Presidential Transition

[Bajo_cero2]

This defies belief. You're responding to every debatable argument (and the issue regarding December 10 is certainly debatable), but regarding the main issue you are silent.

I'll repeat it:

The National Constitution says nothing regarding the traspaso de mando. Almost every president in the country had it done in the Casa Rosada. Including Peron, it appears.

CFK is misquoting the Constitution. Anibal Fernandez is misquoting the Constitution. You are misquoting the Constitution. And when called out on it, you go silent.

I replied you but you don't understand. I hope it is only that you don't understanf legal language in Spanish.
The article 93 of CN is brand new (1994, Peron died in the 70') and it is crystal clear: she is right.
Art. 93 does mention it.
Tradition has legal value in the common law system, it has none in ours because it is not enforzable, helloooooooooo, this is not the US.

 

[ben]

I replied you but you don't understand. I hope it is only that you don't understanf legal language in Spanish.
The article 93 of CN is brand new and it is crystal clear: she is right.
Art. 93 does mention it.

I will translate the full text, correct me where I'm wrong (capitalization sic):

Upon taking office the president and vice president shall take an oath, in the hands of the president of the Senate and before the Congress assembled, respecting his/her religious beliefs, to "discharge faithfully and patriotically the responsibility of the office of president (or vice president) of the Nation and observe and have [others] observe faithfully the Constitution of the Nation".

Where on earth does that refer to the ceremonial process of traspaso de mando?

According to the CN, without the traspaso de mando, is the president not fully in office? Then is it not purely ceremonial? If it is ceremonial, is not misquoting the CN for political purposes not scandalous?

And again: Did nearly every Argentine president violate the Constitution?

Are all K supporters like this?

Still waiting for a response regarding common law by the way.

 

[Bajo_cero2]

This IS the traspaso de mando in the new text of the CN.

It is normal that people continue doing something because they just follow what they did before.

Normally it is not too important BUT considering who is Macri, it is important.

Also, the President decides it, not the prospect.

However, all the Presidents who didn't get power by elections (Saa, Puerta, Duhalde, etc) didn't do anything wrong.

I cannot reply you about common law if there is not an answer.

 

[ben]

OK, so now we're going to play a definitions game. Fine.

The full "traspaso de mando" as defined by the CN was always going to be done before Congress. At no point did anyone indicate otherwise.

The argument was about passing the symbols of power. Baston, banda, marcha de Ituzaingo. Everybody understands this.

So quoting the Constitution in this respect is a lie. The Constitution regulates where to conduct the ceremonial handover - banda and baston - exactly as much as it does the color of Macri's underwear at the event. (So that there's no mistake, that means: not at all).

To cover the lie of the Constitution being relevant, we come to the further lie that Macri wanted to take the oath of office at the Casa Rosada. A lie created to cover for a prior lie.

The ceremony is of symbolic value - to see the literal handover of power. Normal countries respect their traditions. Normal countries you have Carter and Reagan being as gracious as possible to each other during the transition and at Reagan's inaugural, as acrimonious as the prior campaign had been. Same for Bush/Obama.

[EDIT: You edited your prior post to add: "Also, the President decides it, not the prospect". Why? Who said that? Where and when, in the world ever, did it work that way? Does the word asuncion - inaugural in English - make it about the outgoing president (or other office-holder, for that matter) or the new one? Bias is warping your thought process.

And if the incoming president wants to depart from traditions, that's also OK if it doesn't offend anyone. CFK had her daughter hand her the atributos FFS. And here Macri is the one reverting to the tradition. Why exactly was she shutting him down over this? Because she doesn't care for the traditions, she cares for herself. She wants to turn his inaugural into her farewell, rather than do the farewell, you know, the day before. But no. She has to make a grab for his inaugural, same as the official Twitter account.
END EDIT].

And since you bring up common law again, I'll refer you - again - to my original rejoinder, which is as relevant here as there.

Does the CN mention the outgoing President gets to keep and rename the official Twitter account? Or can we apply common sense regarding that?

 

[Bajo_cero2]

OK, so now we're going to play a definitions game. Fine.

The full "traspaso de mando" as defined by the CN was always going to be done before Congress. At no point did anyone indicate otherwise.

The argument was about passing the symbols of power. Baston, banda, marcha de Ituzaingo. Everybody understands this.

So quoting the Constitution in this respect is a lie. The Constitution regulates where to conduct the ceremonial handover - banda and baston - exactly as much as it does the color of Macri's underwear at the event. (So that there's no mistake, that means: not at all).

To cover the lie of the Constitution being relevant, we come to the further lie that Macri wanted to take the oath of office at the Casa Rosada. A lie created to cover for a prior lie.

And since you bring up common law again, I'll refer you - again - to my original rejoinder, which is as relevant here as there.

Does the CN mention the outgoing President gets to keep and rename the official Twitter account? Or can we apply common sense regarding that?

The National Constitution is the SUPREME LAW of this country. How can it be a lie? Helloooooooooooooooooo.

If the CN doesn't rule it (???????) then, the President decide it (she).

Common law...let's see. Your nickname is Ben, most of the members are Americans...are you french? Do you ignore so much how does you country (France) works and its history?

 

[ben]

OK you're trolling. One more attempt and I'm out.

I did not say the Constitution is a lie. I said you are lying. To quote the Constitution's requirements with respect to a ceremony it doesn't mention, is a lie.

The Constitution dictates the oath of office. That will take place in the Congreso. Nobody is disputing this, except the K's who pretend that Macri does. Another lie.

The argument is about the ceremonial handover, on which the Constitution is silent. To quote the constitution regarding something on which it is silent, is to lie.

To make things even easier, I brought the example of Macri's underwear. Helloooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo?

Why is the inaugural for the new president decided by the outgoing president? The outgoing president is outgoing. This is the inaugural for the new one. To make it even easier for your legalistic brain: Particularly since at the time of the ceremony being argued about, the full traspaso de mando as defined by art. 93 will be concluded, and the incoming president is now the president. Where and when does or did, ever, the outgoing president dictate ceremonial terms?! Helloooo?

Cristina wants(ed) the whole thing to be done with the adoring Campora bidding adieu. She wants to ignore tradition and spit on Macri. OK. Just admit it. "I'm a bitch and proud of it. I'll go where I want. I'll name ambassadors I want, whenever I want. I'll make whatever stinking DNU I want. I take the official Twitter account, because I want to. All your Twitter are belong to me". At least that'd be honest. But no. Must lie.

I never said I am French, although I spent a while in France. So did a rather famous Ben, an American, whose portraits Argentines are fond of collecting.

You seem to think traditions are only respected in common law countries. The difference between "legally binding" and "respected" seems to be foreign to you.

Kindly point out what history and workings I'm ignoring. Ask a Frenchman to compare the last presidential transitions to this one, and they'll stare at you like you've lost your mind. And they'll be right.

 

[scotttswan]

He's either a moron or one of these

either way don't feed him.

 

[AmigoArtistico]

I replied you but you don't understand. I hope it is only that you don't understanf legal language in Spanish.
The article 93 of CN is brand new (1994, Peron died in the 70') and it is crystal clear: she is right.
Art. 93 does mention it.
Tradition has legal value in the common law system, it has none in ours because it is not enforzable, helloooooooooo, this is not the US.

Esto es Articulo 93 de la constitucion:

Artículo 93[background=rgb(179, 217, 226)].[/background]- Al tomar posesión de su cargo el presidente y vicepresidente prestarán juramento, en manos del presidente del Senado y ante el Congreso reunido en Asamblea, respetando sus creencias religiosas, de "desempeñar con lealtad y patriotismo el cargo de Presidente (o vicepresidente) de la Nación y observar y hacer observar fielmente la Constitución de la Nación Argentina".

Mostrame donde dice en la constitucion que el traspaso de la banda y el bastón tiene que occurrir en el congreso. No podés hacerlo? Qué raro!

Además, hay una clara tradición en que el traspaso de la banda y el bastón occura en el salón blanco de la casa rosada.

Qué buen abogado sos! Los extranjeros saben más de tu constitución que vos.

Y como sabés muy bien (o quizás no; un abogado competente sabe, pero vos?), en ausencia de disposiciones concretas, la tradición toma precedencia, y en este caso hay amplia precedencia.


YOU REALLY DON'T HAVE THE SLIGHTEST IDEA OF WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, WHICH IS SAD, CONSIDERING THAT YOU CLAIM TO BE AN ARGENTINE LAWYER SPECIALIZING IN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, AND YET, FOR THOSE WHO BOTHER TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT YOUR ASSERTIONS AND COMPARE THEM TO THE COURT'S RULINGS, YOU'VE BEEN WRONG VIRTUALLY EVERY TIME, AND I SERIOUSLY DOUBT THAT THIS WILL BE AN EXCEPTION.

OF COURSE, YOU ARE RIGHT AND THE COURTS ARE CORRUPT. ISN'T THAT YOUR ANSWER EVERY TIME YOU ARE PROVEN WRONG (WHICH IS VIRTUALLY EVERY TIME)?

WHY DON'T YOU STOP WASTING EVERYONE'S TIME, INCLUDING YOUR OWN (ALTHOUGH YOU DON'T WASTE MUCH OF YOUR OWN TIME, BECAUSE IT DOESN'T TAKE MUCH TIME TO THROW TOGETHER AN INCOMPREHENSIBLE POST WITH A FEW INSULTS COMBINED WITH A COUPLE OF GENERIC LINKS WHICH SAY ABSOLUTELY NOTHING THAT WE DON'T ALREADY KNOW, AND WHICH HAVE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SUBJECT AT HAND AND NEVER PROVE ANYTHING (OR, IN FACT, PROVE THAT YOU ARE WRONG, AS IS THE CASE HERE)?

YOU ARE LIVING PROOF THAT WE'RE LIVING IN A BANANA REPUBLIC. I'D LIKE TO BELIEVE THAT MACRI AND PRO CAN CHANGE THAT, BUT WITH SO MANY PEOPLE LIKE YOU THAT ACTUALLY HAVE CREDENTIALS, THAT ARE ACTUALLY TAKEN SERIOUSLY, IT'S HARD TO BELIEVE THAT THERE WILL BE MEANINGFUL CHANGE IN ARGENTINA IN MY LIFETIME. I ONLY HOPE THAT THE CHANGE THAT IS JUST BEGINNING TAKES HOLD, AND THAT WE SEE TRUE, SUBSTANTIAL AND SUSTAINABLE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR ARGENTINOS IN THE YEARS TO COME.

 

[semigoodlookin]

Ben, I really admire your willingness to keep engaging with Bajo, and I appreciate how much clarity you and others are bringing to this subject, providing plenty of information. However, you are being trolled mate; this is a debate you will never win because the goalposts will keep being moved.

 

[Gringoboy]

Cristina is determined to have the last word for better or worse and her last ceremony tonight at the Casa Rosada, where she will be unveiling a bust of Nestor, will no doubt be charged with rhetoric. Or will she take the opportunity to leave with dignity?