Bite me
Yup, they can certainly reject his nomination(s). But they can't "block" him from nominating somebody. They can try, but I suspect the SCOTUS itself will find them in violation of the Constitution.Originally Posted by Mantra
If he's smart, he'll choose a known moderate.
Last edited by allegro; 02-14-2016 at 12:13 AM.
Throbbing Member
Here's a post from scotusblog (bunch of lawyers who blog about the Supreme Court... they've won a few awards for their coverage) in which they give the history of appointing justices during election years. The Republicans have no precedent for what they're currently suggesting, which is waiting for the next president to appoint the new justice.
Bite me
Good link!!
And I posted this in the Dead Souls thread:
http://www.vox.com/2016/2/13/1098769...-confirmations
Last edited by allegro; 02-14-2016 at 01:15 AM.
Active Member
I am no fan of Donald Trump, but he was 100 correct during this exchange.
http://us.blastingnews.com/news/2016...-00787079.html
Bite me
Yeah he's been doing that all along, and also going after Jeb since it's his brother. He's also been going after anybody who voted for the war in Iraq.
Last edited by allegro; 02-14-2016 at 08:36 AM.
Active Member
Some cognitive dissonance for Trump supporters who voted for and still love Dubya.
Bite me
I don't know that they still love W. A LOT of W voters started really disliking him after Iraq dragged on for more than 8, 10 years and was an obvious disaster that many of us knew it was going to be before they decided to go in. And now that we have ISIS as a gift from that whole mess, it's even more reason. Jeb is only trying to do "Trump damage control" because Trump had been PUMMELING him because of W. Not sure Jeb can blow off that stink with this "leave my family alone" shit.
See this: http://theweek.com/articles/606035/w...ive--brilliant
Trump has also gone after W for all those Saudi Sept 11 guys being in the country with expired visas, and how that whole thing got pulled off even though the CIA had been warned.
Last edited by allegro; 02-14-2016 at 11:39 AM.
Active Member
G.W. Bush is still very popular among Republicans, at least in South Carolina, with 84 percent approval.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...561_story.html
Bite me
G (husband) has read a few articles saying that it doesn't matter, Trump is doubling down on this because he truly believes he has the GOP nomination locked up and that his stance on W (which has been consistent since Day One yet he still leads in the polls) might appeal to moderate independents or Dems in the general election.
Active Member
Maybe. The point is, Bush 41 and 43 are still very popular among Republican voters, and it remains to be seen if Trump's comments last night will have any impact going forward. And maybe G.W.'s campaigning will help his brother with voters. We won't know until people vote in SC on 2/20.
This article states that maybe this time Trump went too far.
http://www.vox.com/2016/2/14/10988380/donald-trump-9-11
Last edited by GulDukat; 02-14-2016 at 11:40 AM.
Bite me
But this isn't NEW, he has been blaring that all along. I linked that from the debate back in September, and he was STILL leading in the polls in S.C. even though he's been openly blaming W for more than six months. I read a comment today by Mark Sanford, former Governor of S.C. and R-SC, who said Trump and Sanders are doing really well there because, contrary to beliefs and "polls" that think that S.C. voters are divided into blacks going for Clinton or conservative evangelicals going for GOP candidates, a "wave of economic populism" is driving the Trump and Sanders campaigns and is motivating the GOP.
Look, this is from Oct of 2015: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...-9-11-attacks/
So is this: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...nt-911/411175/
Yet, he has STILL BEEN LEADING THE POLLS in the South. For MONTHS after he has been saying this.
The audience last night was cherry-picked with various candidate supporters.
Last edited by allegro; 02-14-2016 at 11:41 AM.
Active Member
That was back in October and people might not have been paying as much attention. Last night was a televised debate, a week before the SC primary, and Trump very publicly rebuked George W. Bush, a sacred cow for many Republican voters in that state. But as I said, we won't know until February 20 if it will have any impact.
Bite me
We shall see. Like I said, he has been saying it all along, it's not news. It's been at other debates, TV interviews, etc. He has been saying it so loudly, that is one of the biggest reasons he GOT attention (and Jeb looked like a wimp). Trump has used it to highlight how this country got into so much DEBT and "isn't winning." Which is why so many of his followers love him, because he just blurts out shit the establishment won't say. Even Clinton won't admit that Iraq was a mistake. Trump is REALLY BIG with vets, he keeps telling vets that they shouldn't have been sent to Iraq, etc. And there are a LOT of vets in S.C.
Last edited by allegro; 02-14-2016 at 12:00 PM.
Active Member
She has said her Iraq War vote was a mistake.
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/0...ke-iowa-118109
Bite me
Yet each time it's brought up in debate, now (when Sanders says he voted AGAINST it), she just visibly bristles. It doesn't reflect well on her. And Sanders is correct that Libya was just another Iraq Part 2, creating yet another power vacuum to be filled by groups like ISIS. A lot of what she says seems to be lip service political speak. Hindsight is 20/20 but isn't totally useful to us taxpayers or families of dead veterans.
Last edited by allegro; 02-14-2016 at 12:16 PM.
Active Member
She was wrong and Sanders was right on Iraq. I'm a Clinton supporter but there is no way around that and it's a stain on her legacy. That Iraq War vote was why I supported Obama in 2008 over Clinton.
Active Member
How about constantly rejecting any nominations until Obama is out?
The Democrats already set a prescident for rejecting a SCOTUS nomination based purely on ideological grounds. Anyone remember Robert Bork? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert...urt_nomination
Bite me
Yup, and the Republicans can do the same thing. Although, there are a few recent Appellate court appointees that met with high Republican approval that might be moderate enough to make the cut for SCOTUS.
Active Member
I'm just laying it out there because Dems are going to pretend it never happened so that they can point fingers at GOP being obstructionist.
Also, In the press conference that Obama just held, he specifically said that he has no plans to choose a moderate just to appease republicans. This will be fun! Maybe we can find to have a SCOTUS shutdown!
Bite me
No, I think the Dems are saying that the Repubs can't block the NOMINATION (which McConnell was threatening to do). They can delay an approval (confirmation) all they want. They need a 60% vote in the Senate to confirm or reject.I'm just laying it out there because Dems are going to pretend it never happened so that they can point fingers at GOP being obstructionist.]
Robert Bork was WAYYYYY too conservative, that wasn't just a political move. Some REPUBLICANS voted Nay.
The SCOTUS won't shut down; it will continue with only 8 members. People don't realize this, but there are many times when the SCOTUS sits with less than nine members (a few are out sick or must recuse him/herself). But a minimum of six must be present to hear a case.
Last edited by allegro; 02-16-2016 at 05:25 PM.
Active Member
well shit, now I have to research it. I had always assume they were talking about rejecting a nomination. Now I'm really curious what legal basis they are proposing to block POTUS from even making a consideration/nomination.
Bite me
They can't block the President from nominating, it is his/her duty under the Constitution (Article Two, Section Two). Some of these idiots in Congress haven't READ the fucking Constitution.
"Advise and consent" is this.Clause 2: Advice and Consent Clause
The President exercises the powers in the Advice and Consent Clause with the advice and consent of the Senate.
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
Last edited by allegro; 02-16-2016 at 05:35 PM.
Active Member
Yeah, not much to research there. There is no legal grounds for blocking that I'm aware of. Just some Republicans talking out of their asses.
tempus est umbra in mente
I would like to hear the presidential candidates weigh in on this issue that Apple is bringing up. They have posted a public letter, asking for support in their defiance to the US Government demanding that they create a security-hole/backdoor to grant them access to encrypted personal data. At this point, even Apple cannot access a user's iPhone, because they have intentionally locked-out their ability to do so. If only Google was half as considerate when it came to protecting its customers.
It's outrageous for the government to require a company to intentionally create a security flaw for a device which stores so much personal and financial information, and Apple is correct in asserting that this backdoor would inevitably be exploitable by other nefarious parties and hackers. People need to stand up and support a company that says no to government overreach and unwarranted surveillance, even if they hate Apple for everything else they do, and I would love to hear Clinton and Sanders offer their take on this (although I have a feeling I know what the majority of plausible Republican candidates would say).
https://www.apple.com/customer-letter/
Bite me
The FBI sucks. Plain and simple. The FBI couldn't find a terrorist if the terrorists were the bathroom in the FBI HQ. Most FBI agents probably have passwords that are "123456."
This shouldn't be a matter for Presidential candidates; this should be a matter for the public to understand fully: HEY, IF YOUR IPHONE IS STOLEN, THIS MEANS SOME HACKER CAN STEAL YOUR FUCKING BANK DATA OR ANY OTHER CONFIDENTIAL DATA OFF THAT PHONE!
JUST LIKE WHEN THE FBI'S UNENCRYPTED SERVER CONTAINING CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION RELATED TO EMPLOYEE'S SECURITY CLEARANCE WAS HACKED AND OVER 20 MILLION FEDERAL EMPLOYEES' DATA WAS STOLEN BY HACKERS, INCLUDING SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS OF THE EMPLOYEES AND THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS, AND FINGERPRINTS (!!!) BECAUSE THE FBI WAS USING COMPUTER EQUIPMENT FROM THE FUCKING 80s.
And you want to TRUST WHAT THE FBI THINKS ABOUT THIS SHIT or what it wants??? When the FBI can't even manage to protect itself or its own employees?
Hey, the CIA Director's email was hacked!
Yet the Republican candidates are worried about Hillary's email not being on a "secure server."
But they don't care if any of YOUR CONFIDENTIAL DATA is on a secure server or if it can be stolen by spies in China subjecting you to blackmail (LIKE WHAT HAPPENED ON THE FBI SERVER).
These idiots are just that .... IDIOTS.
The FBI being given any data is like giving your house keys to thieves, SINCE THAT IS WHO WILL END UP WITH IT ANYWAY.
Last edited by allegro; 02-17-2016 at 05:53 PM.
Active Member
Gotta love this!
Member
The Pope says what Trump is doing about the wall is wrong and now that Fascist Fuck calls the Pope's comments "disgraceful". Trump is going to need a body bag if he thinks he can win a fight against a man of God.
Active Member
The Trump camp is already calling the Pope an hypocrite because the walls surrounding Vatican City..
The best one is this tweet which said: "Regarding the Pope, I could be wrong but isn't there a "wall" next to the Gates of Heaven? Even heaven isn't an "open" border."
I laughed pretty hard at that last one.
Member
Fascist Asshole really doesn't get it. If he does become the president and the country gets fucked by war and we're all in danger. This is what I hope would happen to him:
I'm not kidding. I want to see him hanged. He's an evil piece of shit.
Bite me
Ugh, just stop. This is just silly, there's no stupid ELECTION that's worth getting this worked up over. Trump does this just for effect, and obviously he's working you up just as planned. I get more worked up over Marco Rubio, then I stopped looking at this shit. Mexicans aren't even coming into this country, anymore; we have net zero Mexican immigrants. We have more Chinese and Indian immigrants. So this is just silly talk.
I'm more pissed off at the FBI wanting Apple to build iPhones with security holes in them. But nobody cares about that; they get all upset over Trump vs. the Pope, like it's a cage match.
Last edited by allegro; 02-18-2016 at 03:45 PM.
Posting Permissions
Likes: 
Faceplams: 
