Alex1Powell's Categories
Alex1Powell's Authors
Latest Saves
Most of Formost’s ships were built by China’s state-owned China State Shipbuilding Corp (CSSC).
CSSC is one of the top 10 defense groups in China.
\u201cMcConnell\u2019s marriage into the Chao family dynasty has coincided with a trajectory of ever-increasing personal profit for McConnell and the Chaos, as well as Chinese state business interests.\u201dhttps://t.co/g7HbYGbsZI
— Ron (@CodeMonkeyZ) December 16, 2020
This piece by @ThatShockratees is the best thing you will read today.
— Greg Olear (@gregolear) December 15, 2020
We know Biden will replace Trump as President. We didn't know MVP Kamala can replace Mitch as presiding officer of the Senate.https://t.co/vSOlywz8Hn
The problem with that attack is encapsulated in the Senate's official history (cited graf 7) - https://t.co/UwF93b9YaA
The Senate's official history on its https://t.co/gLTPXi8eiT site recounts the Constitutional fact that the majority leader's presiding powers are derivative.
A power informally delegated by the VP can be taken back, so the Senate history accurately describes the majority leader as "an emperor without clothes." So, if the VP used presiding power to give priority to a senator moving a House-passed bill to the floor, and . . .
. . . the House purported to override that action by 1) self-recognizing the ML to do something different, and then 2) sustaining a point of order limiting the VP's presiding power, what would be the legal basis and remedy for that action?
Several principles intersect here that arise from agency rulemaking. But first, we have to recognize the Supremacy Clause - the Constitution is a superior law to any other law, rule or precedent.
Spoiler: it makes uncomfortable reading for the Attorney General.
There will be no substantive change to the sentences passed on the killers of Pc Andrew Harper.
— The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) December 16, 2020
The Attorney General\u2019s application to refer the sentences as unduly lenient and the defence applications for leave to appeal against sentence have been refused by the Court of Appeal. https://t.co/qxTzuj7jR3
First, by way of background. I was one of several commentators astonished that the Attorney General, who has no known experience of practising criminal law, decided to personally present this serious case at the Court of Appeal.
It appeared an overtly political decision.
Grimly cynical.
— The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) November 12, 2020
The Attorney General - who has absolutely no experience of criminal law - is so desperate to exploit this tragic case that she is inserting herself into proceedings that she is not competent to conduct.https://t.co/QWdINvUwwf
Comments leaked to the press confirmed this was a political decision, to capitalise on a tragic case in the headlines.
A “friend” of the Attorney General told the Express that she was pursuing the case *against* legal advice. She also took a preemptive pop at the judges.
Before the hearing, the Attorney General leaked to the Daily Express, via an alleged \u201cfriend\u201d, her views that, should the judges find against her, it will be because they are \u201cwet liberal judges\u201d who are \u201csoft on criminals\u201d. https://t.co/5uGggN8tTT
— The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) November 30, 2020
On the day of the hearing, it appeared from selected reports that the AG was out of her depth. She appeared to be making political submissions to the Court of Appeal that have no place in a case of this type.
The Attorney General had to be embarrassingly corrected during the hearing by an actual criminal silk after making irrelevant and politicised submissions to the Court of Appeal.
— The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) November 30, 2020
What a farce. pic.twitter.com/wy81xoFIDI
The Court of Appeal judgment helps understand what happened.
The AG played a limited role. She “rehearsed some of the facts and said that the sentences had caused widespread public concern”
Her contribution was seemingly not considered by the Court to be legal submissions. Oof.
But facts are facts: China’s gov't has committed serious rights violations against the #Uyghurs on a 🚨massive 🚨scale.
A 🧵on @hrw findings so far & next steps.
In 2018, @wang_maya literally wrote👏 the👏 book👏on the Chinese govt's mass, systematic campaign of violations against Turkic Muslims in Xinjiang. /2 https://t.co/t7nyX3x6QO
The Chinese govt's "Strike Hard" campaign has subjected ❇️ 1 million+❇️ Turkic Muslims to abuses like:
💠forced political indoctrination
💠collective punishment
💠restrictions on movement and communications
💠heightened religious restrictions
💠mass surveillance
/3
Not even kids are safe from this campaign’s cruelty.
Chinese authorities have kept countless children - whose parents are detained or in exile - in state-run child welfare institutions & boarding schools w/out parental consent or ⛔️access. More here: https://t.co/vVT6Xk4U7Y
/4
Last week, @wang_maya revealed a big data program for China’s policing in #Xinjiang that arbitrarily selects Turkic Muslims for possible detention. The government is using technology 💻 to “turbocharge” its repression of the #Uyghurs.
https://t.co/C8xouSEHD4
/5