US Politics Mega-thread - Page 676

On September 06 2018 23:13 Acrofales wrote:

How do you get kicked out of the senate? There's a procedure for that? What happens if in the (presumably) subsequent election, he is reinstated?

On September 06 2018 23:13 Saryph wrote:
So the NY Times has been leaked some of the documents that have been blocked from the public having access to them, and they include Kavanaugh writing that Roe v. Wade isnt settled and can be changed, which is at odds with what he told the committee earlier this week. Obviously this is exactly what people were worried about, though I'm not sure if it changes anything.

On September 06 2018 23:40 Danglars wrote:

https://twitter.com/samstein/status/1037700471501320194
I think if you slow down the horses to read it, it’s barely even a dry statement of fact. Kavanaugh’s only crime is saying the kind of obvious stuff that sections of polite society would rather leave unsaid.

If you want constitutional crisis, senators leaking documents subject to executive privilege is either getting there or already there. Things are getting more exciting and I think Trump’s chance of reelection just went up a bit.

On September 06 2018 23:40 Danglars wrote:

https://twitter.com/samstein/status/1037700471501320194
I think if you slow down the horses to read it, it’s barely even a dry statement of fact. Kavanaugh’s only crime is saying the kind of obvious stuff that sections of polite society would rather leave unsaid.

If you want constitutional crisis, senators leaking documents subject to executive privilege is either getting there or already there. Things are getting more exciting and I think Trump’s chance of reelection just went up a bit.

On September 06 2018 23:50 Doodsmack wrote:
Conservative Twitter is going nuts over the idea that the NYT op-ed writer is a member of the deep state. Except, hes talking about senior Trump appointees. But hey, when party loyalty has reduced you to supporting Donald Trump, you gotta say what you can.

On September 06 2018 23:13 Acrofales wrote:

How do you get kicked out of the senate? There's a procedure for that? What happens if in the (presumably) subsequent election, he is reinstated?

On September 06 2018 23:40 Danglars wrote:

https://twitter.com/samstein/status/1037700471501320194
I think if you slow down the horses to read it, it’s barely even a dry statement of fact. Kavanaugh’s only crime is saying the kind of obvious stuff that sections of polite society would rather leave unsaid.

If you want constitutional crisis, senators leaking documents subject to executive privilege is either getting there or already there. Things are getting more exciting and I think Trump’s chance of reelection just went up a bit.

On September 06 2018 23:59 zlefin wrote:

article 1 section 5 sub 2 of constitution
"2: Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member."

On September 06 2018 23:23 ShoCkeyy wrote:
Imo, Republicans already stole a nomination from the democrats when they chose to not even hear Merrick, if I were the Dems, I would be doing the same thing. Funny enough, Brett praises Merrick as a judge, and they both voted together on the same issue 93% of the time, yet Republicans chose to not hear the nomination because it was "Obamas" nomination. Despicable turn of events in my opinion.

On September 07 2018 00:21 Mohdoo wrote:
The question of "should this be released or not?" should always be answered with "yes". This only stops being true for blatantly obvious national security things. But some dude's confirmation hearing? Anything whatsoever should be on the table.

On September 07 2018 00:04 iamthedave wrote:


Run me through the logic here? How does this increase Trump's chances of re-election?

Though I personally think they're pretty high anyway; has a President ever lost re-election while the economy is doing okay-good?

And if you think this is a final straw, isn't it already bad that your side of the aisle held up the nomination for the best part of a year just to spite the sitting President?

It seems to me that no matter how theatrical the stuff with Brett gets, it's entirely the fault of Republicans for taking the seat hostage in the first place when Obama - by all accounts - recommended a perfectly reasonable judge, and I know you're fond of those sorts of arguments so you should be in full support of these shenanigans. Many a time have you tut-tutted the left and said 'well if you didn't want x to happen, you shouldn't have done y'. This is exactly that.

On September 07 2018 00:31 Danglars wrote:

It’s an example of Democrats willing to burn it all down because they’re still wishing Clinton won and got their picks (and regret that Republicans won the Senate back during Obama’s tenure). It really works against any 2020 Democrat claims that they’re the path back to sanity in politics.

And if you’re still sore at “seat hostage” business, blame Biden. I really think your characterization of the issue is just the opposite partisanship of mine. Since Supreme Court justices are practically legislators, their nominations close to presidential election years are political election decisions. It’s just refusal to come to terms with the consequences of a politicized court that leads to all these silly “hostage” and “just to spite.” Why not let the Kavanaugh hearings proceed without breaking the rules on leaks and constant interruptions, if you really are against doing things just to spite the president?

On September 07 2018 00:28 Plansix wrote:

More importantly, the committee has always decided what documents to withhold through a bipartisan agreement. And privilege has never(from all reports) had to be invoked by the White House, since the Judiciary committee was always able to work it out if privilege was a problem. The Republicans side stepped that process, telling the Democrats to just eat shit and like it. And now they are all shocked that the Democrats are punching back.