In this political climate, I don't believe the Senate will give Obama another Justice. They will turn down anyone he appoints and wait it out... unless he chooses Ted Cruz, but we all know that won't happen. What a blow to the Conservative wing of the court, and a very sad day for all of us Reagan Republicans. I can hear the conspiracy nuts already... saying things like, check between his toes, that they killed him. RIP Antonin Scalia... you were a good soldier for the Constitution.

Woah, sudden. This makes things even more interesting.

 

People, climate changed triggered ocean level rising is like the tides, it comes in a matter of hours or its bogus!

 

We, the human race, are altering the very balance of the earth ecosystem by our "progress", and you just want to ignore that? Fine. Let me come into your home and seal you air tight, see howlong you last. We can take bets on what kills you first, more then likely the asphyxiation.

 

"But scientist, we breath in as much air as we breath out, how could we ever asphyxiate?"

 

P.S. air exhaled is heavier then inhaled air, FEAR THE SCIENCE!

Dress up in a sheet, grab a hand bell, paint up a sign that says "IT IS COMING! THE END OF THE WORLD!", and hit a street corner. I will die of boredom reading about this shit before the weather gets me. There are no tornadoes, hurricanes, or floods in Las Vegas... I live on the high ground, and I wake up to beautiful blue skies most every morning.

 

enjoying the increase in water $$? >_>

 

Guess weather is too sciency aswell, I personally wouldn't get tornadoes (we get a twister a year or so) or hurricanes (unless its a north-western) either.

In this political climate, I don't believe the Senate will give Obama another Justice. They will turn down anyone he appoints and wait it out...

 

Certainly possible, but it would be highly unusual for them to "wait it out" for 11 months.  Someone on Reddit compiled approximate lengths between presidential justice nominations and completion of the confirmation process:

Kagan: 3 months

Sotomayor: 2 months

Alito: 2 months

Meirs: withdrawn same month

Roberts: 1 month

Breyer: 2 months

Ginsburg: 2 months

Thomas: 3 months

Souter: 3 months

Kennedy: 3 months

Bork: 3 months (rejected 1987)

Scalia: 3 months

Rehnquist: 3 months

 

Given that over the past 30 years, the time has been nearly universally 2-3 months, and rejections have been rare (once, Bork, 1987), I'll reiterate that it would be highly unusual for the Republican-led congress to stall for nearly a year (it would also do a disservice to the judiciary since the Supreme Court would likely issue a lot of 4-4 ties, which confirm the lower court's rulings, but don't formally address the constitutional questions).

 

Certainly Obama would need to be sensitive to concerns about balance on the court, and would have to nominate someone with a moderate or moderate-conservative portfolio of judgments.  However, assuming he does so, it seems that the nominee should be confirmed.

 

One possibility is that an older moderate-conservative nominee could be made, with the expectation that they would step down in the next 4-8 years.  This would preserve the court's functionality but still allow the future president to make a more-permanent replacement.  Someone in that vein might be Judge Richard Posner, age 77, appointed to the US Court of Appeals (7th circuit) by Reagan in 1981.  His legal opinions have been mostly conservative, but he also has given some more liberal ones in the areas such as abortion and same-sex marriage.

In this political climate, I don't believe the Senate will give Obama another Justice. They will turn down anyone he appoints and wait it out... unless he chooses Ted Cruz, but we all know that won't happen. What a blow to the Conservative wing of the court, and a very sad day for all of us Reagan Republicans. I can hear the conspiracy nuts already... saying things like, check between his toes, that they killed him. RIP Antonin Scalia... you were a good soldier for the Constitution.

Do you really think the Republicans want to spend the next 10 months playing into every single attack advert setting out that they are the party that blocks things rather than looking to work across party lines? If Obama puts up a middle of the road candidate, and they block them, then they will just be offering free adverts to the Democrats. 

So the Court can work with 8 people? No law stating it has to be 9? Perhaps we should ask the Court that, no wait...

A Supreme Court Justice dying while still serving on the bench, is very rare. A Supreme Court Justice dying while still serving on the bench, in an election year, and during a Presidents lame duck year, is even more rare.

 

Barack Obama will nominate replacements... it's his job, and his duty as President to do so. As President, Barack Obama has spent his entire time in office trying desperately to get around the limitations of the Constitution, bypass Congress and the entire Legislative branch of Government, and stack the Judicial branch will liberal judges that think exactly like he does, so his illegal actions will not be overturned by the courts. Harry Reid changed the rules of the Senate to prevent Republicans from blocking these judicial appointments... and the Federal Courts have been completely diluted with far left judges to advance the Obama agenda. Obama has acted as a Monarch, and used his race to ensure he would never be impeached.

 

He has had one problem that has prevented him from completely "transforming the United States"... and that's the Conservative wing of the United States Supreme Court. He even publicly called their decisions out during a State of the Union Address, in a disgusting attempt to humiliate the Justices and pressure their opinions. That resulted in Scalia, Thomas, and Alito to never attend another Address of this President. The court schedule this season is stocked full of illegal Obama actions to be decided by the court.

 

Yes the Court can, and will, function with a panel of 8 Justices. All 4-4 decisions will affirm the lower court rulings. Will Obama nominate candidates?... Yes. Will Obama nominate someone that the Senate would approve?... No. Will the Senate approve anyone Obama nominates?... No. Will there be political backlash?... only if the Senate confirms an Obama appointment. The entire Republican Party would burn down anyone that caves in to Obama. In short... the chances of Obama getting another Supreme Court Justice sworn in on the bench, are non-existent... he has an ice cubes chance in hell.

So the Court can work with 8 people? No law stating it has to be 9? Perhaps we should ask the Court that, no wait...

Depends if you define a court that comes to a 4-4 ruling on every issue, and therefore serves just to confirm lower court decisions as "working."

As far as last nights debate goes... I was extremely disappointed in the whole thing. The moderator from the beginning had his pants down and exposing his bias. He tried to somehow shame every candidate to support an immediate Senate confirmation to replace Justice Scalia, and even started debating with Ted Cruz until the audience began to revolt over a moderator debating a candidate.

 

It was an entire slug-fest with arguing, name calling, and just shy of drawing blood. I remember thinking several times that all these guys need to pull out their second amendment remedy, and the last man standing gets the nomination. If Trump was anyone else, he would be thrown out of the room. He was obviously talking to the television audience, and not the people in the room, or the people of South Carolina. If anyone came out better than they walked in... it was Marco Rubio. The two pacifists that really refused to participate in the brawl... Kasich and Carson... were boring, uninteresting, weak, and done.

 

Will Trump continue to win South Carolina in a walk? My guess is Yes.

CNN hosted a cage match last night, if anyone watched it. Donald Trump was center stage, Marco Rubio was on his left, Ted Cruz was on his right, Carson and Kasich were on the wings. Marco and Ted pulled out bats and just wailed on Trump for 2 hours, and Ben and John stood there as they were ignored. Half the time you had 3 dudes just yelling at the same time... and Wolf Blitzer just stood there and smiled the entire time. It was truly embarrassing for anyone, and everyone, to witness.

 

Did they stop Trump? No.

I hear that alot was said but people just remembered the dB generated but not the actual lines

It's been 6 months since the first debate, and man have things changed since the beginning. It's really hard to sit through them now. They have turned into the "Kill Trump Show", and there are these people I really liked, even moderators, that I am losing respect for, because they want to hurt him so bad. Donald Trump is the same Donald Trump I have known since the '80s, and I expect it from him, but Cruz, Rubio, and Megyn Kelly? That's not the people I have known, and liked a lot, in the past.

 

Well anyway, Fox had another debate last night. They keep bashing on Trump over his business, past political donations, flip-flopping on issues, and he's not a Conservative... and it's nothing new. Everybody knows this stuff already. People are supporting Trump because he's not them. They don't understand why they are voting for Trump over a couple of first term Senators. Megyn Kelly turned from being a moderator, and changed into a journalist in a heated interview, trying to hammer Trump into admitting he's a liar or something. It was not good, and it will anger people into supporting Trump more. They don't support Trump because he's the most honest, the nicest guy in the room, and the most eloquent speaker that tells everyone what they want to hear. They support Trump because he's a hard ass and he'll do what needs to be done, without remorse. People like that.

 

So will Donald Trump still win? Yes.

They support Trump because he's a hard ass and he'll do what needs to be done, without remorse.

Up to and including defrauding members of the general public, yes?

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/432010/trump-university-scam

 

With all the pixels wasted on how Hillary is "going to be indicted and jailed before the election," the fact that Trump will be forced take the witness stand in a real, actual trial, has apparently been lost.

Well Niels, I guess you got something there if you want to claim that an unsatisfied customer is as bad as passing around and storing classified information on your private unsecured email server in your bathroom. I wouldn't be surprised if they charge her with selling that classified information to boost up that foundation.

Well Niels, I guess you got something there if you want to claim that an unsatisfied customer is as bad as passing around and storing classified information on your private unsecured email server in your bathroom. I wouldn't be surprised if they charge her with selling that classified information to boost up that foundation.

 

You're right, they're not comparable: one has produced enough evidence of potential wrongdoing to result in a trial, one has not.

You're right, they're not comparable: one has produced enough evidence of potential wrongdoing to result in a trial, one has not.

Sending and storing classified information in your home is a crime. Deleting the words "Classified" off the documents does not make the information unclassified. Instructing your staff to delete the classified marks off the information, and send it to your private server at your home, is a crime. No one is above the law. Soon, very soon.

 

I do recall back in 2003, you guys made a really big deal out of an ex-CIA operative that was exposed as an ex-CIA operative. How selective Democrats are with that outrage.

Then stop babbeling and just strike her down, you only make yourself look bad for not doing it in the first place. (With "you" I mean the prosecution offcourse).

 

Anyway, I heared Trump came out with a 7-point plan surounding social security, I did read our news article about it and it seems halfly capitalist and communist, in a strange way. Seeing as Trumps actual site doesn't want me on it (guess its my old PC >_>) and wiki isn't feeling helpfull, can someone give me the 7 points as listed by Trump (screw newssites, the source is whats needed).

 

You're right, they're not comparable: one has produced enough evidence of potential wrongdoing to result in a trial, one has not.

Sending and storing classified information in your home is a crime. Deleting the words "Classified" off the documents does not make the information unclassified. Instructing your staff to delete the classified marks off the information, and send it to your private server at your home, is a crime. No one is above the law. Soon, very soon.

 

I do recall back in 2003, you guys made a really big deal out of an ex-CIA operative that was exposed as an ex-CIA operative. How selective Democrats are with that outrage.

 

You've been saying something is about to happen for going on 8 months now. When is something actually going to happen? 

 

Then stop babbeling and just strike her down, you only make yourself look bad for not doing it in the first place. (With "you" I mean the prosecution offcourse).

 

Anyway, I heared Trump came out with a 7-point plan surounding social security, I did read our news article about it and it seems halfly capitalist and communist, in a strange way. Seeing as Trumps actual site doesn't want me on it (guess its my old PC >_>) and wiki isn't feeling helpfull, can someone give me the 7 points as listed by Trump (screw newssites, the source is whats needed).

There is a 7 point healthcare plan that consists of "deregulate and abolish obamacare." Which to me reads like a person who doesn't have a plan, as it doesn't propose a single positive action to solve healthcare costs in America (which are stupidly high and frankly an embarrassment to you guys).

 

 

You've been saying something is about to happen for going on 8 months now. When is something actually going to happen?

I'm not an FBI agent. So getting that out right now, as I understand it, granting immunity from prosecution for testimony only happens in criminal cases, and in the last stages of investigations. From here, it should happen in the next 6 weeks, unless of course it's stonewalled by the Justice Department. If that happens, the FBI will go ballistic if they recommended indictment, and it will blow up all over the media through leaks. Business as usual.

Just do it faster, even a toddler could have read all her mails by now...

 

Either find a mail that was secret at the time of sending, find something else to pin on her or just let it drop. Cause now you are just giving fuel to her like the GOP is fueling Trump.

Just do it faster, even a toddler could have read all her mails by now...

 

Either find a mail that was secret at the time of sending, find something else to pin on her or just let it drop. Cause now you are just giving fuel to her like the GOP is fueling Trump.

If I was Attorney General, she would have been clapped in irons 2 years ago... but it's Obama's Justice Department, and we all know how corrupt his administration has been. You don't seem to understand that it is illegal to store classified information at your house. Should I repeat that again?... it is against the law to store "Classified Information"... at your house.

And yet I don't hear 1 statement claiming the infirmation at the time of storage was classified as secret or higher. You want to go around jailing people who had "product X" 5 years ago while "X" just now became illegal? Be my guest, american prisons aren't full enough yet last I heared >_>