kavenaugh, the Resident continues to build a firewall between himself and eventual reckoning with the law.
He influenced Justice Kennedy to resign to make way for his replacement pick, who had stated that a sitting president could not be prosecuted.
He fired Sessions to make way for an AG that does not support Mueller’s search for truth, a search which he is supposed to manage. A wolf to guard the hen house.
He will continue to try to replace adversarial players with complacent (complicit) ones as long as he is allowed to.
He must be stopped.
53
So Marbury, the New Deal and ACA rulings were “bad” according to Mr. Whittaker. Wonder what his views would be regarding the Dred Scott, Plessey v. Ferguson and 1954 Brown decisions. Or the 1964 NYT libel, the 1965 Griswold, the 1966 Miranda and the Court’s Nixon tapes rulings. This man is hard core right and would let the “county sheriffs” decide what and what is not the law.
40
Trump is clearly determined to keep investigators from exhuming the mass grave of his past financial transactions, where all the bodies are buried. Investigators must keep digging until Trump can either be cleared or convicted. At the very least, we finally get those long-promised tax returns, although after a different kind of "audit" perhsps than the one Trump was imagining.
18
The President claims the economy is booming and the strongest ever, but Whitaker clai.s the ACA is having an "incredibly negative impact on our economy". So which is it?
This man is obviously extreme in his views and politically and ideologically motivated. His only qualification is his belief that the Mueller Investigation should be shut down or starved for cash.
26
Whitaker is Trump's Mini Me. Trump wants to wack Mueller investigation and his Executioner-of-choice is Whitaker.
Trump has the right to fire Jeff Sessions, but the appropriate interim successor is Rod Rosenstein, who was confirmed by the Senate in 2017
28
“Bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., shouldn’t know how to better educate my kids than I do.”
I didn’t realize that becoming a parent made someone an expert in education.
By that reasoning, bureaucrats shouldn’t know how to run commerce better than someone who owns a corner store or treasury better than someone who has a bank account.
This guy sounds like an intellectual lightweight.
56
It seems that Trump would have an un elected unconfirmed henchman make laws and regulations for the country as he circumvents courts and congress in an undisguised grab for power by his boss.
If the courts and congress are ruled irrelevant it leaves only a corrupt power hungry con man to make vital rules. And what do you call that? A dictatorship pure and simple.
33
@just Robert - In our house, if someone is forgetful, we say, "That's how it starts." (Alzheimer's). Well, in this case, giving the moves Trump has made to ensure impunity for himself, I'd say, "That's how it starts" meaning dictatorship.
4
So if you were to build the perfect modern day Conservative piece by ideological piece the Mister Potato Head that you end up with is Mr. Whitaker. All that's missing is to see him wearing a MAGA hat rah-rah-rahing in the crowd at one of Trump's rallies.
The supreme court is always the perfect place to uncover conservative hypocrisy: "We don't want activist judges" except of course when it suits their policy aims.
27
President Trump, flush with the success of making President G. W. Bush look spectacular in comparison, does the same for former Attorney General Sessions.
22
So when does this trump house of cards come tumbling down? Its put together with something other than American values. How long will the Repubs just stand by and let the destruction of our democracy continue? I am appalled by the fact that the corrupt Repub senate gained 2 seats. What are people thinking? I guess its the ole you don't know what you got until its gone blinders in play here. My goodness.
13
@What_the - This was just a bad Senate map for Democrats. Democrats had to defend 10 seats in states won by Trump. Republicans had to defend only 1 seat in a state won by Clinton. (There were 25 Democratic seats open, total, to just 10 Republican seats). In 2020 the situation will be reversed.
2
And you thought Sessions was bad.
14
Wow. Can't believe I'm saying it, but this guy is even worse than Sessions. Not to mention he hasn't been confirmed by the Senate and has no legal right to take this position.
But hey, as Trump and his followers believe, we don't need no stinkin' Constitution!
52
And it's not even Saturday night yet.
13
I read the candidate Q and A link (thanks NYT) and between that and this Charlie Savage piece, I'm not a fan and don't think the Senate will confirm if he goes through the process.
6
Extremely 'bad' person. Bad for the country and bad for the law (and order).
12
Does he do his own root canals?
16
@northlander Thanks northlander, you made me laugh and that's about the only redeeming thing that came from reading this article about the new DoJ hitman.
1
Nit-picker arrogant Whitaker, curiously a lawyer himself, is finding fault in just about anything and anybody the Court says... that may imply Trump's malfeasance. He clearly lost objectivity, and does not deserve sitting and making decisions as Attorney General...unless he wants to qualify as a hypocrite, and Trump's loyal supporter in abusing his power. As this is being written, Whitaker's appointment seems unconstitutional. If this causes his resignation now, it may save hiom from being indicted later (for obstruction of justice).
10
Whether you agree or disagree with his prior comments he is the acting AG pending approval of a new AG nominated by Trump. Some may wish the Democratic House could prevent his assuming that role. It can't. Some might wish he must be confirmed. He doesn't require confirmation. He is only Acting AG. Some might wish his powers didn't include the requirement that Mueller report to him and he can do with it what he wishes. Some might hope he could not prevent Mueller from pursuing areas deemed by Whitaker outside the mandate. He can. Bottom line: smart move by Trump. Mueller will likely move faster and more circumspectly because of this. Mueller will not be dismissed.
40
@alan brown per Clarence Thomas in a ruling on a much less significant position, you're wrong. Senate has to approve this nomination before he can assume the position. Whereas the Deputy AG did get confirmed, and could assume the role while a nomination is pending.
43
@alan brown Slow walking government control is a Putin tactic. Trump does not have the smarts but someone else in charge does.
15
And if he is dismissed, I believe Adam Schiff already has his resume.
7
Unfortunately this man is a typical Trump appointee. He’s not only ignorant, but his beliefs are in total opposition to the role and responsibilities that the position supposedly supports and upholds. His only qualification is that he is a Trump loyalist, which is clearly what matters most to Trump, whose management style is an appalling combination of a reality show and mafia don. We can only hope that Mueller is far enough along, or that established mores prevail. And, why if the Mueller investigation such a “witch hunt” is our dear leader so eager to shut it down?
15
This man needs to be confirmed in the senate as every other cabinet member must be. It is illegal for this person not to undergo the confirmation process as made clear in many places.
74
His title is acting. I don’t know how long he can be acting but It appears to be either 120 or 150 pursuant to the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998. It could be extended if a new AG is nominated on day 119 for example until that person is confirmed.
2
So, it appears that Whitaker does not have actual legal reasons to disagree with prior SCOUTUS rulings, only blatantly political ones. If those rulings run counter to far right orthodoxy they are "bad." If they hew to radical right wing beliefs they are inherently, "good."
He is clearly and completely unqualified for the position, so, of course he'd be Trump's first choice!
257
Does Whitaker have security clearance? Might be nice for an AAG. I did not see any indication searching his background online.
62
@Tom Jeff He was Sessions' Chief-of-Staff. He would have already had the appropriate security clearances.
@JustMyWords - How could he get a security clearance if his previous job was with a fraudulent company that had to pay a major fine before being shut down?
5
@JustMyWords please note that, as we saw in the past 22 months, security clearances do not automatically go with top jobs, and are a long process which some of Trump's appointees failed. Whitaker was apparently not in the military, so why would he have gotten one? My question stands.
The AAG needs high-level clearance, or at a minimum Senate vetting given the National Security cases he will surely be involved in. It is a simple question, does he, and if so at what level?
2
This totally disqualifies this person from occupying any public position, elected or appointed, in which the office holder is expected to uphold the Constitution and its established order. I’ve been commenting to all who will hear that this country, beginning with the corrosive and corrupting impact the GOP had on the legislative branch once it acquired control over it during the better part of the Obama administration and sealed by the 2016 election, has plummeted into a constitutional crisis.
All events since further prove this. This is where all the exceptionalism, neoliberalism, capitalist chickens have come home to roost, primed by a very poor educational system that only cares about turning out workers for a capitalist corporate economy rather than critical thinkers and civic-minded citizens.
81
@FoxyVil
Agreeing with Lawrence Tribe and the rest of the liberal legal academy’s fuzzy headed concept of the Constitution is not a prerequisite to upholding the actual document itself.
Mr Whitaker needs to go back to middle school & read the Constitution. The Administrative, Legislative & Judicial systems have separate and EQUAL powers. PERIOD!
107
'Separate but Equal' Yes. But not overlapping as so many conflate.
Although the branches may be equal in theory, Alexander Hamilton observed in The Federalist Papers that the Judiciary was the weakest/inferior. Any high schooler could read the Constitution and discern that.
2
@Bob
Don't worry about it. He won't get far because the court will never judge itself illegitimate; and he won't go far because present and future bench legislation will likely suit his interests.
1
The Circus of "our" Nation's Capital is no longer even slightly funny; as demonstrated by Trump assigning Whitaker as acting Attorney General. Whitaker has complete disregard, and 100% contempt for the Constitutional Process of Law.
Further, I don't believe that it is legal for Trump to pick the next Attorney General without Congress and the Senate's debate and confirmation.
So, aw heck, let's just drop the investigation into Russian hacking and meddling in "our" Presidential Election. And, heck again, let's forget about Trump's taxes (or, lack thereof) and Trump's fat Russian business deals, via son-in-law Jared. If Trump has nothing to hide, why can't we all see his tax returns AND a dossier on his Russian business dealings?
Democracy is no picnic, we all know that. But Trump is "stacking the deck" in ways that are WAY past the out-of-bounds line, and, to my way of believing, very illegal.
If we are lucky enough to survive until 2020, may the American People VOTE him out of Office.
56
So what did anyone expect? It's a surprise that he's totally unqualified for the job?
The only question now: what corruption has he been involved in?
You always get the two-fer with Trump appointees.
70
Republicans don't believe in big government until they want squash the rights of those they disagree with. Then....here comes the heavy hand of government.
82
@Vinson: where's the evidence for your comment? I can't find it.
The Vacancies Act of 1998 is being abused.
Sessions was fired, forced out. His "resignation" was on an undated letter and the first paragraph indicates he was being dismissed not of his own volition.
This is a ploy to avoid a confirmation hearing on an apparatchik. An unqualified candidate who would not have been confirmed. He was put in the DOJ by Trump, not by Sessions on merit.
What is most disgusting is the Democrats have given up on the Rule of Law. I suppose I should have expected it given how they didn't give Al Franken due process.
36
@Carl Lee The Democrats? Try the Republicans do not have respect for the law!
2
@Carl Lee Even if you accept the idea that Sessions resigned and wasn't fired, appointing Whitaker violates the Federal Vacancies Act.
3
@Carl Lee, how does the Vacancies Act come into play? Isn't the Attorney General, whether acting or not, a principal officer under Art. II, Sec. 2, cl. 2 of the Constitution and thus able to act only after Senate confirmation? At least that's what Trump has argued regarding Mueller, overlooking the fact that Mueller is not a principal officer.
"The Department of Education should be disbanded and the resources either returned to the taxpayers or put into the schools,” Whittaker said. “Bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., shouldn’t know how to better educate my kids than I do.”
Trump must have seen Whittaker on a Kentucky Fried box and said to himself, "He looks good. I'll make him acting AG," because that's how Trump chooses the greatest people for the right jobs.
39
@Kbu
What has significantly improved in education since the Department of Education was founded?
1
Actually I think Trump found him on Fox news. He was a frequent “contributor’ to Sean Hannity’s noxious show.
Mr. Whitaker is a twin to Admiral Jackson stepping into the role of Director of the Veterans Hospitals,
both men are passionate and fiercely loyal to Donald Trump, and both men would serve their nation better by not stepping into a job far over their heads.
Our Justice department and our Veterans deserve only the best women and men, to serve our nation.
Matthew G. Whitaker would better serve America on Fox "News".
42
The Guardian reports Whitaker spoke at a conservative forum in 2014, saying judges should be Christian and that non-religious people should be barred from judicial appointments. So much for Article VI, Clause 3 regarding no religious test for public office. Or do we still have a Constitution?
229
@JSHWell, at least he did not say that judges should be white. Recall that DJT had no faith that a Mexican-American judge will rule fairly in a case involving him.
2
Whitaker was chosen as chief of staff for the DOJ many months ago. Now, it seems likely that Trump had this planned all along. As chief of staff Whitaker cast a dark shadow and should have had more light placed upon on him then. Thank you Lawrence Tribe! We know now. It’s going to be a mad,mad,mad world..not just mad,mad.
31
".., now it appears that there is no reasonable prospect that anything Mueller does or says could result in Trump's removal and replacement by Pence.
Trump famously said "I could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and not lose any votes" . That has now been replaced by "Trump could be caught on videotape handing American military secrets to Russia and still not have any Republican votes for impeachment".
Whatever evidence and proof of criminal acts that Mueller could come up with, it is certain that such evidence and proof could not be as powerful an indication of wrongdoing as the evidence in the public record that Bret Kavanaugh was lying in the senate hearings relating to his confirmation as a Supreme Court Justice.
Once Ford’s account included three people she said were there AND his calendar had them all at Tim Gaudette’s house on July 1, 1982, AND Ford’s description of the interior of Gaudette’s house in Rockville, MD exactly matches that of the actual house, which still exists: the only way that Kavanaugh was not lying is either: Ford somehow obtained access to his 1982 diary/calendar, or Ford has a time machine or Ford stalked Kavanaugh in 1982 and planned to do this, if and when he was nominated to the Supreme Court..."
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4216597
33
Look. If Matthew Whitaker were not absolutely the wrong person to put into this position of authority, Trump would not have placed him there. It's as simple as that.
163
@Glen well said--just astounding, the unlimited supply of craven, intellectually challenged opportunists he comes up with for appointments
24
Whitaker is a scam artist just like Trump. The organization he worked for was recently fined $26 million for bilking small investors. Charming. Now the miscreant--Trump's lackey--is in charge of the Mueller investigation. People, we have to dump this criminal Administration ourselves, U.S. Senators who are complicit w/ their Dear Leader Trump won't do it. I'm now going to my local "No One Is Above the Law" rally. Any change that has come about came about through protest. Even in Russia and other authoritarian countries, this is true.
51
How did this guy get degrees from Yale and Harvard? Seriously.
24
@Harry
He bought it - as many before him!
6
@Harry
So now we know what kind of people these so-called elite schools produce.
8
@Harry: Did he? According to Wikipedia and all other sources I fount online, all his degrees are from University of Iowa, ranked #27 here https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-law-schools/law-rankings
3
Franklin Graham, Jr. is less regressive than this Whittaker guy.
(If only he's spent some time cutting off the 'private parts' of Iowa-raised pigs, maybe he'd just be another backward, farm-state Senator -- not a man awaiting 'the chair' of The U.S. Dep't of Justice, but no more qualified for a 'ranking' gov't office than his president, or either of as 'the Javankas,'; nor one 'poised' to make the racist Jefferson Beauregard Sessions look like the first U.S. A.G. deserving of 'a place' on Mt. Rushmore.)
10
Fire Mueller now!
If Mueller is fired, against the advice of prominent Republicans, the newly Democratic House will impeach Trump, 100%.
6
Where did this idiot (Whitaker) go to law school?
10
Was Whittaker created by Info-Wars or Breitbart?
20
another blow for democracy and justice. the hits just keep coming with trump.
19
There's more - Whitaker is another scammer...bigly. Just ask the FTC:
https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/world-patent-marketing-scam-took-millions-of-dollars-from-inventors-9605870
26
I’m no expert on the oversight powers of The House of Representatives but would venture to guess they are close to, if not in excess of Robert Mueller’s current authority. If I’m correct, and should Mueller & Team become unemployed, I wonder what if anything could stop the incoming House leadership from employing them. Were this to be possible, Trump would only be digging a deeper hole for himself by firing Mueller. But then again, Trump has done little else except dig holes for himself since announcing his candidacy.
30
@Ed Dougherty yesterday Senator Angus King said the House could hire Mueller if he were dismissed by Trump.
4
From Lincoln's 1st Inaugural Address
"I do not forget the position assumed by some, that constitutional questions are to be decided by the Supreme Court; nor do I deny that such decisions must be binding in any case, upon the parties to a suit, as to the object of that suit, while they are also entitled to very high respect and consideration, in all parallel cases, by all other departments of the government. And while it is obviously possible that such decision may be erroneous in any given case, still the evil effect following it, being limited to that particular case, with the chance that it may be over-ruled, and never become a precedent for other cases, can better be borne than could the evils of a different practice. At the same time the candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the government, upon vital questions, affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made, in ordinary litigation between parties, in personal actions, the people will have ceased, to be their own rulers, having, to that extent, practically resigned their government, into the hands of that eminent tribunal."
I guess Mr. Tribe wouldn't consider Abe Lincoln to be a "constitutional scholar". Oh wait -- didn't Lincoln save the Union?
6
Interesting quote. Context would be good. I'm guessing this wasn't when he suspended habeas corpus--which some judge to be unconstitutional.
4
Mr. Whittaker believes he knows more than 200+ years of Supreme Court justices, who left Marbury v. Madison as settled law.
More alarmingly, the implication of this extremist view is that the President and Congress can never be questioned. What if the President signs an executive order or Congress passes a law, but it violates the Constitution? Without the power of the courts to overturn unlawful actions, we're left with the dictatorship of the majority -- or just plain dictatorship.
There are no constitutional "rights" -- there's just whatever the President or Congress want.
Is that what our nation wants -- an Acting Attorney General who believes that the President and Congress are not answerable to the Constitution?
I can see why a proto-dictator would support that result. I don't know why the rest of us would.
198
I heard something interesting today in a politics class: after he files his report, there is nothing to prevent Mueller from speaking out. It’s not a non- disclosure agreement. So, if the acting AG sabotages him we can still learn the truth.
46
So is this the change most wanted when voting for Mr. Trump. Did they have any idea who he truly was and that his election could possibly lead to the destruction of our Democratic Republic; which is based on laws?
21
@Shimar The Trumpster don't think that much into things.
1
Where does Trump find these troglodytes?
I loved how he said he was “not a climate denier,” but then said that while the globe may be warming and human activities may contribute, “the evidence is inconclusive” and “that’s very small and it may be part of the natural warming or cooling of the planet.”
What does he think the definition of a climate denier is?
59
@Joel Shore "Where does Trump find these troglodytes?" He calls his so-called 'friends' and asks for 'advice.' Deeply troubling, all of this!
1
Whitaker is there to hatchet-job Mueller's investigation. Then he'll be gone. The next AG can start with clean hands.
Whitaker probably doesn't realize that with Trump, loyalty flows upwards only.
23
This piece would be more persuasive and informative had it included comments from legal scholars to the right of Lawrence Tribe. I loathe the Trump administration, but please do some actual reporting - I could have told you off the top of my head what Tribe would think about Whitaker without reading this.
5
@Ghost, anyone with a middle-school civics education can tell that Whitaker's disdain for both Marbury and the ACA cases is both ignorant and internally contradictory. You don't have to be a respected Harvard legal scholar to see that.
What about you? What do you think of the quotes from Whitaker that show that he is a reactionary, far-right religious conservative who explicitly says that if he can he will undo civil rights in the areas marriage equality, reproductive rights, the exercise of religion and the right to be free from religion, and environmental protections needed to ensure the health and the very lives of tens or hundreds of thousands of Americans? I don't need Lawrence Tribe's opinion to see that this man is dangerously out of touch with the traditions and institutions that have kept this country great for over 200 years. Are these not obvious to you? By the way, this is an opinion piece, which the New York Times is careful always to label as such, unlike Fox News and the crazy Infowars.
1
Where does the Constitution label the judiciary inferior?
31
Insignificant per Whitaker - climate change, education, courts, equality for immigrants, equality for same sex couples, the Affordable Care Act, the Supreme Court........just for starters.
Throw in the Mueller investigation, and we’ll have Putin at our doorstep.
And this is Making America Great Again?
Gee, I feel cought in the middle. Too old to see this country become great again, and too young to think about how it could really be - without Donald Trump. Either way is sickening.
This is Justice?
21
The BEST people. God help us ALL when we start getting the Worst.
Seriously.
58
@Phyliss Dalmatian He is the very definition of a "hack".
18
The only compliment I could possibly give Mr Whitaker: he seems to be completely genuine in his bigotry and ignorance.
130
No one should be allowed to be the Attorney General if they do not know or appreciate the Constitution and what it says about the three branches of government and separation of powers!
58
Nothing to worry about with guy, we'll be fine.
God help us.
16
If the Senate wishes to retain its role it might start with a sense of the Senate resolution declaring that this sppointment is invalid without advice and consent.
But that vote might be too easy.
14
When the mob boss hand picks a conciglieri and henchman to do his bidding, he typically does not consider character or commitment to the constitution as prerequisites for the job. And, lets be honest, this man has one purpose and one purpose only and that is clearly not to act in the best interests of the DOD or the country.
26
Great. We have a complete political hack now in charge of Justice. And a puppet of the Trump administration. Full bore constitutional crisis coming.
56
Trump's minion, we HAD to know he wasn't going to be a genius.
24
"internally contradictory” and “ignorant" ...
It sounds like he's a perfect sycophant for Trump.
17
Leave it to a cheating liar with a criminal mind to find like-minded allies to work for him. Just look at this guy.
27
A vivid example of unsocial promotion.
12
Just what we need to make 'merica great: an AG who apparently never read or understood the Constitution.
17
Is Mr. Mitchell a reincarnation of Nixon's John Mitchell.
6
. . . sign of an “internally contradictory” and “ignorant” . . .
And thus Trump and his entire so-called "administration."
14
Come one and all, and read about the invention promotion SCAM that the new, fake [as in unconstitutional] AG was a paid advisor to - nice company he keeps!
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/blogs/business-blog/2017/09/how-invention-promotion-outfit-demoted-truth
14
A typical Trumpian appointment who is an extremist and intellectually and morally unqualified for any post in our judicial system. Of course the main purpose of the Supreme Court is judicial review and the legal interpretation of our laws.
His views are beyond the pale and disqualifies him from this appointment. Just ridiculous!
17
I wonder how he keeps his knuckles from scraping the ground when he walks?
20
Another know-nothing Trump lackey who disdains the law when it applies to HIM or the dictator wannabe to whom this lamprey is attached!
16
I'm convinced! Trump daily outdoes himself in picking unqualified people to positions of power. This one picked because Trump is worried (with cause) that his time is about over.
18
Whitaker is a scam artist and fraud like Trump so they get along well together.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/11/8/1811192/-Matthew-Whitaker-s-work-as-a-scam-artist-and-threatening-bully-makes-him-the-perfect-Trump-AG
13
Another NYT hatchet job.
The courts are the least democratic of the branches, because they are not elected and (federal courts) serve for life on "good behavior". They are not responsible to the electorate, and most scholars think the Founders expected them to play a much smaller role than they have been. It's not crazy to consider them an inferior branch, and they have done a lot of harm. Dred Scott gave us the Civil War.
3
@Jonathan Katz:
Could you explain how this is a hatchet job? Please ID the falsehoods in the article.
13
You are incorrect. I’m basically everything you said. I have taught law for over 30 years and assure you that no one agrees with your assessment.
11
@Jonathan Katz. If the FF thought so, they ought to have written it explicitly in the Constitution. Conservatives cannot be both originalists (which means textualists, really) and interpreters of the intent.
3
I love all those "small government" types who are always eager to accept a government job.
Those are presently holding office should give up their perks. Imagine how much money that would save.
18
Whitaker also said judges should be Christian and people with other beliefs or no beliefs should not be allowed to be judges.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/08/matthew-whitaker-acting-attorney-general-judges-christian
30
@Linda
A clearly unconstitutional position. Immediately disqualifying him for a Federal office where he has to take an oath to defend the constitution..
12
@Linda
I guess he’s not going to the Trump’s for Hanukkah or Passover.
2
On the issue of climate change, Mr. Whitaker said he was “not a climate denier,” but also said that while the globe may be warming and human activities may contribute, “the evidence is inconclusive” and “that’s very small and it may be part of the natural warming or cooling of the planet.” As a result, he said, he did not believe in regulations aimed at curbing carbon emissions that could “hamstring” the American economy.
Great news for Mr. Whitaker. If his tenure as Acting Attorney General does not pan out, then he can always toss his hat into the ring to be Acting Secretary of the Interior once Ryan Zinke's tenure finally collapses under the weight of investigations by Congress and the DOJ. His views on climate change appear to be as well thought out on those of the role of the courts.
Always warms my heart to see someone with well-documented and multi-faceted ineptitude and ignorance such as Mr. Whitaker leapfrog his way up the organizational ladder. Only in America.
70
@Adam Kenny. It brings to mind the aphorism often (wrongly??) attributed to Will Rogers, talking about Hoover: "It’s not what he doesn’t know that bothers me, it’s what he knows for sure that just ain’t so."
2
If the Constitution is, as it says it is, the supreme law of the land, and if a federal or state law or executive may action, or a lower court decision contravenes it, who else is to decide if not SCOTUS? This question has plagued the Brits ever since. They do not have judicial review because Parliament is supreme there. Would those oppose Marbury v. Madison thus conclude that, since it is the subject of our Article I, that Congress should decide? Or would they further spin the Founders' intent to conclude that POTUS or no branch has the power of review?
AAG Whitaker and others of his ilk would have us believe that POTUS or Congress is Supreme, not the Court the Founders gave that name. Justice John Marshall was right. Marbury should have gotten his appointment if and only if the law that entitled him was constitutional.
6
Mr. Whitaker, at the time of the Marbury v Madison ruling over 90% of the men who ratified our Constitution were still living. They could have easily organized an action to contest the ruling. They didn't. The Constitution doesn't explicitly give the Supreme Court the power to determine whether or not laws or executive orders are Constitutional. Then again, the Constitution is incredibly vague in many, if not most, areas. Our Founding Fathers intended for each branch of our government to be equal. When citizens disagree with a SCOTUS decision the remedy is to change the law or to amend the Constitution. Otherwise, SCOTUS determines whether or not a law is Constitutional when a case is brought. It would be ridiculous to claim that SCOTUS has run wild overturning laws. They haven't. On the other hand, your boss, Donald Trump is definitely running wild.
62
Seeing how things are in the US now makes me think that one should never take peaceful times and a functioning democracy for granted. It’s both sad and frightening to read about what’s going on. When I was younger I always expected society to evolve and get better, but that’s obviously not how it works..
78
@Kari Please encourage your government to change their position on the proposed Antarctic Wildlife Refuge: they were one of a handful of countries that opposed it.
3
@Kari
Democracy is probably inherently self - limiting.
In any case, the United States was specifically designed to incorporate only limited democracy without being a democracy.
2
"Mr. Whitaker holds strongly conservative views across a range of issues, his answers revealed." Really? I'd say someone who rejects the concept of judicial review isn't trying to "conserve" anything. He's not a conservative, he's a monarchist.
39
@Matt
From Lincoln's 1st Inaugural Address
I do not forget the position assumed by some, that constitutional questions are to be decided by the Supreme Court; nor do I deny that such decisions must be binding in any case, upon the parties to a suit, as to the object of that suit, while they are also entitled to very high respect and consideration, in all parallel cases, by all other departments of the government. And while it is obviously possible that such decision may be erroneous in any given case, still the evil effect following it, being limited to that particular case, with the chance that it may be over-ruled, and never become a precedent for other cases, can better be borne than could the evils of a different practice. At the same time the candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the government, upon vital questions, affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made, in ordinary litigation between parties, in personal actions, the people will have ceased, to be their own rulers, having, to that extent, practically resigned their government, into the hands of that eminent tribunal.
3
The ACA - "It’s having an incredibly negative impact on our economy." says Whitaker. Really? Not that I hear from my many friends the doctors, health insurance execs, and Big Pharma. They are making out nicely thanks to ACA. Another case of 'really good for the 1%'?
Or is the new AAG a fan of alt-facts?
21
the question is not just about his views but whether the appointment is justified since he was never reviewed by the senate.
17
He provided NO legal reasoning for the positions he takes. Just his opinions, based on ideology, not the law.
35
"“Bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., shouldn’t know how to better educate my kids than I do.”"
This is why I think home-schooling should be illegal. Very few of us have the resources to "know how to better educate". It's why we have professional teachers and I thank each and every one of them that helped me through life.
81
@Jake News. I had homed in on the 'shouldn't know' part of that statement, as though Mr. Whitaker thinks there is no place for expertise or experience when setting policy to build our country's future. Things that make you say "Wha?"
This is what we need, an acting AG that studied business and communications running the Department of Justice, in other words we needed a lawyer but we got a shoe salesman.
Him and Trump have something in common, neither ones knows what they are doing.
38
Everybody knows that like with Kavanaugh, he was picked for three reasons-- a hatred of our laws and courts and precedent, the belief in the unlimited powers of Trump, and a puppy-like slavish loyalty to Trump.
31
"The Department of Education should be disbanded..."
This statement alone is terrifying for me to hear both as a private citizen but also as a parent.
I have two Masters degrees, my wife has one as well, and neither of us remotely believe we have a handle on how educate or instruct our children.
To think this man is now running the Justice Department is appalling. No senate confirmation? Really? We're not even trying to pretend this isn't a farce anymore are we GOP?
55
@Nick
Education is the job of state governments that they generally delegate to local school districts and municipalities. The Department of Education only does a tiny amount in comparison.
How do you suppose the Department of Education is going to teach you how to teach your children? What do your Masters degrees in different subjects have to do with it?
1
@Nick Have you given up on your State? Where in the Constitution does it give the power to regulate/interfere with the education of children -- to the Federal government?
1
@Nick Where we give all of the obligations of educating our children to the states and local school districts we get some of the least knowledgeable citizens in the U.S. When graduates cannot even make change, when they cannot get jobs unless they are only with local businesses or family businesses, when they get their information from tweets, when companies like Boeing and Michelin and BMW have to import educated workers from other places - places where students actually learn how to read and understand a manual or do the calculations required to become a nurse - then you have an appreciation for why national standards help us to compete with better educated Chinese and Indians and Japanese and Germans and Norwegians and Brits and Canadians. If you want a child who knows how to drink and go to football games, send that child to school in Missouri, Alabama, Louisiana and South Carolina
6
Is there any reason to expect that trump will change his spots and get professionals and mainstreamers on his team? No!
The “president” the other side hired is the perfect foil for nationalist xenophobic passion. Trouble is, none of his loyalists actually know how (or care) to represent our democracy. Even Sessions could not last.
7
Well, chances are 6 to 3 he doesn't have to worry about that any longer.
2
It is a sad statement on these United States of America and the promise of human liberty and justice for all.
9
Mr Whitaker is a perfect republican.
He believes in the rule of religion over the rule of law.
He does not believe in science or math.
Most ominously, he believes the courts and the justice department are political tools of his party.
1930s Germany.
64
Now that Trump has been emboldened by the election of those that "embraced" him, has real enemies to fight (the Democratic House and the Press), people like Matthew Whitaker are only the beginning of a White House that is solidly behind Trump and willing to lie, cheat and confiscate what is left of American Democracy to promote the Trump agenda of hate. Soon, very soon, we will see the disappearance of moderates from the Administration, replaced by the hard line radical right. Seems to me we sat by and observed a similar scenario unfold sometime around 1938.
If this was Russia, and so far it is not, Jim Acosta would not have had his Press Credentials removed, he would have just simply disappeared.
13
All this hair afire hysteria over Whitaker's temporary plug into the AG position is insane. Just another milestone in the railroading President Trump's first term is receiving. Once he picks Sessions' real replacement, what will cause the next anxiety attack?
@JBC, I like how you worked in the reference to hairplugs with reference to Mr. Chrome Dome here.
“Bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., shouldn’t know how to better educate my kids than I do.”
What a terrifying thought him educating his children.
26
“I don’t believe in big-government solutions to a problem that doesn’t appear to be that significant or quite possibly isn’t man made.”
About climate change?!? Even Trump was concerned enough to protect Mar-a-Lago.
Could things get any more bleak?
10
Wow. This guy is way worse than I could have possibly imagined. He appears to be an outlier among the outliers and I'm surprised he isn't in favor of bringing back slavery (individual property rights, after all).
If AG Sessions had forced Trump to fire him, instead of tending his resignation, this could not have happened - Rosenstein would have taken over. But it seems that Sessions ONE honourable action was to recuse himself from the Russia inquiry. Apparently that was all he could stomach.
16
First he should address the farm subsidies then address the social spending cannot cherry pick. As or putting education back to the family I think he proofed that with his 2014 coments . Anyway he will be Trump's puppet then Trump will throw him out
5
I guess that Whittaker's opinions checked all Trump's boxes. What could possibly go wrong?
18
Another one of the Donald's "Best People" appointed without any vetting by anyone except the Great Donald himself. He makes Little Jeffy look like a Boy Scout by comparison.
The alarming arc of the Donald's two years in office has finally morphed into an all out Predatory Presidency, intent upon destroying everything in its path...like a developer bulldozing the past to make way for a lawless new order, featuring walls, barbed wire, and guns.
67
I'm so sick of mediocre and not-so-intelligent people -- generally white men -- getting the pick of the most powerful and prestigious jobs in our nation.
This is why college-educated women, and so many others, voted for Democrats on Tuesday.
189
@Vic NY
I too am “sick of mediocre and not-so-intelligent people”
BUT your comment reeks of misandry (the hatred of men) and racism.
Can we please agree that the problem is not restricted to race, color or sexual orientation, but to ignorance and intolerance?
Whitaker may be male and white, but it is his ultra-conservative values that are the bigger problem.
Let us hope that a reasonable man or woman is chosen as the next AG.
1
Where are the lawsuits stating that putting him in this position is unconstitutional? If Trump was a thinking man -- and we all know he's anything but -- I'd say he stays up nights thinking of ways to destroy the rule of law. But he just blindly skips along on his little autocratic way, destroying democracy with every bumbling, self-serving, unchecked step, enabled by Republicans. Trump is corrupt, conniving and cornered and that's a terrible combo for the country. Any rational person can see that Whittaker should recuse himself. But then he'd be useless to Trump. Which makes Whittaker as corrupt as Trump.
20
So Whitaker:
Was a good college football player but apparently couldn’t make it to the pros.
Appointed as US attorney, who serves "during good behavior" but apparently couldn’t take it.
Ran for US Senator from Iowa and lost.
Ran Sam Clovis’ campaign for Iowa State Treasurer, and lost.
Tried to learn law but was apparently unable to understand the constitution.
Now he has failed upward by working for trump. Quite appropriate.
211
Too many concussions, maybe?
14
Don’t forget his stint as a conservative commentator at CNN. I’m pretty sure that is how he came to the attention of Trump. Reality television rules all now.
23
Excellent analysis.
1
As President Reagan, I think, once said, "There you go again." In this case, the article attempts to interpret a reasonable and historically justified characterization of the Supreme Court's relation to the other branches of the federal government in ways unfavorable to the current Administration. Federalist Papers No. 81, for example, makes it clear that the Court is ultimately subordinate to another branch of government, namely, the legislature. Read your history before making your readers jump to conclusions!
1
@Barefoot Boy
Take you own advice and read without ideological blinders. Also remember that the Federalist Papers were opinion not fact. Kind of an extended op-ed.
17
@Barefoot Boy - The article addresses far more than Mr. Whitaker's opinion about the relationship of the Supreme Court to the other branches, and the other opinions that Mr. Whitaker expressed make it clear that he is an extreme partisan who believes the government exists to impose the beliefs of "right-thinking" Americans like himself upon others. For example, somehow, the mere existence of gay servicemen and women forces military chaplains "to go against their religious beliefs." His opinion on Marbury v. Madison clearly is not a reasonable intellectual difference, but a position he is willing to take when it suits his ultimate goal of turning the US into an authoritarian religious state.
17
You cite nothing to back up this vague and irrational claim. While the legislature makes legislation, the Supreme Court, and other lower courts as well, can strike legislation down and have been doing at least since 1803 in Marbury v Madison. Put your shoes on, go to a library and learn something about your own country works.
9
Well, I think that Mr. Whitaker will fit right in with all the other folk around trump and pence that are yearning for a theocracy.
Wasn't that the whole point of the 1st? That religion could - and should! be a private matter and that it was not to interfere with the new secular society? "Separation of church and state"?
That god's law is NOT superior to man's law?
And, now, after all these decades and even more and more decades, here's another "nature" boy.... no, not because he loves the flora and fauna, but a "nature" boy like Scalia was: Man's nature is superior to a female's nature and that is why a man get's to rule on when life "begins" and those women can just shut their mouths but keep their wombs open.
"I don't believe in big-government solutions, " he swears..... which only goes to prove that he lies just like trump...
NOTE: In the exit polls, nationwide, people were asked on their opinion on abortion. 69%, nationwide, said leave it alone - it's fine the way it is.
This is why the R's are in a dying party.
They are on the wrong side of everything.
Just another God-fearin' Hilly-Hater.
This man has no business being anywhere near government.
Someone tell him to move to the Vatican State.
19
@rosa
“Wasn’t that the whole point of the 1st? ... that religion was not to interfere with the new secular society?”
No, it wasn’t. Read it. It prohibits the state from interfering with religion but says nothing regarding prohibiting religion from interfering with the state or about establishing a new secular society. It left the state as a secular institution entirely exposed to the religious influences within what was a profoundly religious society.
“Separation of Church and State” is to be found nowhere in the constitution.
Another muddled mediocrity, too inconsistent even to even label an ideologue. Trumpniks wanted chaos and they're certainly getting it.
21
Well this should be interesting....the man heading the AG’s office seems to be a radical of the worst sort. If he’d prefer to go back to 1803 and Marbury v Madison then frankly let’s just start shooting at one another again and just get this all over with. There’s little value in my opinion to continuing this ruse that this nation is a nation of laws.
13
@Coastal Existentialist.... Your just a footstep away from the Canadian border. I myself am looking into what it takes to become a permanent resident there.
3
@Scott J. I’m in Canada right at the moment, headed back tomorrow. Were I younger and healthy and not particularly interested in seeing my kids, grandchildren or great grandchildren I’d simply stay here....I have a distinct advantage though: I’m a dual citizen.
7
@Coastal Existentialist....I'm a Canadian myself,
living for the past 40+years in the USA.I stay because of the weather and California.We had a wooden stove in the winter:Resolute Bay or Marina Del Rey was an easy choice for me at 20. Stop for a delay (i was a steward for Air France),quit that day,and never look back.
2
This is course comes as no surprise as this country heads toward the potential of a totalitarian regime. After all many of this horrific president's supporters call themselves "family." Sound familiar to those of you who know about the mafia? A regime that has no respect for laws is a lawless regime and, therefore, doesn't function as a real democracy. And Congress has done nothing and won't, at least not before the newly elected new members of the House are sworn into office nearly two months from now. So for the next two months we can expect total lawlessness from the White House including ending Mueller's vital investigation. I think of Kurtz's last words in a novel with a title that could well be the title for a book about this administration, "The Heart of Darkness": "The horror! The horror!"
11
A typical Trump nomination- pick someone who’s loyal to you, don’t bother vetting too thoroughly, make him or her do the dirty work for you, hope you’d get away with yet another coverup.
Sooner or later luck is going run out and his illegal past will cause his demise.
11
Is anyone surprised? By ANYTHING Trump does?
7
This man, Whittaker, is a dangerous as trump.
11
Yet another right winger who wants to take us back to the past. In this case, apparently, all the way to 1802.
12
Religion, the gift that keeps on giving. In this case providing cover for the people who do the bidding of the ultra-rich.
8
This is truly frightening.
13
This article has cherry picked and restated the entirely of Whitaker's views, perspectives and statements on the courts.
Then prove it. Post the full questionnaire.
5
@danleywolfe
Can you summarize in 1500 characters or less? If you type it, I'll read it.
6
@danleywolfe I have no doubt the writers chose Mr. Whitaker's own words to describe his positions on particular issues because those issues are of interest to readers of the NYT. While you may characterize that as "cherrypicking," I would argue that his stated opinions on these issues demonstrate he is not fit to serve as AG. However, if the information in the article is inaccurate or incomplete, I am confident the readers of the NYT would like to know about it...but of course, it isn't.
5
I get it. He’s willing to trash our systems of Government.
9
Sounds like he’s almost as unqualified as Trump is...
13
Wow talk about fringe individual, and He is the acting AG. Insanity
13
Another Trump acolyte without respect for the US Constitution and rule of Law.
11
The man is not a "conservative," he's a lunatic extremist. You can say what you want about the merits of the Marbury v. Madison decision, but it's been settled law for over 200 years.
25
Someone who despises the office he works for?
Well, to Trump, that is the singular thing that makes him qualified.
Remember deVos? Pai? Tillerson? Mnuchin?
“I hire the best people.”
— Donald J. Trump
The 45th President of the United States
9
NYT, please stop calling people like Whitaker "conservative".
Especially when you quote him in the very same paragraph criticizing Marbury v. Madison, a ruling from 1803!
15
I feel like Trump has appointed Lex Luthor or The Kingpin fer cryin' out loud. Where is Superman or Daredevil when you need them?
13
Laurence Tribe calls his legal views “internally contradictory” and “ignorant”. Sounds perfect for the Trump DOJ.
19
@David - Who are you going to believe? An esteemed Harvard law professor, or Sam Clovis's hatchet man.
6
I guess we now know why the president* picked this guy
6
Oh great. Whitaker, another cuckoo who wants to strike down New Deal type programs and health care. How do they function without hearts ? Why ever run for office, if not to help the American people? Lost souls.
9
I'm sure the blank far-off expression on his face mirrors the internal "working" of his mind.
9
Whatever else you say about this administration, you have to admit they have attracted some serious scholars -- Whitaker, Gorka, Dr. Hannity, Pirro, Prof. Arpaio and the rest.
10
Ask Whitaker what his stance is on presidential obstruction of justice.
That's what this is all about; a continuum of lies, deceit, distraction and obstruction of justice by the Con-Man-in Chief and his similar and ignorant minions.
Lock them all up!
10
He like all conservatives does not believe in big government unless it is used to advance his loony far right principles.
This clown show that is the Trump administration is about to get way way worse. And Trumps enablers in Congress, yes that's you I'm talking about Mitch McConnell will not lift a finger to stop the insanity. Trump is his useful idiot and he is quite happy with his ploy to stop Obama from letting the public know about Trump and the Russians before the election in 2016. I don't see this ending well for our country.
4
Anything that mitigates the power of the courts is welcome. The ebb and flow of executive, legislative and judicial power are naturally-occurring phenomena in government. Additionally, it is unfortunate that the Supreme Court Justices--being unelected-- haven't a mandatory retirement age. Age 80 is time to retire from the court.
@Zugzwang, nobody's saying that this purported Acting AG is actually going to have an effect on the power of the federal judiciary. They're saying that his uninformed and internally-contradictory ideas about the Supreme Court disqualify him from his job.
POTUS is dredging the swamp and putting what he finds in office. These people, like him, do not honor the Constitution. Dregs.
38
another intentionally ignorant republican given more authority than their capabilities demonstrate they are capable of handling.
65
"more authority than their capabilities"
...never mind their ethics.
3
FYI - The Britt article was written in 2002 (not 1 year ago)
Quoting Lawrence Tribe is leftist extremism it self.
3
@james
Have you ever read Prof. Tribe's writings, or are you just knee-jerking?
5
I guess he feels that the largely ignorant buffoons in the House of Representatives should be the final arbiter of 'law,' v those who are constitutional scholars. Another second-rate lawyer whose career languished until the hapless Trump saw opportunity for another 'useful idiot.'
21
Matthew Whitaker:
University of Iowa undergraduate Bachelor's degree.
University of Iowa MBA.
University of Iowa Law School J.D.
What are they putting in the corn?
12
political hack/hatchet man. from Wiki: "From 2005 to 2007, he was responsible for the unsuccessful investigation and prosecution of Iowa State Sen. Matt McCoy on charges of attempting to extort $2000. The jury took less than 2 hours to return a not guilty verdict." says much.
tight end for Iowa - lost to Washington in Rose Bowl '91.
20
@Mark
too many hits to the head...football?
1
It goes against my upbringing and what I perceive to be the better angels of my character to judge anyone on their looks, and I doubt that the gentleman expected to suddenly find himself having to wisely administer our laws, but the photographer does not seem to be his friend.
9
His photo is the most flattering thing about him, Mark.
It’s all downhill after that.
24
@Socrates
Whitaker's work as a scam artist and fraud is right up Trump's alley.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/11/8/1811192/-Matthew-Whitaker-s-work-as-a-scam-artist-and-threatening-bully-makes-him-the-perfect-Trump-AG
5
Sounds like he doesn’t agree with the U.S. Constitution.
7
@NCLady
No, read carefully. He disagrees with the more liberal interpretation of certain parts of the Constitution, as those liberal views are stated by one of the most extreme liberal Constitutional scholars in the country, Larry Tribe.
@GMooG, the Marbury v. Madison decision is not a "liberal interpretation" of the Constitution. And you have to admit that Tribe is exactly correct when he says that Whitaker's views are contradictory. You can't fault the Court for Marbury at the same time you wish that the Court did more to find laws unconstitutional.
All righty, then! This guy is a real peach.
Did you know that he was on the Advisory Board of a company that was shut down last year by the FTC? It was determined to be a fraudulent operation.
102
Maybe he took too many hits to the head while playing football for Iowa.
9
How can his supporters believe he is draining the swamp?
10
@MMG: In terms of Biology, a swamp is place of ecological diversity. We Protect swamps so we can maintain diversity and protect endangered species. Yes, Trump's goal is to drain the swamp and fill it with toxins so that only his species will survive. However, since he is uneducated and is not concerned about our future it is likely we will all be on the endangered species list soon.
@MMG you have to drain the swamp to find all the bottom feeders.
Key paragraph:
“He seems to think much of the fabric of federal law that is part of our ordinary lives violates the Constitution of the United States to which he is evidently going to take an oath,” Mr. Tribe said.
___
Isn't that the case w/ EVERY [acting] AG?
11/8/18 2:36P CT
Ha. He's just right for the party.
3
What an exciting time, an administration that would bring us back to 1776, and start over on 200 plus years of American history. White males in charge and the only ones franchised to vote and rule the country; meanwhile, the Bill of Rights are ignored since we have no recourse to correct governmental injustices.
15
Whitaker gives us,the people no choice, we need to resist....protest....and vote. This new false Trump appointee needs to be stopped in his tracks,he is dangerous to our democracy,the justice system & our health.
12
So the Constitutions applies my way but if it is for you it ain't valid?
That about sum up his position?
It surely does for Trump even when Trump may not have startedout being a crook.
5
@Just Me
But he did start out as a crook. Everyone in New York (and I was one) knew he and his father were racist slum lords who broke the law as a matter of course. No accident that he has appointed so many other crooks to his administration. You do what you know.
5
Wow. Just Wow.
I wonder where he got his law degree? Obviously, Constitutional Law was not a lasting memory.
4
With all due respect Prof. Tribe and many of those who have written comments Mr. Whitaker's beliefs are in almost total agreement with the Federalist Society and their " scholars ".
As a member of the Lawyers Guild [ since 1968 ] I have seen their publications and attended their lectures and have tried to explain to " liberal " dem.'s how dangerous their idea's are. In every short time [keep a close eye on the lame duck session ] the majority of the entire federal judiciary will be made up of this group and they are all very young.
32
In its reporting on this the Times continues to say that Trump "fired" Sessions and replaced him with Whitaker. The Times should know better; it printed a column today by George Conway and Neil Katyal that referenced controversy grounded in the Vacancies Reform Act, and separate Justice Dept. statutes on succession, about Whitaker's authority, and how it depends on whether Sessions resigned, or was fired.
In short, if Trump had fired Sessions, it would be harder for Whitaker to claim full authority over the Justice Dept, including the Mueller investigation. The basic logic here is that the President should not be able to fire Cabinet officers simply because they won't do his will, especially if his will is corrupt, as Nixon's was in the Saturday Night Massacre. The case that Trump's motive here is corrupt is extremely strong. Thus it matters whether Sessions was fired or resigned. Arguably, by resigning--which is what Sessions actually did--he smoothed the way for Trump to attempt to act on a corrupt motive.
The Times should be on top of these important features of this story.
12
@TMSquared. The undated letter Sessions submitted claims he "resigned at the request of"-- ie-- fired. Surely I am not the only one to notice!! Forced to resign= Fired.
1
@judith loebel
I wonder how much is riding on the "i.e." Trump, and now the DOJ, which says Whitaker has the full authority of the AG, appear to be reading this as resigned, not fired. Sessions could have forced the issue by declining to resign at Trump's request, and making Trump fire him, but he didn't.
Anyway, it just seems like a crux that the Times is ignoring.
He can't do anything until he is confirmed- it would be a totally illegal construct.
1
@Millie Bea
Totally wrong. Congress is not in session - this is a recess appointment. People who don't know anything about the law or Constitution should not be commenting on those things.
GMooG, you should know that this is not a recess appointment. The Senate is in session. And Millie, there are no plans to get Whitaker confirmed: Trump seems to believe that his appointment is enough. Whitaker is purporting to serve as acting as Attorney General in spite of the Constitutional requirement that principal officers be confirmed by the Senate.
Clearly, he has a very high opinion of himself.... not unlike trump
5
ok. So what?
The r's will hide all of this from the confirmation committee just like they did with kavanaugh.
2
What confirmation committee? The guy was appointed as acting AG two days ago. There will be no committee, even though the Constitution appears to require the advice and consent of the Senate.
Trump is trying his hardest destroy every part I will government.
3
Trump has his Roy Cohen.
Have McConnell and the Senate Republicans so surrendered their powers to Trump that they will allow such a stooge, without Senate confirmation, be the top Justice Official?
Are they so cowardly and contemptuous of their Constitutional oaths that they will not put a check on this President’s attempt to derail the investigation into his possible criminal connections to Russia in the last election?
Democracy is dying in plain view because of Republican complicity.
22
Oh good, Lord, I have heartburn again. Will this insanity never end?
10
Perhaps all of his years as a football player dislodged his heart and shook up his brain...what an ego: he knows better than the 215 years of jurisprudence that came before him; he says he knows more about how to educate his children than educators; he apparently knows more about medicine than those who created the ACA, he knows more about climate change, it goes on and on. He is a Trump mini-me.
26
Echoes of 1938: a loud leader running all the paths to power. With 40 per cent of the country openly enamored by him.
Our history of democracy is different and is the buffer we count on. But we are in a new place in the experiment. And already becoming a new society, unfamiliarity become common, and without the common shared knowledge of before. Our Reichstag isn't afire, but it's eaves are smoldering.
11
His understanding of the Constitution and the separation of powers is probably the same as most average Americans, ohh wait i mean average Republicans who don’t know anything other than the supposed powers of the executive.
4
HE PLAYED FOOTBALL FOR IOWA for four years too! Proudly! Never once wearing a helmet!
9
Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse!
6
Whittaker’s appointment is just another peg by Trump in obstructing justice
3
Once again, we see the price of total ignorance and a lack of knowledge as to how governmental institutions are supposed to work.
Tired of this 'Administration's' consistent view of itself as Year Zero, where only their (baseless, conspiratorial, sycophantic) opinions count in an airless, joyless, bubble devoid of precedent or reason. Yet half the country appears to go along with this garbage.
Authoritarism? Who are these Oliver Twists, saying "Please, sir, may I have some more?"
12
And this should surprise no one.
6
This is it. The Constitutional Crises we expected. Not only was Whitaker paid to undermine the Mueller investigation before joining the DOJ, he’s a radical who shouldn’t even be the acting AG. That should be Rosenstein. What clearer case of Obstruction of Justice could there be? There isn’t one because this was clearly designed to end the Mueller Investigation and install a minion. Why are we hearing nothing from our esteemed Republican Law and Order Senators? It’s a world-wide disgrace. I’ve already written my Senators demanding this guy’s recusal at a minimum. Of course mine would be “Lyin’ Ted Cruz” and “Good old Boy,” John Cornyn so I’m not so hopeful. But our voices must be heard on this! This is outrageous!
8
Just another passenger for the clown car. It must be really crowded in there.
8
Brace for the impact.
2
Only the best! This guy couldn't get a job teaching constitutional law in a high school. Leading the justice department is easy peasy I guess.
11
Looks like Trump found his Mini Me. A baby autocrat.
3
This is what happens when a vile amoral man consumed by his hunger for adulation, power and money ascends to the presidency. He has no concern for the rule of law, unless it serves his own purposes. Thanks GOPers, non-voters, electoral college members who failed to do their duty, and a special thanks to those who voted for Putin's Green Party candidate, Jill Stein. BTW the Green is busy spoiling the Senatorial election of a Democrat in Arizona, in case no one noticed.
11
But her emails....and some speeches on Wall St. Thank God we rooted out THAT evil.
12
So a Harvard law professor says that Mr. Whitaker's views reveal an “internally contradictory” and “ignorant” philosophy. So are we surprised Trump picked someone in His own image?
12
The perfect Trump appointee, he shares the same exact views, as Trump, as well as about 1/3 of the country. He is as dangerous, if not more so, than Trump with these beliefs.
It is people like Whitaker that makes holding a Constitution Convention both scary, and dangerous at the same time.
There is no question now that Whitaker will shut down the Mueller investigation, and clean house. And, most like allow Trump to issue an executive order to prevent Democrats from having any hearings or perform an investigations, when they take over the House.
This is how the face of autocracy works. When a president, and his attorney general, tear up the Constitution, the "rule of law" is finished.
8
@Nick Metrowsky Congressional committees are not bound by executive orders. Separation of powers and all that.
"There are so many” bad rulings, Mr. Whitaker said."
The Supreme Court historically has been the bane of progressives and conservatives alike and therein lies strong evidence of its importance to our democracy. Mr. Whitaker has made it plain that he would push heavily on one side of the scales of justice according to his belief system which is precisely how justice and human rights in government are obliterated.
14
So the Supreme Court should not have judicial overview of the Constitution, but it should have said that the Affordable Care Act was unconstitutional? Sounds Trumpian to me.
37
Whitaker should never have been working under Sessions even, let alone as his replacement. Another article said the replacement without Senate approval ( a mere formality in Trump's Republican Senate) makes this appointment unconstitutional. We shall see.
8
Gee I thought in The Federalist papers the courts were seen as a co-equal branch of government. They were made so as to protect against tyranny of the Executive Branch.
7
@Bob Wrong. See, for example, Federalist Paper No. 81.
@Bob. So sayeth A dot Ham. But they cherry pick their Bibles and their Founders writings and intents, so are you surprised?
1
That’s so GOP: saying that the Supreme Court lacks the power to declare laws unconstitutional while simultaneously complaining that the Supreme Court didn’t declare laws he doesn’t like unconstitutional. It seems that having self serving twaddle instead of principles is a job prerequisite.
5
Matthew G.(will I obstruct justice?) Whitaker, should decline the appointment or recuse himself. If he consults his lawyer or clergyman, they will so advise him.
3
Why wouldn't the Deputy Attorney General become the Acting Attorney General until the Senate can confirm a replacement?
6
Whitaker's assertion that the courts “are supposed to be the inferior branch,” alas, is based on no less an authority than Alexander Hamilton. In Federalist 78, Hamilton wrote, "The judiciary...has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. The judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of powers [executive, legislative and judiciary]...Of the three powers above mentioned, the judiciary is next to nothing."
Oh dear.
1
@Lewis M Simons Hamilton was wrong.
1
@Lewis M Simons. Was he praising that or bemoaning it? Intent??
1
And Hamilton's sentiment made it into the Constitution and Constitutional jurisprudence how, exactly?
I'm tired of being shocked and outraged and tired of it in others, too. Is that all we are going to do? What kind of action do you all suggest in this kind of a situation. I have written to my Senators and House Rep, and, of course, voted. There is an action/protest here today as in many other places, to show up and be seen. Ideas? We have let this go too far down the road.
1
@Mary...many of us were where you are within the first few months of the regime. When voting doesn't cut it, as it didn't Tuesday, and the solution rests in a WHOLE LOT more than that anyway, the "action" necessary to negate the tyranny of the moment is utterly alien to 21st-century "Americans." We're cowards---all of us, not even close to possessing the courage to do what we ALL know needs to happen. Oh, and we're way to busy padding bank accounts to be bothered with quelling fascism/revolutionary change anyway. It's much safer (and delusional) to pretend we're making a difference preaching to the choir in e-forums and occasionally voting. And as far as beseeching representation, they're part of the reason a new R needs to happen. This has been trending for 50 yrs, and has now come to a head. Your question is the most important of our time, but will be kicked down the road while we allow our kids to be desensitized to an ETREMELY compromised version of "America."
Are you ready?
2
Since Whitaker feels the way he does about the courts, rule of law, etc. maybe he should consider moving to Russia. Certainly Vladimir Putin will have a place for him in Russia's government.
6
If Republican senators have any spines left, and any true concern for the tenets upon which this nation is built, they will immediately speak out and voice their objections to Whitaker's new role in the Justice Department.
Not only are virtually all of these statements untenable legal positions, but, had Whitaker proceeded through the typical confirmation process, these extremist beliefs would have justifiably disqualified him from the position.
I'm talking especially to you Senators Flake, Heller, and Corker - you are leaving the Senate in a few months. Use your voices to protect the nation. Do you want to be remembered for remaining silent?
4
@Williamflake will furiously tweet about it, but in the end will do nothing to stop this madness.
1
To those who pooh-poohed the notion that Trump's election portended an attempt to to subvert the Constitution and establish an authoritarian and fascist regime: there is nothing more to argue; it has become a self-evident fact. Matthew Whitacker doesn't even hide his contempt for the Constitution and his intentions to subvert the rule of law. And sadly, this week's election "normalized" Donald Trump and his profane and anti-democratic rhetoric. The takeover has begun in earnest.
History which note side each citizen took at this inflection point, and the actions they took or did not take to stop it. It's time to come down decisively the side of patriots. And act now.
15
U.S. courts should only play an advisory role. The U.S. Constitution does not grant them the power of review.
1
If there's one thing U.S. courts cannot do, it is play an advisory role. Courts make decisions, they don't offer nonbinding advice. Those decisions are law.
Scary thought but what if he is Trumps next Supreme Court pick. I can't see the Republicans in the senate voicing a bit of concern, my thought is his is just your average right wing Republican these days. Maybe just a bit more honest when speaking publicly but that's about it.
3
President Trump has always acted like he thinks he is the smartest person in the room. If Whitaker's appointment is any indication of appointments to come, it now appears that Trump is going to guarantee that he's the smartest person in the room by surrounding himself with fourth-rate intellects.
10
Another example of a person in this administration; and too many republicans who think they have all the answers to everything. That they are always right, they got theirs, and lots of luck to the rest of us. History will not be kind to him and his ilk,
4
Most importantly, because all I have left are attempts at humor, will this energize the "Founding Fathers" to rise from their graves and set these people straight?
2
Dr. Lawrence Tribe was quoted on MSNBC just now that Congress has the authority and can exercise it when the Democrats are in control of subpoena power in the House to have Mr. Mueller publically testify to everything he knows about the Russia probe excluding confidential or redacted information. Mr. Whitaker as an illegally appointed AG has absolutely no power to direct Mr. Mueller to not testify.
If Mr. Mueller is stymied in his job or is fired he cannot be prohibited from disclosing it to the House subcommittee. Mr. Whitaker is a phony appointment and has no legal authority to prevent it according to Article II Section II Clause II of the Constitution. Read the OP/ED in today's NYT for more details.
4
Trump has no use for the rule of law and knows very little about it. In his entire life in business he never made a move that one or more lawyers didn't check and recheck to keep him out of prison. Strange he would take a job he got by accident that is all about law and nothing but law and the first one he ever had where his attorneys were not able to save him from himself. It's too late now.
5
He's like our, a democracy's worst nightmare & requires confirmation which would never happen. Even with the Repubs increased majority, I think it is a bridge too far, I hope.
How and why are Whitaker's views on Marbury v Madison and judicial "inferiority" conservative? Why not say "reactionary"? His audition succeeded, but his statements on overruling New Deal laws do not square with his opinion about Marbury.
1
Republicans seek to destroy the independence of the judiciary, suppress freedom of the press, institutionalize large-scale corruption and effectively delegitimize dissent. The result seems likely to be one-party rule for the foreseeable future if Republicans are allowed to stay in power - - and it is power, raw power, that Republicans are seeking to establish for themselves. An iron-fisted rule. We are in grave danger at this juncture of American history. If we continue a swing to the far extreme right, meaning fascism, it will be almost impossible to return to our great American ideals. Whitaker is apparently part of that power grab for one-party rule by the far, hard extreme right.
1
How can someone involved in a firm that was sued by the federal government for fraud in the millions be working, nothing more and nothing less, as the attorney general? only in America, I guess.
2
He sounds like just what the president ordered. Someone who is already on board with an autocratic President and will back down if he dares harbor a dissent.
The harm this president is doing will take generations to undo.
4
It is ridiculous to continue to use the word "conservative" to describe such views. When it gets to questioning Marbury, we are way at the radical end of the spectrum. It is in no way conservative to urge that 215 years of jurisprudence be thrown out.
3
Marbury v. Madison establishes the foundational principle of our democracy: The judicial branch of the government is possessed with the authority to determine the validity and constitutionality of laws enacted by the Congress, signed by the president, as well as the validity of rules and regulations promulgated by the “fourth branch” of government, administrative agencies.
The principle of judicial review has served our republic well since the decision was rendered.
I’d ask the Acting AG: what would he prefer? Legislative review, by the branch of government that enacted the law in the first place? Executive review, by the President who signed the bill into law. Or no review, so that the Congress can do anything it wants, unchecked? Kind of like the Nuremberg laws.
3
Well, duh... Was anybody expect a Trumpian choice to be rational and law abiding?
I'm publicly offering this advice to the House Democrats: get the word out that they are seeking to hire an army of experienced forensic accountants and white-collar-crime specialists. Nothing too overt, but just enough to leak out through all the usual back channels and see what shakes out. I predict that the results would be hilarious.
2
Although Whitaker seems loathsome, I fear this less than many.
Mueller's work is, in all likelihood, substantially complete. If anyone thinks the results will sink into a black hole are mistaken.
First, Mueller will be subpoenaed by the new House in January and provide great detail into his findings. Second, the knowledge Mueller gained in the investigation is not erased if he is fired. He is not compelled to silence. His many highly competent associates are not compelled to silence. If the investigation is thwarted or ended by this rank amateur Whitaker, he will go down in infamy and a whole bunch of patriotic lawyers will be prepared to be the Daniel Ellsberg of the 21st century. The Mueller papers will make the Pentagon Papers look like Winnie the Pooh.
11
Even the last guy in the graduating law school class earns the title Esquire. the whole lot of them deserve whatever the future holds.
Let's remember this lack of respect and disregard for the courts when the conservative majority on the Supreme Court hands down it's decisions. What's good for the goose....
5
Wow. Quite a bunch of ill-informed beliefs there. No wonder Trump likes him.
This one is particularly interesting, since he or his wife can certainly choose to home school their children. "And Mr. Whitaker said he believed the federal government should play no role in public education."
Whitaker seems to be in the very image of Trump...perfect choice to do Trump's ill biddings.
1
I’m very worried that he’ll share
information from the Mueller
investigation with the White House. How much corruption
must we stomach before this
nightmare ends?
1
The implication of such a view is that those who execute the law are also imbued with "superior" powers of interpretation.
Law can be difficult to write clearly, which makes it just as difficult to interpret. The varying interpretations of the Constitution's clauses and of its amendments are evidence of that.
Deferring interpretation to the executive branch, particularly those charged with enforcing the law, would be disastrous.
56
Building up a repudiation of the courts' authority over the White House's accountability.
180
@Coyoty Unless, of course, the Courts' rule for Trump's position on anything- then he'll gladly defer.
4
I suppose these unusual views might have tipped the President's choice to Mr. Whitaker, but I would think an unqualified expectation of loyalty would have been most important. In any case at least one candidate for next Supreme Court nomination may be otherwise engaged.
19
Welcome to Authoritarian Anarchy !
Screw the law.
Screw the Constitution.
'L'etat c'est moi'
TRUMP 2018
283
@Socrates Unfortunately, trump 2020.
2
Yet more proof that Trump has no care for the rule of law and will not care until January, when Democrats will MAKE him care.
333
@Tyler Harris
Don't fool yourself. He intends not to care then, either. He will confront their legitimacy. He will try to shut the democrats down in ways that will be stunning. He has no choice. He has boxed himself in. This is extremely dangerous.
13
Potus can try with all his might to end these investigations, but I think a lot of people are going to end up in jail. Hope they all enjoy their astronomical legal bills.
284
I doubt it. The investigation by Mueller is over as of the minute this guy walked through the door. As the boss, he now has access to all of the investigation material, including sources. I expect we will see some new poisonings very shortly.
4
And they'll be democrats: Obama, Biden, Clinton, etc., etc.....
3
"He also signaled opposition to abortion rights"
Well, wedge politics have created a situation that America needs to fix.
Those divisive strategies have created controversies where there is no debate. There should be no controversies about abortion: nobody is FOR abortion. Abortion is a tragedy.
Abortion rights are about legalizing abortion. Legalizing abortion is about controlling it.
Banning abortion will never stop women from having an abortion. It only hides it.
Legalizing abortion can enable those who really want to fight it to act. How do you want to convince someone not to have an abortion when this someone is hiding or traveling abroad to have it? Doing it in a barn with the help of a nurse with needles?
I suppose the extremists don't really care about abortion and the wellbeing of the women concerned. They want women who have an abortion to be punished, in any way, even death.
How Cristian is this? Where is love? Where is life?
190
@exo Birth control, available to all, is the answer. It is not Christian or Jewish or Muslim.
6
@exo
“They want women who have an abortion to be punished, in any way, even death.”
More than that, they want any and all women who enjoy sex outside of marriage to a man to be publicly shamed and brutally punished.
Make no mistake. Christianity, as is practiced by the voting majority in this country, is a patriarchal system of overt coercive control over women’s sexuality as well as those who do not indentify as cisgendered heterosexual. Christian love has nothing to do with it and is completely lacking in their motives. It’s all about forcing this nation to its knees in obsequiousness to raw white heterosexual Christian male power.
This is a fight that everyone, especially third party Stein voters, must wage. Voting straight ticket Democratic is the only way the separation of church and state will survive. And left wing Stein voters will be the first to be eliminated in a Christian dominionist state. So, stop the suicidal voting!
21
@exo Abortion is like Prohibition and the drug war... you can legislate against it but you'll never stop it.
15
He is NOT a Conservative, he's another unhinged extremist with a radical, activist agenda. His ideas are not conservatism, they are anything but.
761
thank you for speaking the truth. I am sick and tired of everybody sidestepping the reality that Trump is on the road to destroying our democratic government. He will do it however he can. Perhaps by declaring martial law on our Southern border or inciting war with some other Nation.
24
This is absolutely conservative. It is consistent with the Republucan platform, their legislation, their votes since at least Reagan. This is what conservatism is.
14
@anita, it may be “Conservative” but is not “conservative”. Capital “C” tend to be reactionary and want to turn back the clock, small “c” conservatives just want to slow the clock down a little and consider the ramifications of actions before moving forward. Whitaker wants to turn the clock back to 1803 and start over.
18
Another inspired choice by Trump...it’s almost as if he’s intentionally picking people to destroy the US government; as if he were some kind of a foreign agent...well, if so, I’m sure this new appointee will get to the bottom of it.
382
Exactly. Steve Brannon’s fingerprints are on everything Trump does. Starve the beast. Destroy the state. Rebuild. This is Trump’s explicit agenda. Nothing secret about it. And he’s achieving it.
19
Almost? As if?
7
@James You hit the nail on the head.
6
The breadth of this man’s ignorance is astounding. How did he ever navigate law school?
456
@Craig Reges
I guess the same way he got to the AG position. Through people who knew him and his loyalties.
18
@Craig Reges
He was a member of the University Football Team! By the looks of him. a linebacker!! These guys didn't crack books!
24
@Craig Reges
An embarrassment to the U. of Iowa. Played football. Maybe a few too many concussions.
38
Why doesn’t he get vetted by congress? This will be the end of the Mueller investigation.
33
Candidates appointed to fill vacancies when the Senate isn’t in session don’t need a hearing because the position is temporary. If Whitaker was nominated to become the permanent Attorney General, then he would have to go through a hearing.
34
If his job is temporary why does he get to make permanent decisions??
9
@Aaron H. The Senate is in session.
8
Mr. Whitaker will not pursue against ACA in light of public support for ACA. Nothing will be done against the interests of poor people and immigrants until 2020. If Trump wins the second term, you ain’t seen the worst. Until 2020, Trump and Whitaker lay low not to jeopardize 2020 prospects. Democrats should bring the public awareness early on about the dangers of Trump second term.
98
An AG who thinks it's a good idea to toss away 215 years worth of jurisprudence?
No wonder, since his appointment is unconstitutional to begin with. But he's loyal to the despot, that's all that matters.
686
@Tom
How many years of jurisprudence age justices throwing away when they discover novel historically unrecognized “rights”?
@KBronson None. Discovering something that was not previously seen to be there is not the same thing as denying something which quite patently IS there.
14
Sounds like the perfect AG for this President: as Professor Tribe said, “internally contradictory and ignorant.”
492
Another fascist wannabe, like those who went to the gallows after WWII, is now the acting Attorney General of the US. Thank you Republicans in the Senate for your total submission to fascism.
525
Like the angry, devious mountebank who appointed him, Whitaker's 'ideas'are so bumptious in their lockstep, unthinking conservatism, and so gratingly expressed, that the idea of him being attorney general of and on behalf of all the people is a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery of a travesty of two mockeries of a sham.
157
@Robert Yarbrough
Great use of "mountebank" I had never associated that with him; I will appropriate it, if you don't mind.
4
@Robert Yarbrough
points for using the word mountebank....reducing points because using it trivializes the depth of trumps perfidy.
7
This guy is scary. I hope that the institution of the Justice department and the many non political folks can do what they can to slow walk, or refute him on his ideas as he tries to enact them.
Maybe just maybe this guy is even too scary for the conservatives on the Supreme Court.
211
Doubtful
3
@Charleston Yank
thomas, goersch, kavannaugh, alito....nope not too scary
5
@Charleston Yank
Even the rabid right wingers on the Supreme Court might choke on this guy's take on Marbury v. Madison.
14
This is fascist, theocratic, supremacist thinking interpreting our Constitution for his own purposes. What Republicans are doing to our country and its government is an Orwellian nightmare.
There is no way this man can uphold the Constitution. The Republican denial of equality, separation of church and state, science, decency, public education, the environment, health care is appalling and shameful.
This is not going to end well.
945
@Suzanne Moniz
I've found that a lot of people aren't really familiar with what fascism really is. When I call someone a 'fascist' (which I've been doing a lot more these days) they take it as an insult. I point them to an article written over 1 years ago by Lawrence Britt that defines 14 common characteristics of the political ideology. I ask them to tell me which one of the 14 don't apply to this administration. They rarely come back with an answer.
Google the search terms 'Fourteen' and 'Characteristics' and read it for yourself.
24
I agree 100%, Ms. Moniz, except that I believe it WILL end well because WE THE PEOPLE - average Americans - will not let it stand.
There were over 1000 Rapid Response "Trump Is Not Above The Law" demonstrations across America last night to protest The Con Don and demand protection for the Mueller investigation.
THAT, ladies and gentlemen, is democracy in action.
Thanks for showing up and Good Job!
14
and yet.... Americans have rewarded this president with a stronger senate. Americans are getting the government they appear to like.
1