The Evil Genius Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Merrick Garland is going to **** slap you, turtlehead. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD0506 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busch1724 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 So all of the interviews Trump has been touting all this past week were just a facade? I never would have guessed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceman Spiff Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 47 minutes ago, Busch1724 said: So all of the interviews Trump has been touting all this past week were just a facade? I never would have guessed! Trump treating this like the Rooney Rule when the Raiders hired Gruden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogofWar1 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 It sounds like NBC is retracting the report on Kennedy-Trump agreement, at least in part. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Kennedy can rot in hell with Trump. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Like other retractions, it doesn't matter, the narrative has been established. Yay twitter reporters 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 2 minutes ago, tshile said: Like other retractions, it doesn't matter, the narrative has been established. Yay twitter reporters Feel free to plunk your head back in that sandy hole you just pulled it from. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Just now, AsburySkinsFan said: Feel free to plunk your head back in that sandy hole you just pulled it from. At in down there people aren't full of **** all the time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Llevron Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Naw there is a point to be made about the over use of Twitter. I'm not sure but I always thought there was a process to news. Like vetting or whatever. But with twitter not only is that unessesary, you lose if you arnt first and that makes appropriate vetting a negative to your bottom line (clicks). Now, that's all obviously besides the fact that truth means nothing to anyone anymore anyway. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhead36 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Devolving further and further back into the 1950s... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 (edited) 8 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said: If true that he violated a law then he should be removed. if this is another bs story, then Alter should be sued into the poorhouse Edited July 10, 2018 by Kilmer17 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said: If true that he violated a law then he should be removed. if this is another bs story, then Alter should be sued into the poorhouse Is it a law? Or an ethics violation like a lot of the Trump administration does all the time but never get punished for. Edited July 10, 2018 by visionary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbit Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 (edited) Quote Reporters didn’t bust Brett because they benefitted. Will one now? if they didn't give up their source, is tweeter just guessing? Edited July 10, 2018 by Gibbit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Gibbit said: if they didn't give up their source, is tweeter just guessing? They probably told him about it, maybe even bragged over the years. So he likely knows second hand. Of course they might have made it up, but it sounds like it was multiple people. Edited July 10, 2018 by visionary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 18 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said: If true that he violated a law then he should be removed. if this is another bs story, then Alter should be sued into the poorhouse I think we both know that the law doesn't apply to this administration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearrock Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Even if the motivation was not self benefit, when would we expect reporters to give up their source? Wouldn't that be like expecting Woodward and Bernstein to give up deep throat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Here is a serious question. Say a President is impeached for treason and/or a bunch of other crimes. Is there really nothing that can be done about all the appointments this person did not just on top level. But Judges all over the country? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 15 minutes ago, @SkinsGoldPants said: Here is a serious question. Say a President is impeached for treason and/or a bunch of other crimes. Is there really nothing that can be done about all the appointments this person did not just on top level. But Judges all over the country? Yes. There is. All appointments can be removed via impeachment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momma There Goes That Man Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 18 hours ago, Kilmer17 said: He’s going to win confirmation. If Dems were smart, they’d gather a small group of typically hard core leftists and vote to confirm. It would provide cover for the red state Senators up for election and give them a talking point about bipartisanship. They wont though They won't because they shouldn't. How did it work for selling "bipartisanship" for republicans after blocking the Garland nomination. They really got it taken to them at the voting booth by their base, angry at this lack of bipartisanship didn't they? All that does is drop a giant middle finger to the Dems in those states working their asses off for those senators. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 2 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said: They won't because they shouldn't. How did it work for selling "bipartisanship" for republicans after blocking the Garland nomination. They really got it taken to them at the voting booth by their base, angry at this lack of bipartisanship didn't they? All that does is drop a giant middle finger to the Dems in those states working their asses off for those senators. They have to help their most vulnerable. Not pad the wins of the blue staters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Just now, Kilmer17 said: They have to help their most vulnerable. Not pad the wins of the blue staters Conflicted here, but I see your point. On the flip side, there is a difference in say....nominating a Dem Governor from Montana who is more of a center-left white guy than voting in favor of this nominee. I do get that you want to protect what you have. But if you do, is that more of "taking the high road" only to lose again for being soft? No idea. Just thinking out loud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogofWar1 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 "LEAKS! RAAHHHHHHH LEAAAAAAAKKKKKKSSSSSS" - every GOP Congressmen right now, I assume. We'll see if there's any water to the allegations. 28 minutes ago, @SkinsGoldPants said: Here is a serious question. Say a President is impeached for treason and/or a bunch of other crimes. Is there really nothing that can be done about all the appointments this person did not just on top level. But Judges all over the country? Impeachment is a political process so technically anyone can be "impeached." That being said, if we're talking about whether the impeachment is warranted bc some impropriety in Trump or their confirmation suggests their appointment was not legitimate, that's a tougher road to hoe. The Senate, through their "advise and consent" powers are viewed as "curing" problems with Trump. That is, Gorsuch and Brett don't face immediate impeachment even if Trump did collude with the Russians and is removed from office and given 500 years in jail. HOWEVER, and I mentioned this waaaaaaaay back like 2 weeks ago, if any Senators were to get caught up in the mess and removed/convicted, that could hypothetically "justify" impeachment by saying the guy would not have gotten 50 votes BUT FOR this illegitimate Senator/s voting to confirm. Gorsuch is probably safe. 54 votes yes, so very unlikely 5 senators who voted yes get canned. Maybe. 7 of them went to Russia so who knows, but probably not. Brett is a little closer, assuming he's confirmed something like 51-49 or 50-50 with VP tiebreaker (another potential area of issue if Pence gets in trouble with mothe- I mean, Mueller), then the number of Senators who would need to be in trouble who voted yes would only need to be 1 or 2. Even so, impeachment is probably not the best route unless Dems just blow GOP out in 2020, because convicting them in the Senate is harder and extremely unlikely. If you're aiming for a SCOTUS seat, you best not miss. To impeach a sitting SCOTUS justice on the basis that his appointment was illegitimate is fine, but if you can't convict in the Senate, what's the point? Presumably you won't get them to resign in shame, so really all you do if fire up the bases and going into 2022 that's probably not the best option because usually when the right is fired up right at midterms == bad time for America, even if the left is similarly fired up. Better to let Brett do some dumb far right crap and rally the liberal banners for the midterm, if you can't actually remove him. Similar rallying point/cry as would be there if tried to remove him, but with the benefit that rightwing voters, fat on their SCOTUS case wins, will be less fired up. But make no mistake. I will look for any opportunity to take a seat from the right, as will most people left of center. The crap they pulled with Merrick Garland must be avenged one day. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 (edited) 17 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said: They have to help their most vulnerable. Not pad the wins of the blue staters It could lose them votes in close states as well. It's not clear that voting for Trump's judges helps Democrats in toss up or red states more than it hurts them or other candidates by lowering enthusiasm and voter turnout. Edited July 10, 2018 by visionary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now