Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Off Topic > Off Topic - General


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 09-27-2020, 06:00 AM   #286
hcap
Registered User
 
hcap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location:
Posts: 29,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by OntheRail View Post
No he did not... Mitch confirmed that point. Obama nominated as required. Mitch choosing not to bring it forward that was a consequence of the Democrats losing control of the Senate.

Obama wanted a favor from the Republican... they treated him inkind.
The Garland Affair: What History and the Constitution Really Say About President Obama’s Powers to Appoint a Replacement for Justice Scalia
https://www.nyulawreview.org/online-...ustice-scalia/

There have been 103 prior cases in which—like the case of President Obama’s nomination of Judge Garland—an elected President has faced an actual vacancy on the Supreme Court and began an appointment process prior to the election of a successor. In all 103 cases, the President was able to both nominate and appoint a replacement Justice, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.

This is true even of all eight such cases where the nomination process began during an election year. By contrast, there have been only six prior cases in which the Senate pursued a course of action that—like the current Republicans —deliberately sought to transfer a sitting President’s Supreme Court appointment power to a successor.

The historical rule that best accounts for senatorial practices over the entirety of U.S. history is thus the following: While the Senate has the constitutional power to provide advice and consent with respect to particular Supreme Court nominees and reject (or resist) particular candidates on a broad range of grounds, the Senate may only use this power to deliberately transfer a sitting President’s Supreme Court appointment powers to a successor in the highly unusual circumstance where the President’s status as the most recently elected President is in doubt.
.................................................. .........................................


Sure, unusual circumstances.

42 days untill a presidential election, and a deeply corrupt president needs a compliant Supreme court in case he loses fair and square and manages to use thousands of corrupt lawyers to litigate his way to the Supremes
__________________
The inmates have taken over the asylum.

Last edited by hcap; 09-27-2020 at 06:12 AM.
hcap is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-27-2020, 06:07 AM   #287
davew
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 14,010
what is the historical rule when the justice is assassinated and cremated to cover it up?

what is this 'historical rule' thing? something you say when you disagree with outcome?
davew is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-27-2020, 07:04 AM   #288
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 39,808
Quote:
Originally Posted by davew View Post
what is the historical rule when the justice is assassinated and cremated to cover it up?

what is this 'historical rule' thing? something you say when you disagree with outcome?
Exactly! "Historical rule"? What in the world is that!? I didn't know history made rules either.
__________________
Consistent profits can only be made on the basis of analysis that is far from obvious to the majority. - anonymous guru
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-27-2020, 07:07 AM   #289
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 39,808
Quote:
Originally Posted by hcap View Post
The Garland Affair: What History and the Constitution Really Say About President Obama’s Powers to Appoint a Replacement for Justice Scalia
https://www.nyulawreview.org/online-...ustice-scalia/

There have been 103 prior cases in which—like the case of President Obama’s nomination of Judge Garland—an elected President has faced an actual vacancy on the Supreme Court and began an appointment process prior to the election of a successor. In all 103 cases, the President was able to both nominate and appoint a replacement Justice, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.

This is true even of all eight such cases where the nomination process began during an election year. By contrast, there have been only six prior cases in which the Senate pursued a course of action that—like the current Republicans —deliberately sought to transfer a sitting President’s Supreme Court appointment power to a successor.

The historical rule that best accounts for senatorial practices over the entirety of U.S. history is thus the following: While the Senate has the constitutional power to provide advice and consent with respect to particular Supreme Court nominees and reject (or resist) particular candidates on a broad range of grounds, the Senate may only use this power to deliberately transfer a sitting President’s Supreme Court appointment powers to a successor in the highly unusual circumstance where the President’s status as the most recently elected President is in doubt.
.................................................. .........................................


Sure, unusual circumstances.

42 days untill a presidential election, and a deeply corrupt president needs a compliant Supreme court in case he loses fair and square and manages to use thousands of corrupt lawyers to litigate his way to the Supremes
Hey, Empty Suit, what do you mean by "unusual circumstances"? That the left didn't get the election outcome they wanted or expected or think they are entitled to?
__________________
Consistent profits can only be made on the basis of analysis that is far from obvious to the majority. - anonymous guru
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-27-2020, 10:05 AM   #290
fast4522
Registered User
 
fast4522's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 10,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by hcap View Post
So Mr.Slow, it was Moscow BITCH'S "prerogative" deny a sitting president his constitutional right?

The Senate Republicans deliberately transferred President Obama’s power to appoint Justice Scalia’s replacement to the next elected President with a full 8 months left in Obama's term.

All you Trumpites and subservient dishonest corrupt used to be rethugs, will not be missed.
Thick as a brick. Case in point, Obama exercised his constitutional right. The communist ideology and its followers forgets this, co-equal branches of government are not required to follow each other like good little commies. And is why our system was setup this way, inability to take apart the republic is a nice design feature built into our system.
fast4522 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-27-2020, 10:12 AM   #291
fast4522
Registered User
 
fast4522's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 10,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by formula_2002 View Post
how wrong can one person be about another.. perhaps that's why trump is where he is
And without you, how would anyone of us here at Pace Advantage be able draw a baseline? Be very real, when you go to hide like Biden no one will remember either of you here or there.
fast4522 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-27-2020, 10:41 AM   #292
stuball
Registered User
 
stuball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,339
Thumbs up Yes

The Dems were bamboozled by their own rule changes. This has them so upset they can't think straight and when President follows the rules they do exactly the wrong thing and not just the wrong thing but, the wrong thing multiplied many times. I was born and raised a Democrat - a teamster for 30 years - followed the rules set down by others smarter than me. (NOT) After following what is really going on I could never ever picture my self condoning and approving the actions on the left. Am I the only one in the United States that feels that way? Am I alone on an island? I consider myself to be a Patriot I have 3 flagpoles in my yard 24 footer flies US Flag -- 18 footer Air Force Vet (2 sons)
and Army Vet (myself) -- and another 18 footer Trump Train and Blue Line.
stuball is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-27-2020, 12:39 PM   #293
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 39,808
Quote:
Originally Posted by fast4522 View Post
And without you, how would anyone of us here at Pace Advantage be able draw a baseline?
That's a pretty scary thought actually...
__________________
Consistent profits can only be made on the basis of analysis that is far from obvious to the majority. - anonymous guru
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-27-2020, 01:14 PM   #294
OntheRail
Registered User
 
OntheRail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,926
Quote:
Originally Posted by hcap View Post
The Garland Affair: What History and the Constitution Really Say About President Obama’s Powers to Appoint a Replacement for Justice Scalia
https://www.nyulawreview.org/online-...ustice-scalia/

There have been 103 prior cases in which—like the case of President Obama’s nomination of Judge Garland—an elected President has faced an actual vacancy on the Supreme Court and began an appointment process prior to the election of a successor. In all 103 cases, the President was able to both nominate and appoint a replacement Justice, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.

This is true even of all eight such cases where the nomination process began during an election year. By contrast, there have been only six prior cases in which the Senate pursued a course of action that—like the current Republicans —deliberately sought to transfer a sitting President’s Supreme Court appointment power to a successor.

The historical rule that best accounts for senatorial practices over the entirety of U.S. history is thus the following: While the Senate has the constitutional power to provide advice and consent with respect to particular Supreme Court nominees and reject (or resist) particular candidates on a broad range of grounds, the Senate may only use this power to deliberately transfer a sitting President’s Supreme Court appointment powers to a successor in the highly unusual circumstance where the President’s status as the most recently elected President is in doubt.
.................................................. .........................................


Sure, unusual circumstances.

42 days untill a presidential election, and a deeply corrupt president needs a compliant Supreme court in case he loses fair and square and manages to use thousands of corrupt lawyers to litigate his way to the Supremes
Your off the edge... i suggest you have someone come in a secure all your sharp and pointy object's . So when President Trump wins again you'll no hurt yourself.

Supreme Court justices, court of appeals judges, and district court judges are nominated by the President and confirmed by the United States Senate, as stated in the Constitution.

Quote:
...
Twenty-nine times in American history there has been an open Supreme Court vacancy in a presidential election year, or in a lame-duck session before the next presidential inauguration. (This counts vacancies created by new seats on the Court, but not vacancies for which there was a nomination already pending when the year began, such as happened in 1835–36 and 1987–88.) The president made a nomination in all twenty-nine cases. George Washington did it three times. John Adams did it. Thomas Jefferson did it. Abraham Lincoln did it. Ulysses S. Grant did it. Franklin D. Roosevelt did it. Dwight Eisenhower did it. Barack Obama, of course, did it. Twenty-two of the 44 men to hold the office faced this situation, and all twenty-two made the decision to send up a nomination, whether or not they had the votes in the Senate.
...
Nineteen times between 1796 and 1968, presidents have sought to fill a Supreme Court vacancy in a presidential-election year while their party controlled the Senate. Ten of those nominations came before the election; nine of the ten were successful, the only failure being the bipartisan filibuster of the ethically challenged Abe Fortas as chief justice in 1968.
...
The bottom line: If a president and the Senate agree on a Supreme Court nominee, timing has never stopped them. By tradition, only when the voters have elected a president and a Senate majority from different parties has the fact of a looming presidential election mattered. When there is no dispute between the branches, there is no need to ask the voters to resolve one.
https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news...t-vacancy-2020
__________________
Remember To Help Old Friends Thoroughbred Retirement Center.

Last edited by OntheRail; 09-27-2020 at 01:18 PM.
OntheRail is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-27-2020, 01:53 PM   #295
ElKabong
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,549
Quote:
Originally Posted by hcap View Post
The Garland Affair: What History and the Constitution Really Say About President Obama’s Powers to Appoint a Replacement for Justice Scalia
https://www.nyulawreview.org/online-...ustice-scalia/

There have been 103 prior cases in which—like the case of President Obama’s nomination of Judge Garland—an elected President has faced an actual vacancy on the Supreme Court and began an appointment process prior to the election of a successor. In all 103 cases, the President was able to both nominate and appoint a replacement Justice, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.

This is true even of all eight such cases where the nomination process began during an election year. By contrast, there have been only six prior cases in which the Senate pursued a course of action that—like the current Republicans —deliberately sought to transfer a sitting President’s Supreme Court appointment power to a successor.

The historical rule that best accounts for senatorial practices over the entirety of U.S. history is thus the following: While the Senate has the constitutional power to provide advice and consent with respect to particular Supreme Court nominees and reject (or resist) particular candidates on a broad range of grounds, the Senate may only use this power to deliberately transfer a sitting President’s Supreme Court appointment powers to a successor in the highly unusual circumstance where the President’s status as the most recently elected President is in doubt.
.................................................. .........................................


Sure, unusual circumstances.

42 days untill a presidential election, and a deeply corrupt president needs a compliant Supreme court in case he loses fair and square and manages to use thousands of corrupt lawyers to litigate his way to the Supremes
I have a feeling the elation you experienced over the phony impeachment will pale in comparison to the celebration that's about to happen when the 6th conservative is seated to the USSC

#knowhowthegameisplayed
__________________
October 12, 2020

Joe Biden: "I'm running as a proud Democrat for the Senate"
ElKabong is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-27-2020, 02:50 PM   #296
Greyfox
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 18,606
Quote:
Originally Posted by stuball View Post
After following what is really going on I could never ever picture myself condoning and approving the actions on the left. Am I the only one in the United States that feels that way? Am I alone on an island?
You are not alone.
Life-long Democrat Leo Terrell will vote for Trump.
He feels the Democratic Party left him and has moved too far Left.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Terrell



Last edited by Greyfox; 09-27-2020 at 02:52 PM.
Greyfox is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-27-2020, 02:55 PM   #297
fast4522
Registered User
 
fast4522's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 10,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
That's a pretty scary thought actually...
I am not good at sarcasm and often miss things when others use it, so bear with me.
fast4522 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-27-2020, 08:37 PM   #298
formula_2002
what an easy game.
 
formula_2002's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 38,466
Trump tax returns may indeed be fake....
"news "
formula_2002 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-27-2020, 10:47 PM   #299
PaceAdvantage
PA Steward
 
PaceAdvantage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Del Boca Vista
Posts: 66,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by formula_2002 View Post
Trump tax returns may indeed be fake....
"news "
It's not news to the IRS...they've had them for years and years and years...if there is something illegal in there, why wasn't he arrested years ago?

You figure for sure Obama would have pushed the IRS to do something if there was something there...

Thus, high confidence that, once again, it's a whole lotta nothing.
__________________
@paceadvantage | Support the site and become a today!
PaceAdvantage is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-27-2020, 11:15 PM   #300
formula_2002
what an easy game.
 
formula_2002's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 38,466
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage View Post
It's not news to the IRS...they've had them for years and years and years...if there is something illegal in there, why wasn't he arrested years ago?

You figure for sure Obama would have pushed the IRS to do something if there was something there...

Thus, high confidence that, once again, it's a whole lotta nothing.
Remember trump says the IRS is still auditing. Who knows what is going on. However if I lost in my business as much as trump did in his, I would also be a very rich man
formula_2002 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
» Current Polls
How do you prefer your Coffee !?
Cream and Sugar - 28.57%
30 Votes
Cream only - 20.00%
21 Votes
Black - 41.90%
44 Votes
Decaf - 9.52%
10 Votes
Espresso - 12.38%
13 Votes
Starbucks etc... - 9.52%
10 Votes
Other - 23.81%
25 Votes
Total Votes: 105
This poll is closed.
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2020 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved -- Best Viewed in a modern browser @ 1280x720 Resolution Or Higher
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.