tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8932561596322097661.post2011199892793813325..comments2024-03-19T21:27:10.501-04:00Comments on Scotty's Dreamworld: Are You an Enemy of the State?Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18227567734763798004noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8932561596322097661.post-29311043193881149892011-12-03T10:04:56.491-05:002011-12-03T10:04:56.491-05:00The truth is, your take on this is probably the co...The truth is, your take on this is probably the correct; center of the path; sane response to this legislation. What powers that our president takes upon himself, I feel, has little to do with this bill. Executive privilege and power has reached a point where it is almost unchecked.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18227567734763798004noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8932561596322097661.post-1464521068291950242011-12-02T15:00:25.074-05:002011-12-02T15:00:25.074-05:00Thanks for the link back. I have yet to see this f...Thanks for the link back. I have yet to see this final bill that was passed, that is now heading back to the House.<br /><br />But my hopes are that the definition of "covered persons" remained intact.<br />If it didn't, now we have something to worry about. :)<br /><br />My stance on this is not to do battle with folks, but to calm people down from hysteria.<br /><br />Congressman Amash claimed Sec 1032 (the APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS AND LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—(1) …was that it's "simply makes such detention discretionary", even though it stated "requirement... does not include Citizens of the US". So my disagreement with Amash is, if the President makes his decision to detain, based on a discretionary decision, that would expand the authority of the President, which Sec 1031 (d) prohibits that.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07899335615984185508noreply@blogger.com