Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

SCOTUS: No longer content with stacking, they're now dealing from the bottom of the deck


Burgold

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

I have no idea if Laufer has any real insight into the court and Roberts' actions, but I haven't heard this nugget before (specifically the part about Roberts' forcing recusal) so I thought it was an interesting thing to think about (less to take as actual news, since there's no way to verify).

 

 

 

It would 100% be the right thing to do, to force recusal of these two in any case involving the present President's conduct, but we'll have to see if it actually happens.

Having faith that this Supreme Court would do the right thing over the political thing seems a stretch. Damn, I'm getting cynical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Burgold said:

Having faith that this Supreme Court would do the right thing over the political thing seems a stretch. Damn, I'm getting cynical.

I mean, I have a hard time seeing Roberts forcing recusal too, it seems like a somewhat intense action, but it absolutely would be the right one.

 

Roberts is deserving of some faith, right around "trust but verify" level.  I have to imagine he can see what is happening out here and realizes the incredible weight that decisions made here will have.  As such I hope he will do the right thing if/when the times comes that a case comes before him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DogofWar1 said:

I mean, I have a hard time seeing Roberts forcing recusal too, it seems like a somewhat intense action, but it absolutely would be the right one.

 

Roberts is deserving of some faith, right around "trust but verify" level.  I have to imagine he can see what is happening out here and realizes the incredible weight that decisions made here will have.  As such I hope he will do the right thing if/when the times comes that a case comes before him.

I dunno. The slew of recent rulings suggest they value political ideology and promoting political chicanery far more than the rule of law, the ideals of the Constitution, or the dreams of America.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

Has anyone offered a legit plan of action the Dems can take to stop confirmation?  


Seems to be centered around protecting Red State Democrats and focusing political pressure on Murkowski and Collins. Other than that, procedural stalling tactics to push it till after the midterms. At least from what I've read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DogofWar1 said:

I have no idea if Laufer has any real insight into the court and Roberts' actions, but I haven't heard this nugget before (specifically the part about Roberts' forcing recusal) so I thought it was an interesting thing to think about (less to take as actual news, since there's no way to verify).

 

It would 100% be the right thing to do, to force recusal of these two in any case involving the present President's conduct, but we'll have to see if it actually happens.

 

I'm pretty sure there is no precedent for Roberts to actually force a recusal.  I have no idea where he's getting that from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, tshile said:

ugh retirement conditioned on specific replacement seems all sorts of wrong.

 

not sure it's illegal. definitely feels wrong :(

 

 

What is their source for that claim?

Certainly nothing wrong with Kennedy endorsing a candidate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, tshile said:

ugh retirement conditioned on specific replacement seems all sorts of wrong.

 

not sure it's illegal. definitely feels wrong :(

 

 

Honestly had this been a different admin I wouldn't even blink. I feel like that's wrong, but it's how I feel. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Llevron said:

 

Honestly had this been a different admin I wouldn't even blink. I feel like that's wrong, but it's how I feel. 

What if the retirement was of a conservative justice,  and the president was a liberal (or vice versa)? Honestly I think it could only work when they are both on the same side of the political spectrum, but still seems odd. And why would Kennedy trust Trump?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, twa said:

 

What is their source for that claim?

Certainly nothing wrong with Kennedy endorsing a candidate

 

Probably twitter. Throw **** against all the walls see what sticks.

 

Agreed, endorsing is fine.

 

Arranging retirement around a specific selection is obviously different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kilmer17 said:

Has anyone offered a legit plan of action the Dems can take to stop confirmation?  

 

They can't stop the confirmation and I'm not sure they even want to.  Kavanaugh isn't all that different from Kennedy except maybe on social issues.  Dems may even hope that Roe and same sex marriage gets overturned so that they can use it as an election issues for years to come.

 

3 minutes ago, twa said:

 

What is their source for that claim?

Certainly nothing wrong with Kennedy endorsing a candidate

 

Probably just speculation like lot of stuff floating around.  Nothing wrong with Kennedy endorsing a candidate, but "I'll step down if you promise to pick X as the nominee", I think crosses the line of propriety (of course, just a personal opinion really).  I seriously doubt that happened though.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Llevron said:

Honestly had this been a different admin I wouldn't even blink.

 

I would feel the exact same way. I try not to hold double standards just because i do or don't like someone.

2 minutes ago, RedskinsFan44 said:

And why would Kennedy trust Trump?

 

That part bothers me.

 

I would expect Kennedy to be smarter than that. I would expect most people to be smarter than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, skinsmarydu said:

This is ****ing disgusting. 

Wow, maybe some hope for this forum when skinsmarydu is now criticizing CNN.  That was a pretty crappy journalism even by CNN, MSNBC and FOX standards.

Edited by nonniey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, tshile said:

 

I would feel the exact same way. I try not to hold double standards just because i do or don't like someone.

 

Yea, im in a weird place here. I dont like Trump. The only other President that I really paid any attention to was Obama. And I liked him....but I didnt know then what I know now about how our world works, so I'm not sure I'm an accurate judge of him or his admin. So yea it's a double standard for me too and an especially uncomfortable one. 

 

I would really like to live through the Obama admin once more with what I know now. 

 

Back to the point. I dont really know how i should feel about this. But I dont like it at all. Can anyone tell me if something like this (minus the trump factor) has ever happened before? Wont change my mind but I'm curious. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

Wrong like the ties that Trump had with Kennedy's son..or wrong like the tarifff exceptions that Ivanka got? 

Right. 

 

I find it pretty incredible that people still want to extend Trump any benefit of the doubt. Trump has established that if there is any corrupt possibility then that’s the answer unless there’s an even more unsettling, worse, more abusive one ready to surface in the future. 

 

Has there ever ever been a case of corruption not proven true with this version of the GOP?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...