During the Russian collusion hearings on Monday, former Deputy Attorney General, then Acting Attorney General for the Department of Justice, Sally Yates, batted off Trump-supporting Republicans like flies as they desperately tried to discredit, trick and shame her. They failed. What they did manage to do is trip over and embarrass themselves and the country in order to seek the favor of Fake-President/King Donald Trump.
During one particular inquisition, Texas Senator Ted Cruz pompously decided to question Yates on Trump’s Muslim ban, rather ask what she knew about Michael Flynn, which was the main reason for the hearing. But Cruz ended up messing with the wrong person, as he tried to edify Yates on Trump’s authority using a section of the INA/Immigration and Nationality Act. Here is a video excerpt followed by the video transcript.
(Transcript Excerpt)
A minute into the video Cruz brings up Trump’s Muslim ban. This is where his usual condescending smug side reveals its ugly self.
Cruz: Okay. Let’s revisit the topic, Miss Yates, that you and Senator Cornyn were talking about. (see video below)
Yates: Okay.
Cruz: Um. Is it correct that the Constitution vests the authority in the President?
Yates: Yes.
Cruz: And if an attorney general disagrees with the policy decision of the President — a policy decision that is lawful, does the attorney general have the authority to direct the Department of Justice to defy the President’s order?
Yates: I don’t know whether the attorney general has the authority to do that or not, but I don’t think it would be a good idea — and that’s not what I did in this case.
Cruz: Well, are you familiar with 8 U.S. Code § 1182?
Yates: Not off the top of my head, no.
Cruz: Well, it’s the binding statutory authority for the president’s executive order your refused to implement that led to your termination, so it certainly is a relevant and not obscure statute.
Yates: MmmHmm.
Notices how Cruz gets in his dig that Yates was “terminated?” The Texas senator goes on to quote one section of the statute.
Cruz: By the expressed text of the statue it says, quote: ‘Whenever the President finds that the entry of any alien or class of aliens into the United States, would be detrimental to the interest of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for any period he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or class of aliens as immigrants or non immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens, any restrictions he may deem appropriate.’ Would you agree that, that is broad statutory authorization?
Without hesitation, Yates replies with an additional provision that “trumps” (yes, she uses that word) Cruz — basically out-lawyering him and putting him in his place for all the nation/world to see.
Yates: I would, and I am familiar with that — and I’m also familiar with an additional provision of the INA that says: “No person shall receive preference or be discriminated against in issuance of a visa because of race, nationality, or place of birth.” That, I believe was promulgated after the statute that you just quoted. And, that’s been part of the discussion with the courts in respect to the INA, is whether this more specific statute trumps the first one that you just described.
But my concern was not an INA concern, here; it rather, was a constitutional concern.
And scene. Ted Cruz is still desperately trying to ‘find himself’ after election — but then, it’s really dark up in Trump’s ass. Here are some of the responses from Twitter during the Yates-Cruz exchange.
Worth mentioning is another exchange Yates had with the patriarchal, condescending Texas Congressman John Cornyn. She soundly put him in his place as well during this 95-second YouTube clip:
For those who weren’t able to watch any of the proceedings live and want to catch up, you can view or save the PBS YouTube video link below that includes the entire hearing. Given the reasonable time limits and questions, it moves pretty fast. For a synopsis of hearing, check out, “5 Things We Learned From Sally Yates’s Testimony On What The White House Knew About Michael Flynn” via The Washington Post.
Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper held his own during the hearing, as well. At times, he did seem quite irritated, and rightfully so given some of the arrogant, ignorant and baiting questions by Trump-supporting lawmakers. Clapper did get some zingers in there, though, specifically when one Republican asked him about the “leaked unclassified information.” Clapper replied, that if a document is “unclassified,” it can’t be “leaked,” and he garnered a good laugh from the crowd.
How refreshing to witness the kind of intelligent, nonpartisan integrity we saw today from two former government officials who sadly both lost their jobs, directly/indirectly, because of that trait. But many feel we’ll be hearing more from both again and think today we may have witnessed two possible presidential candidates. Cheers to Sally Yates and James Clapper for making America proud.
Here is the full video of today’s hearing.