Huntly, you joined an hour ago and your first opinion is that Obama should resign. Why are you here?
4 Likes
Senate is in recess until Feb. 22 President Obama can appoint a replacement immediately and avoid all the drama.
4 Likes
I expect the MSM will go all-in with the GOP (again) on the âneedâ to block a nominee until next year. At best, it will be another false equivalency to them.
8 Likes
Yes, McTurtle is what, 198 years old now? Man, dem turtles live a long time.
1 Like
The whiny hypocrites would be saying the exact opposite if we had a Republican president. They should not be expecting that anyone will be taking them serious about this.
4 Likes
No fuss if the Repubs block Obama nomination. I wouldnât mind these remaining eight to make decisions on the upcoming cases for the next year and a half before the new President gets a replacement for Scalia. No one is going to be as conservative.
2 Likes
This is a perfect opportunity for Obama to muddy (if thatâs possible) the reputation of the Repulsive Party.
He should immediately nominate Elizabeth Warren, and demand an immediate vote,
If the Repulsives refuse to consider the nominee, he should make it the sole discussion point of the remainder of his term. It should be the only item in any speech, any Saturday address, or any press conference.
This theme should also be taken up by all Democratic congressman to the exclusion of any other subject.
The goal should be to show that the Repulsives are a mirror of their hero, Donald âthe draft dodging cowardâ Trump, and that they also reflect his child-like temper tantrums and real lack of concern for the nation.
If played correctly by Bernie and Hillary, this âfairness issueâ could solidify the results of the election.
Conspiracy theorist extraordinaire Alex Jones - you know, the bastard child of Breitbart and Ilsa, She-Wolf of the SS - said last night that âin his gutâ he feels that Scalia was murdered.
All the assassination plans are laid out in the missing Michelle Obama âwhiteyâ tape. And if you play it backwards, you can hear the duet of John Lennon and Satan singing the greatest hits of Perry Como! Just ask Carly Fiorina. She HEARD it, goddammit!!!
16 Likes
Including not winning the presidency. Last gasps of a dying party? To borrow a he slogan of a certain news organization, âWe report, America has the power to decide, once and for all.â
As part of the grand plan to take all our guns, no doubt.
I think the Republicans are not thinking this through.
The Democrats can credibly say that the Republicans are for the first time in history changing the number of Justices on the Supreme Court, from 9 to 8. And further, that the Democrats will use this precedent to change the number Justices on the Supreme Court next time they control the Senate and the Presidency. From 9 to say 15.
It will not be long before someone in this group declares that there will be no âdemocrat partyâ nominees allowed on the court even if it ultimately means that no one serves. These guys do not accept the legitimacy of their political opponents.
4 Likes
Tempting, but nope.
It would be challenged, and create a real headache. Any decisions made under this would become their own separate body of law, subject to lengthy challenges on the legitimacy of the decision.
Youâre absolutely right (I think). Was reading up on it last night. SC actually ruled against Obama in 2014 when he tried to get confirmation on NLRB appointees during a 3 day recess.
The court ruled 9-0 that Obamaâs appointments were unconstitutional because the Senate was not truly in recess when he made them during a three-day break in pro forma meetings of the legislative body.
The courtâs four most conservative justices would have gone further, ruling that the president exceeded his authority because the vacancies did not arise during that break and because the presidentâs recess appointment power only occurs during breaks between usually year-long sessions of the Senate. However, five justices would not accept those arguments.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/06/supreme-court-recess-appointments-108347#ixzz409T7bAqx
The republicansâs have the audacity to"warn" President Obama about replacing a deceased jurist from the SCOTUS and yet they have nerve to holler out about Sharia LawâŚwhat a bunch of puny idiots!
2 Likes
Didnât see your post. Are you sure about that?
- "The Senate does have an obligation to fulfill its âadvice and consentâ obligation. Says the Constitution, the president âshall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint ⌠Judges of the supreme CourtâŚâ
A preemptive rejection of any possible Supreme Court appointment is self-evidently in conflict with that obligation.
-
The Constitution is not a living, breathing document that changes in meaning as an election approaches.
-
A sitting president is no less legitimant as a lame duck.
-
The Framers intended for the Senate to give up-or-down votes based on a nomineeâs merit.
-
The timing of an election should play no role."
Sadly the Founding Fathers never considered the scenario where a bunch of angry, spiteful, conservative toddlers would be called upon to confirm a SCOTUS nominee.
34 Likes
According to Fux Newsâ own legal analyst just now, Obama has the authority to make a recess appointment.
4 Likes
The repugs would be treating anyone with a D next to their name the same way. I wonder if weâll end up with a constitutional crisis over this (iâm not even exactly sure what that is, so maybe I shouldnât be using it). Image a year from now, HRC nominates someone for an open seats, GOP-locked senate drags feet for eight years.
There are 32 senators up for reelection. Most gopâŚThis rhetoric and promised obstruction by the tea bags will unite the Democrats up and down the ballotâŚGet active and get the gop out of the Senate and barred from the White HouseâŚEnough of the regression!!
4 Likes