This is what former US Attorney-General Sally Yates said as she scandalously instructed her department not to defend President Trump’s executive order on immigration:
“I am responsible for ensuring that the positions we take in court remain consistent with this institution’s solemn obligation to always seek justice and stand for what is right,” Ms Yates said.
“At present, I am not convinced that the defence of the executive order is consistent with these responsibilities, nor am I convinced that the executive order is lawful.“
Notice how she didn’t say that she thought the executive order actually was unlawful – but instead used the weasel-words ‘nor am I convinced…’?
There’s good reason for that…
This is what US law says:
Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President
Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.
(Ref: 8 U.S. Code § 1182 (f) – Inadmissible aliens).
How could Yates have said the above nonsense with such a straight face and dragged her entire department down with her?
Never mind being sacked, why is this not being treated as a criminal offence? Given the national security issues involved, treason immediately comes to mind.
Also, in light of the above, it is simply extraordinary that the ABC (Australia) could write this headline with a straight face:
No – you devious, slimy nitwits – she wasn’t sacked because of her remarks, she was sacked because of her actions in directing her department to defy a lawful executive order.
Why do we pay $1 billion a year to be fed such loathesome fake news?