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

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

3 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

What rule are they breaking that Booker is exposing?  The Senate Rs arent the ones who deemed documents off limits.

I was under the impression that it was. What is “committee confidential” then? Who decides that?

[Kilmer17]

1 minute ago, killerbee99 said:

Hey Karma is a **** bcos if Dems ever get a turn after repubs did nothing with Garland and rushing their guys through.... It's gonna be ugly.. But hey your team, my team right.... **** America, we are all teams now... 

If the Dems have the ability to do so, then I fully expect them to do so.

Just now, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

I was under the impression that it was. What is “committee confidential” then? Who decides that?

Ah.  Sorry.  Different thing altogether.  I thought Booker was complaining that docs were being hidden completely under privilege. 

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

8 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

Some folks tried to warn Dems of this when they got rid of the filibuster.

That’s lame dude. You know why they got rid of the filibuster.

[Kilmer17]

1 minute ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

That’s lame dude. You know why they got rid of the filibuster.

Yes, but they did so thinking there would be no consequence.  There was.  As some tried to warn.

[DogofWar1]

They did not get rid of that filibuster.  The GOP did that in 2017.

 

And the GOP threatened to toss the filibuster in 2005.  The notion that Dem actions in 2013 that were confined to that Congressional term are somehow wholly responsible for GOP actions in 2017 is utter nonsense.

 

How many times do we have to tell you to please wipe your butt, your bs is showing again.

[tshile]

2 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

That’s lame dude. You know why they got rid of the filibuster.

 

you guys keep hiding behind this when no one here (that i'm aware of?) has tried to deny what their rational was.

 

just that they were shortsighted and silly for not understanding how the rule change could/might/would be used against them.

 

it was pointed out to them, they didn't care, now they cry about it and when you laugh at them for being so stupid they fall back on this "but you know why we did it!"

 

it's so tiring watching it happen. you know who you're dealing with, you changed the rules, and it burned you.

 

both parties sucked up power to the executive branch, or allowed it to happen when their team was in charge, and now we have an idiot running the country. 

 

if you're not smart enough to think about who might come behind you an exercise the rules you're creating then you're not smart enough to be changing the rules.

 

[visionary]

Please don’t get into the endless filibuster debate again, or at least not here.

[Kilmer17]

5 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

 

Edited September 6, 2018 by Kilmer17
following Vs advice

[Simmsy]

Not sure you can filibuster a scotus confirmation hearing. You have a limited time to speak, hell, the dems don't even have to be there for the gop to proceed.

[Kilmer17]

1 minute ago, Simmsy said:

Not sure you can filibuster a scotus confirmation hearing. You have a limited time to speak, hell, the dems don't even have to be there for the gop to proceed.

No.  Hearings adhere to specific rules and are governed by the chairman.  The floor debate has has no limit but is subject to cloture votes.

[killerbee99]

All I know is I am voting for the Rock in 2020....**** it since we are going all ****ing Idiocracy now.. Let's dive in.... Tired of taking the constant high ground while people **** on you with smiles on their faces..... And Stormy's lawyer for VP... Let's go... Woooooo!!! 

But Kavanaugh is getting in.... 

[Simmsy]

5 minutes ago, killerbee99 said:

All I know is I am voting for the Rock in 2020....**** it since we are going all ****ing Idiocracy now.. Let's dive in.... Tired of taking the constant high ground while people **** on you with smiles on their faces..... And Stormy's lawyer for VP... Let's go... Woooooo!!! 

 Rex Grossman for Secretary of Football.

[DogofWar1]

Brett, at this stage, is the worst nominee since at least before Bork.

 

Too many things that would have been disqualifying (if true) have been uncovered and gone unanswered.

 

The 2002 stolen documents situation, what he knew and when he knew it.

 

Torture involvement and lying under oath.

 

His 200k debt.

 

And that is ignoring a dozen other things that are probably not criminal but would disqualify most other nominees.

[NoCalMike]

Kavanaugh is getting in because the votes will be there.  Doesn't change the fact that he comes off kind of slimy and dishonest in his answering of questions.  These memos have already contradicted statements he made on Roe v Wade and the wireless surveillance program.  

[killerbee99]

10 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

Brett, at this stage, is the worst nominee since at least before Bork.

 

Too many things that would have been disqualifying (if true) have been uncovered and gone unanswered.

 

The 2002 stolen documents situation, what he knew and when he knew it.

 

Torture involvement and lying under oath.

 

His 200k debt.

 

And that is ignoring a dozen other things that are probably not criminal but would disqualify most other nominees.

Welcome the Age of Trump... The beginning of the true decline of America.. When we elected a pathological liar bcos of a black man being president..... Not decent people Kasich or some other decen person.. .. ****ing Donald Trump, a man with no moral fiber, no guiding principle... God bless America

 

But again Cavanaugh is getting in

Edited September 6, 2018 by killerbee99

[DogofWar1]

I mean, of course he makes it, unless some major criminal bombshell drops before the GOP can vote for him, and that is increasingly looking like it'll have to stem from his 200k debt, because we all know the GOP won't give a crap about 2002 document theft and usage, torture, or perjury to Congress (over/under on how many times a Senator will use the phrase "perjury trap"?).

 

 

But again, that's fine, impeachment exists for a reason.

[visionary]

 

[Cooked Crack]

 

More in thread

[killerbee99]

Where is all the pearl clutching people at.... Booker needs to be kicked out of the senate.... Pffttt... 

[DogofWar1]

Just now, visionary said:

 

Since Grassstain has been revealed as a ****, the appropriate response is to now go through all committee "confidential" docs and release all thst aren't actually supposed to be confidential.

[killerbee99]

6 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

 

More in thread

Don't matter Murkowski and Maine lady senator ain't flipping... Susan Collins... Kept forgetting her name

Edited September 6, 2018 by killerbee99

[Kilmer17]

Is being invited to a meeting the same thing as being involved?

[tshile]

8 minutes ago, visionary said:

 

So dog and pony show for mr booker

 

got it.

[The Evil Genius]

1 minute ago, tshile said:

So dog and pony show for mr booker

 

got it.

  

Or the powers that be didn't want Booker to get the glory...or have the hassle of explaining why they would be punishing him.

[tshile]

Just now, The Evil Genius said:

  

Or the powers that be didn't want Booker to get the glory...or have the hassle of explaining why they would be punishing him.

 

so he got up and talked about maybe being expelled (when he wouldn't be) for releasing documents that were confidential (that weren't any longer) that talked about racial profiling (yet didn't, really, in fact it showed he desired a race-neutral security system)

 

if someone on the right did this you'd all be laughing your asses off at him. but because it's booker it's a grand play to save our democracy.