• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 03:39
CEST 09:39
KST 16:39
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202532RSL Season 1 - Final Week8[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16
Community News
BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams3Weekly Cups (July 14-20): Final Check-up0Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed19Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll8Team TLMC #5 - Submission re-extension4
StarCraft 2
General
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 2025 RSL Revival patreon money discussion thread The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings Esports World Cup 2025 - Final Player Roster Why doesnt SC2 scene costream tournaments
Tourneys
Esports World Cup 2025 Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava Mutation # 480 Moths to the Flame
Brood War
General
BW General Discussion BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams ASL20 Preliminary Maps BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Flash Announces (and Retracts) Hiatus From ASL
Tourneys
[CSLPRO] It's CSLAN Season! - Last Chance [Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL 2v2] ProLeague Season 3 - Friday 21:00 CET The Casual Games of the Week Thread
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok) Path of Exile CCLP - Command & Conquer League Project
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine US Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread The Games Industry And ATVI Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
[\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Ping To Win? Pings And Their…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 600 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 7273

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 7271 7272 7273 7274 7275 10093 Next
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.

In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!

NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious.
Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
LegalLord
Profile Blog Joined April 2013
United Kingdom13775 Posts
April 05 2017 19:41 GMT
#145441
On April 06 2017 04:32 Sermokala wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 06 2017 04:13 Philoctetes wrote:
I am actually shocked at Trump denouncing a chemical weapons attack. And not even a remark that he knows it is ISIS, and not Assad, because 'he is like a very smart person'.
I wonder how much he had to be talked into doing that, though.



As for missiles intercepting missiles. I have never seen evidence that it is possible. The faster and the smaller they are, the more unlikely.

I have high doubts about Patriot. Even more about the absurd claims about Iron Dome. And hitting something that goes 7 km/s or faster, extremely unlikely.

Its actually the faster and larger they are the more unlikly. You're talking about a really big launch vehicle for an ICBM and the common tactic for anti air missles is to blow up in front of the target and destroy the target through a clowd of shrapnel. This is thrown out the window with ICBM's due to its incredible speed and kinetic energy able to just plow through the shrapnel and keep going to the target. Anything large enough to knock it out and you get a problem of it picking up enough speed to reach the target and anything smaller isn't going to take the thing out. The star wars project was never going to get off the ground due to a lack of technology but it still remains the best idea we have so far for taking out these space fairing craft so far.

God forbid what will happen with SCRAMJET aided craft in a decade or three.

And missiles can do so much more than that. Change trajectory to throw off missiles already launched. Deploy decoys. Deploy cluster munitions. There was one that sat in orbit until it orbited above its target (outlawed by treaty). And so on.

But we're not even at the point where we could reliably intercept one missile, one known launch site, one unknown target. Unless we can intercept it in the boost phase, that is. But the program is funded beautifully nonetheless.
History will sooner or later sweep the European Union away without mercy.
Gorsameth
Profile Joined April 2010
Netherlands21665 Posts
April 05 2017 19:45 GMT
#145442
On April 06 2017 03:22 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Either something is about to blow up/leak, or Bannon pissed off Trump.

Didn't the story circulate back when Bannon was appointed and Trump got a lot of flak for it that Trump himself was not aware that he had appointed Bannon to the NSC?

Could be a simple consequence of that, assuming there was any truth in it.
It ignores such insignificant forces as time, entropy, and death
LegalLord
Profile Blog Joined April 2013
United Kingdom13775 Posts
April 05 2017 19:47 GMT
#145443
On April 06 2017 04:45 Gorsameth wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 06 2017 03:22 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Either something is about to blow up/leak, or Bannon pissed off Trump.

Didn't the story circulate back when Bannon was appointed and Trump got a lot of flak for it that Trump himself was not aware that he had appointed Bannon to the NSC?

Could be a simple consequence of that, assuming there was any truth in it.

I think it's been too long for that. More likely Bannon just didn't get along with people whom Trump needed more so he gets sort of sidelined for it.
History will sooner or later sweep the European Union away without mercy.
LegalLord
Profile Blog Joined April 2013
United Kingdom13775 Posts
April 05 2017 20:15 GMT
#145444
The growing number of allegations about President Trump’s links to Russia sounds really incriminating. But would any of them actually be illegal?

As the FBI probes possible coordination between the Trump campaign and Moscow in the run-up to the 2016 election, an array of Trump associates find themselves in the crosshairs of federal and congressional investigators.

There’s former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, pushed out of the White House for lying about his communications with the Russian ambassador to the US. There’s Trump adviser Roger Stone, who has admitted to exchanging messages with a hacker thought to be a front for Russian intelligence. There's former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort, who is accused of failing to publicly disclose taking millions of dollars from a pro-Russian Ukrainian political party and a Russian oligarch. There's Carter Page, Trump’s foreign policy adviser, who advised Russia’s state-controlled gas company Gazprom and was once unsuccessfully courted by Russian spies to become one himself. And that’s not close to an exhaustive list.

But there’s a difference between unseemly conduct and criminal conduct, and I spoke to legal experts to separate one from the other. What I learned is there are three main sets of laws that — at least given what we know now from news reports — could end up being the basis for criminal charges against Trump associates: violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, failing to comply with the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), and making false statements to federal investigators. All of them are felonies and carry the potential penalty of prison time.

At the moment, we don’t know exactly what information the FBI has or if anything especially damning will come to light, and there’s no indication that Trump himself would be implicated in any charges related to cooperating with Russia during or immediately after the election. But if his closest aides end up being indicted for effectively working with a foreign power that the US doesn’t have friendly relations with in order to undermine the US electoral process, that would likely create a political crisis of Watergate proportions.

Source

Nice article that puts the Trump surrogates stuff into perspective. Seems that Flynn is very possibly criminally liable while the rest most likely acted improperly but not in a way that's going to lead to being charged. Though multiple possible felonies are there for the taking.
History will sooner or later sweep the European Union away without mercy.
zlefin
Profile Blog Joined October 2012
United States7689 Posts
April 05 2017 20:23 GMT
#145445
On April 05 2017 11:36 Danglars wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 05 2017 11:21 zlefin wrote:
On April 05 2017 10:09 Danglars wrote:
On April 05 2017 09:40 Introvert wrote:
On April 05 2017 09:32 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:


Dissent, from same reporter.

+ Show Spoiler +







Rewriting statutes as they see fit. I'm glad we have one more on the Supreme Court willing to read statues as written.

I haven't heard about gorsuch being approved, so it doesn't seem you have one more yet, unless I missed something.
at any rate, I find the canard questionable; as if republicans actually favor textualism, they favor whatever serves their interest and beliefs and goals at the time. They don't actually favor straightforward literal interpretation of statues as written. like all (most) politicians, they favor whichever doctrine supports whatever they're trying to do.

Do you favor the 7th circuits current interpretation of the civil rights act?


Show nested quote +
came upon an interesting article on the topic, haven't read it thoroughly or vetted it yet though, but it looks to have a fairly solid backing at least, so a rebuttal would not be trivial. might be worth a read/skim at some point.
http://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/2/27/14747562/originalism-gorsuch-scalia-brown-supreme-court
the tldr seems to be calling bs on the originalist claims.

Let me know when you have done so. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.

ok, I read through it now. It raises a number of strong points, as well as some of mere moderate strength, and has a quite thorough selection of links backing up its various points. It does at times feel like there could be some strong rebuttals to some of them, though not many occur to me immediately; I don't know yet of a rebuttal article, it'd be interesting to read one.

one of those links (http://openscholarship.wustl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6105&context=law_lawreview)
raises some particular cases that seem reasonable that scalia did not follow originalism in many instances.
It and many other situations, bolster the case that originalism is more of a facade for judges deciding cases the way they want to, then finding a pretext for doing so. (and of course originalism has a large number practical problems with it as well, at least if used as too exclusive a doctrine)

It definitely seems worth a read if you're into this kind of thing.

vaguely related thoughts:
I don't recall anything in the constitution itself that says what rules of construction to use for evaluating the constitution; can anyone else think of one? some laws these days do have some specification on how they should be constructed, but i'm not sure how detailed those are in most cases.

The challenges and limitations of a very complex system reminds me of godel's incompleteness theorem and its brethren.
Great read: http://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/ great book on democracy: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10671.html zlefin is grumpier due to long term illness. Ignoring some users.
Introvert
Profile Joined April 2011
United States4748 Posts
April 05 2017 21:14 GMT
#145446
I don't know if this counts as a low content post but: It's happening.



oh here's a statement:
https://www.murkowski.senate.gov/press/release/murkowski-expresses-support-for-supreme-court-nominee-
"It is therefore only at the birth of a society that one can be completely logical in the laws. When you see a people enjoying this advantage, do not hasten to conclude that it is wise; think rather that it is young." -Alexis de Tocqueville
Doodsmack
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
United States7224 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-04-05 21:19:42
April 05 2017 21:18 GMT
#145447
On April 06 2017 05:15 LegalLord wrote:
Show nested quote +
The growing number of allegations about President Trump’s links to Russia sounds really incriminating. But would any of them actually be illegal?

As the FBI probes possible coordination between the Trump campaign and Moscow in the run-up to the 2016 election, an array of Trump associates find themselves in the crosshairs of federal and congressional investigators.

There’s former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, pushed out of the White House for lying about his communications with the Russian ambassador to the US. There’s Trump adviser Roger Stone, who has admitted to exchanging messages with a hacker thought to be a front for Russian intelligence. There's former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort, who is accused of failing to publicly disclose taking millions of dollars from a pro-Russian Ukrainian political party and a Russian oligarch. There's Carter Page, Trump’s foreign policy adviser, who advised Russia’s state-controlled gas company Gazprom and was once unsuccessfully courted by Russian spies to become one himself. And that’s not close to an exhaustive list.

But there’s a difference between unseemly conduct and criminal conduct, and I spoke to legal experts to separate one from the other. What I learned is there are three main sets of laws that — at least given what we know now from news reports — could end up being the basis for criminal charges against Trump associates: violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, failing to comply with the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), and making false statements to federal investigators. All of them are felonies and carry the potential penalty of prison time.

At the moment, we don’t know exactly what information the FBI has or if anything especially damning will come to light, and there’s no indication that Trump himself would be implicated in any charges related to cooperating with Russia during or immediately after the election. But if his closest aides end up being indicted for effectively working with a foreign power that the US doesn’t have friendly relations with in order to undermine the US electoral process, that would likely create a political crisis of Watergate proportions.

Source

Nice article that puts the Trump surrogates stuff into perspective. Seems that Flynn is very possibly criminally liable while the rest most likely acted improperly but not in a way that's going to lead to being charged. Though multiple possible felonies are there for the taking.


I really hope that if Trump's goons are found to have coordinated or committed crimes, it reflects back on Trump too.

I also suspect that there's a lot more to the story that the FBI knows that we don't.
LegalLord
Profile Blog Joined April 2013
United Kingdom13775 Posts
April 05 2017 21:20 GMT
#145448
Schumer well on track to prove that, yes, it's possible to be a worse Democratic minority leader than Harry Reid.
History will sooner or later sweep the European Union away without mercy.
Doodsmack
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
United States7224 Posts
April 05 2017 21:21 GMT
#145449
Well we certainly know where Trump stands on this.

In an interview with The New York Times, Trump defended O'Reilly against new revelations that he, Fox News and parent company 21st Century Fox had paid a total of $13 million in settlements to five women who accused him of sexual harassment or verbal abuse.

"I think he's a person I know well — he is a good person," Trump told the Times. "I think he shouldn't have settled; personally I think he shouldn't have settled. Because you should have taken it all the way. I don't think Bill did anything wrong."


CNN
Introvert
Profile Joined April 2011
United States4748 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-04-05 21:29:24
April 05 2017 21:24 GMT
#145450
On April 06 2017 06:20 LegalLord wrote:
Schumer well on track to prove that, yes, it's possible to be a worse Democratic minority leader than Harry Reid.


One theory was that Schumer was playing chicken with the GOP, thinking they wouldn't change the rule.

Now, as I and many other conservatives have said before, the party contains many squishes. But this is about as close to an open and shut case as the GOP can get. Nominee untouched by scandal with a great pedigree and endorsements, a win in the previous election that was, in large part, about this seat, and finally, the precedent of Harry Reid and the almost unprecedented nature of Democratic obstruction.

If they can't do this they can't do anything.

On April 06 2017 06:27 Doodsmack wrote:
Love hearing conservatives use the word obstruction in relation to the Supreme Court...or anything, really.


I know you do, which is why I'm using it now. It's a fun word to use after hearing about it for so long!
"It is therefore only at the birth of a society that one can be completely logical in the laws. When you see a people enjoying this advantage, do not hasten to conclude that it is wise; think rather that it is young." -Alexis de Tocqueville
Doodsmack
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
United States7224 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-04-05 21:27:28
April 05 2017 21:27 GMT
#145451
Love hearing conservatives use the word obstruction in relation to the Supreme Court...or anything, really.
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
April 05 2017 21:31 GMT
#145452
The filibuster is a powerful tool that is supposed to be used with rarely. Much like the rule that Presidents only served 2 terms, we had a long standing tradition of not abusing these tools to obstruct government. That tradition is pretty much dead and the government cannot function if even one of the parties is willing to use the filibuster to grind government to a halt.

If the Republicans keep the Senate majority in 2018, I expect that to be the last term of the legislative filibuster.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
Introvert
Profile Joined April 2011
United States4748 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-04-05 21:37:48
April 05 2017 21:36 GMT
#145453
On April 06 2017 06:31 Plansix wrote:
The filibuster is a powerful tool that is supposed to be used with rarely. Much like the rule that Presidents only served 2 terms, we had a long standing tradition of not abusing these tools to obstruct government. That tradition is pretty much dead and the government cannot function if even one of the parties is willing to use the filibuster to grind government to a halt.

If the Republicans keep the Senate majority in 2018, I expect that to be the last term of the legislative filibuster.


I don't think you appreciate the unique situation we are in right now. The legislative filibuster will almost certainly remain intact with no changes, though all things are possible.

Edit: if I were a betting man I'd bet that the party to kill it would be the Democrats the next time they take back the Senate.
"It is therefore only at the birth of a society that one can be completely logical in the laws. When you see a people enjoying this advantage, do not hasten to conclude that it is wise; think rather that it is young." -Alexis de Tocqueville
zlefin
Profile Blog Joined October 2012
United States7689 Posts
April 05 2017 21:40 GMT
#145454
On April 06 2017 06:24 Introvert wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 06 2017 06:20 LegalLord wrote:
Schumer well on track to prove that, yes, it's possible to be a worse Democratic minority leader than Harry Reid.


One theory was that Schumer was playing chicken with the GOP, thinking they wouldn't change the rule.

Now, as I and many other conservatives have said before, the party contains many squishes. But this is about as close to an open and shut case as the GOP can get. Nominee untouched by scandal with a great pedigree and endorsements, a win in the previous election that was, in large part, about this seat, and finally, the precedent of Harry Reid and the almost unprecedented nature of Democratic obstruction.

If they can't do this they can't do anything.

Show nested quote +
On April 06 2017 06:27 Doodsmack wrote:
Love hearing conservatives use the word obstruction in relation to the Supreme Court...or anything, really.


I know you do, which is why I'm using it now. It's a fun word to use after hearing about it for so long!


if this is the closest they can get to an open and hsut case that's very sad; as the case is very very far from and open shut.
and pretending otherwise is only the domain of extremely partisan hacks showing a degree of bias bordering on insanity.
also laughable to not note the extreme Republican obstructionism.

not surprising the republicans would force it through of cdourse, they're bad people not interested in good government.
Great read: http://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/ great book on democracy: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10671.html zlefin is grumpier due to long term illness. Ignoring some users.
LegalLord
Profile Blog Joined April 2013
United Kingdom13775 Posts
April 05 2017 21:40 GMT
#145455
It all comes down to whether or not the xDaunt confirmation efforts can siphon off a couple more traitors to prevent a filibuster. Either way he's going through which makes this a losing battle for the Democrats. But Schumer decided to pick this fight. So... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
History will sooner or later sweep the European Union away without mercy.
Nevuk
Profile Blog Joined March 2009
United States16280 Posts
April 05 2017 21:43 GMT
#145456
If the GOP is willing to nuke the filibuster now, they'd be willing to nuke it later. Just force them to do it and stop pretending that it actually means anything. The GOP has been a minority party more often than not, and it's extremely unlikely they maintain a permanent majority in the senate.
Introvert
Profile Joined April 2011
United States4748 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-04-05 21:47:58
April 05 2017 21:43 GMT
#145457
On April 06 2017 06:40 zlefin wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 06 2017 06:24 Introvert wrote:
On April 06 2017 06:20 LegalLord wrote:
Schumer well on track to prove that, yes, it's possible to be a worse Democratic minority leader than Harry Reid.


One theory was that Schumer was playing chicken with the GOP, thinking they wouldn't change the rule.

Now, as I and many other conservatives have said before, the party contains many squishes. But this is about as close to an open and shut case as the GOP can get. Nominee untouched by scandal with a great pedigree and endorsements, a win in the previous election that was, in large part, about this seat, and finally, the precedent of Harry Reid and the almost unprecedented nature of Democratic obstruction.

If they can't do this they can't do anything.

On April 06 2017 06:27 Doodsmack wrote:
Love hearing conservatives use the word obstruction in relation to the Supreme Court...or anything, really.


I know you do, which is why I'm using it now. It's a fun word to use after hearing about it for so long!


if this is the closest they can get to an open and hsut case that's very sad; as the case is very very far from and open shut.
and pretending otherwise is only the domain of extremely partisan hacks showing a degree of bias bordering on insanity.
also laughable to not note the extreme Republican obstructionism.

not surprising the republicans would force it through of cdourse, they're bad people not interested in good government.


ok, then what good reasons do they have for preventing this confirmation?

New challenge, you can't use the words "Merrick" or "Garland." To do so is to invoke the petty partisanship you are so opposed to.

On April 06 2017 06:43 Nevuk wrote:
If the GOP is willing to nuke the filibuster now, they'd be willing to nuke it later. Just force them to do it and stop pretending that it actually means anything. The GOP has been a minority party more often than not, and it's extremely unlikely they maintain a permanent majority in the senate.


No, what Reid did in 2013 was what set the whole thing in motion. You couldn't get 50 Republicans to go any further. The distinctions between appointments and legislation are wide enough that I don't foresee any scenario where the latter is nuked by the GOP.
"It is therefore only at the birth of a society that one can be completely logical in the laws. When you see a people enjoying this advantage, do not hasten to conclude that it is wise; think rather that it is young." -Alexis de Tocqueville
zlefin
Profile Blog Joined October 2012
United States7689 Posts
April 05 2017 21:45 GMT
#145458
On April 06 2017 06:43 Introvert wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 06 2017 06:40 zlefin wrote:
On April 06 2017 06:24 Introvert wrote:
On April 06 2017 06:20 LegalLord wrote:
Schumer well on track to prove that, yes, it's possible to be a worse Democratic minority leader than Harry Reid.


One theory was that Schumer was playing chicken with the GOP, thinking they wouldn't change the rule.

Now, as I and many other conservatives have said before, the party contains many squishes. But this is about as close to an open and shut case as the GOP can get. Nominee untouched by scandal with a great pedigree and endorsements, a win in the previous election that was, in large part, about this seat, and finally, the precedent of Harry Reid and the almost unprecedented nature of Democratic obstruction.

If they can't do this they can't do anything.

On April 06 2017 06:27 Doodsmack wrote:
Love hearing conservatives use the word obstruction in relation to the Supreme Court...or anything, really.


I know you do, which is why I'm using it now. It's a fun word to use after hearing about it for so long!


if this is the closest they can get to an open and hsut case that's very sad; as the case is very very far from and open shut.
and pretending otherwise is only the domain of extremely partisan hacks showing a degree of bias bordering on insanity.
also laughable to not note the extreme Republican obstructionism.

not surprising the republicans would force it through of cdourse, they're bad people not interested in good government.


ok, then what good reasons do they have for preventing this confirmation?

New challenge, you can't use the words "Merrick" or "Garland." To do so is to invoke the petty partisanship you are so opposed to.

yes, you've proven your partisanship by asserting that a valid point is invalid with no sound basis.
congratulations. you lose. you are the partisan hack.
Great read: http://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/ great book on democracy: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10671.html zlefin is grumpier due to long term illness. Ignoring some users.
LegalLord
Profile Blog Joined April 2013
United Kingdom13775 Posts
April 05 2017 21:46 GMT
#145459
On April 06 2017 06:43 Nevuk wrote:
If the GOP is willing to nuke the filibuster now, they'd be willing to nuke it later. Just force them to do it and stop pretending that it actually means anything. The GOP has been a minority party more often than not, and it's extremely unlikely they maintain a permanent majority in the senate.

If they wish to nuke they will need a valid reason to have gone for such a bold and convoluted gesture. The Supreme Court may very well be the only chance they get in a while. Because this isn't really as much about the filibuster as it is about that they absolutely care about getting their SCOTUS judge on the court enough that they are willing to do this.
History will sooner or later sweep the European Union away without mercy.
Introvert
Profile Joined April 2011
United States4748 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-04-05 21:52:23
April 05 2017 21:47 GMT
#145460
On April 06 2017 06:45 zlefin wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 06 2017 06:43 Introvert wrote:
On April 06 2017 06:40 zlefin wrote:
On April 06 2017 06:24 Introvert wrote:
On April 06 2017 06:20 LegalLord wrote:
Schumer well on track to prove that, yes, it's possible to be a worse Democratic minority leader than Harry Reid.


One theory was that Schumer was playing chicken with the GOP, thinking they wouldn't change the rule.

Now, as I and many other conservatives have said before, the party contains many squishes. But this is about as close to an open and shut case as the GOP can get. Nominee untouched by scandal with a great pedigree and endorsements, a win in the previous election that was, in large part, about this seat, and finally, the precedent of Harry Reid and the almost unprecedented nature of Democratic obstruction.

If they can't do this they can't do anything.

On April 06 2017 06:27 Doodsmack wrote:
Love hearing conservatives use the word obstruction in relation to the Supreme Court...or anything, really.


I know you do, which is why I'm using it now. It's a fun word to use after hearing about it for so long!


if this is the closest they can get to an open and hsut case that's very sad; as the case is very very far from and open shut.
and pretending otherwise is only the domain of extremely partisan hacks showing a degree of bias bordering on insanity.
also laughable to not note the extreme Republican obstructionism.

not surprising the republicans would force it through of cdourse, they're bad people not interested in good government.


ok, then what good reasons do they have for preventing this confirmation?

New challenge, you can't use the words "Merrick" or "Garland." To do so is to invoke the petty partisanship you are so opposed to.

yes, you've proven your partisanship by asserting that a valid point is invalid with no sound basis.
congratulations. you lose. you are the partisan hack.


But I provided three strong reasons. Citing Merrick Garland (who was not in the same position as Gorsuch is now) is entirely based on revenge. Unless you really think Trump should reappoint Garland, which is laughable.
"It is therefore only at the birth of a society that one can be completely logical in the laws. When you see a people enjoying this advantage, do not hasten to conclude that it is wise; think rather that it is young." -Alexis de Tocqueville
Prev 1 7271 7272 7273 7274 7275 10093 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 2h 21m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
ProTech65
StarCraft: Brood War
Nal_rA 4339
Hyuk 3952
Zeus 1377
ToSsGirL 208
Leta 82
Backho 74
Sacsri 51
ajuk12(nOOB) 22
NaDa 20
Dota 2
ODPixel217
XcaliburYe162
Counter-Strike
Stewie2K881
Other Games
summit1g5670
ceh992
SortOf10
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick1194
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 13 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH431
• Sammyuel 31
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• lizZardDota255
Upcoming Events
Esports World Cup
2h 21m
ByuN vs Zoun
SHIN vs TriGGeR
Cyan vs ShoWTimE
Rogue vs HeRoMaRinE
Clem vs Solar
Reynor vs Maru
herO vs Cure
Serral vs Classic
Esports World Cup
1d 2h
Esports World Cup
2 days
CranKy Ducklings
3 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3 days
CSO Cup
3 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3 days
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
FEL
4 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
4 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
4 days
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
[ Show More ]
Sparkling Tuna Cup
6 days
Online Event
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Xiamen Invitational
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL20 Non-Korean Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
CC Div. A S7
Underdog Cup #2
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25

Upcoming

CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
SEL Season 2 Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
FEL Cracov 2025
HCC Europe
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.