With the sting of the campaign now fading away and the conservative Trump agenda one that Senator Cruz favors, he’s steadily becoming one of the President’s strongest and most important voices of support inside Washington DC.
In this questioning of former acting Attorney General Sally Yates, Senator Ted Cruz, an excellent debater, came armed with the facts and although Yates held her own in professing her position that she had a right to second guess and defy the direct orders given to her by the President of the United States, she fails to make the case. Senator Cruz gets the last laugh, with the last word, coming after Yates was clearly quite pleased with herself, thinking she had gotten the better of the exchange.
Senator Cruz initially implies that Yates is a partisan Democrat, telling her, “The arguments you laid out are arguments we can expect litigants to bring, partisan litigants who disagree with the policy decision of the President.” He then reminds her that “On January 27th, 2017, the Department of Justice issued an official legal decision, a determination by the office of legal counsel that the executive order, and I’ll quote from the opinion, ‘the proposed order is approved with respect to form and legality. That’s a determination from OLC on January 27th that it was legal. Three days later you determined, using your own words, ‘that although OLC had opined on legality it had not addressed whether it was, ‘wise or just.'”
Yates replies, “And I also, in that same directive, Senator, said that I was not convinced it was lawful. I also made the point that the Office of [sic] OLC looks purely at the face of the document and, again, makes a determination as to whether there is some set of circumstances under which some portion of that EO would be enforceable, would be lawful. They importantly do not look outside the face of the document.”
She continues, “And in this particular instance, particularly where we were talking about a fundamental issue of religious freedom [foreigner religious freedom to enter the US at will?], not the interpretation of some arcane statute [Democrats believe immigration laws aren’t really laws anyway] but religious freedom, it was appropriate for us to look at the intent behind the President’s actions and the intent is laid out in his statements.” What was critical to Yates was to incorporate the Comey principle in which intent is used to manipulate the statute with subjective distortion by the would be enforcer as justification for arriving at the predetermined political objective.
Senator Cruz has one final question for the self-righteous political hack, asking her, “In the over two hundred years of the Department of Justice history, are you aware of any instance in which the Department of Justice has formally approved the legality of a policy and three days later the Attorney General has directed the Department not to follow that policy and to defy that policy?”
Yates replies, “I’m not but I’m also not aware of a situation where the Office of Legal Counsel was advised not to tell the Attorney General about it until after it was over.” As she sits there with a smug pride evident on her face, and begins to back away from the microphone, Senator Cruz delivers the final shot, saying, “I would note that might be the case if there’s reason to suspect partisanship.”
Cruz is a real asset to President Trump. It’s good to have them cooperating, at least for all appearances working together towards a common goal.
Thank you for reading and sharing my work – Please look for me, Rick Wells, https://www.facebook.com/RickRWells/ , http://www.gab.ai/RickRWells , https://plus.google.com/u/0/+RickwellsUs and on my website http://RickWells.US – Please SUBSCRIBE in the right sidebar at RickWells.US – not dot com, and also follow me on Twitter @RickRWells.