Supreme Court News

Serial Killers, Mass Murder, Unsolved Mysteries, Terrorism. (Description & Links Only)

Re: Supreme Court bans warrantless cell phone searches

Postby CrissyAlwaysSunny » Thu Mar 17, 2016 11:34 am

Cate McCalley wrote:Should Congress block every Obama SCOTUS nominee, it will be the first time in the history of our country that a Congress has failed to fulfill their Constitutional mandate to fill a SCOTUS vacancy. The ramifications of which will surely result in a future successful challenge to our Federal doctrine itself.

This may appear to be Congressional gridlock playing itself out in opposition to the final year of a sitting President. The issue is much more significant than partisan politics. It challenges the power of Federalist doctrine that created our three branches of government.


Shoe meet other foot. Their is a video clip of Biden saying the same thing about blocking Bush's nomination.
CrissyAlwaysSunny
 
Posts: 1336
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2014 8:07 am

Re: Supreme Court bans warrantless cell phone searches

Postby Cate McCalley » Thu Mar 17, 2016 12:14 pm

Not sure I've heard Biden speak on on Bush nominations. The point is partisan politics played out to the extreme in the within the highest structures of the three branches of our government, threaten our Federalist doctrine without respect to Party platforms.


Time & Tide Changes Everything
User avatar
Cate McCalley
(no custom rank chosen)
 
Posts: 10042
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 8:54 pm

Re: Supreme Court bans warrantless cell phone searches

Postby CrissyAlwaysSunny » Thu Mar 17, 2016 2:20 pm

Cate McCalley wrote:Not sure I've heard Biden speak on on Bush nominations. The point is partisan politics played out to the extreme in the within the highest structures of the three branches of our government, threaten our Federalist doctrine without respect to Party platforms.


We can't afford as a nation to put another liberal on the highest court in the land.
CrissyAlwaysSunny
 
Posts: 1336
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2014 8:07 am

Re: Supreme Court bans warrantless cell phone searches

Postby VoteMout » Thu Mar 17, 2016 3:14 pm

Cate McCalley wrote:Not sure I've heard Biden speak on on Bush nominations. The point is partisan politics played out to the extreme in the within the highest structures of the three branches of our government, threaten our Federalist doctrine without respect to Party platforms.


So you approve of his nomination?
VoteMout
 
Posts: 749
Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: Supreme Court bans warrantless cell phone searches

Postby Cate McCalley » Thu Mar 17, 2016 9:00 pm

VoteMout wrote:
Cate McCalley wrote:Not sure I've heard Biden speak on on Bush nominations. The point is partisan politics played out to the extreme in the within the highest structures of the three branches of our government, threaten our Federalist doctrine without respect to Party platforms.


So you approve of his nomination?



I know nothing about him. Haven't followed who is who on the subject. I can't believe there isn't someone that can fill the post well qualified to render fair and impartial rulings. They may not meet the the expectations of every single Republican Congressional member, but IMO that shouldn't be an expectation to begin with.


Time & Tide Changes Everything
User avatar
Cate McCalley
(no custom rank chosen)
 
Posts: 10042
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 8:54 pm

Re: Supreme Court bans warrantless cell phone searches

Postby upallnight » Fri Mar 18, 2016 8:33 am

He voted for the Washington D.C. gun ban. The Supreme Court overruled the lower court.
upallnight
 
Posts: 1693
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 6:18 pm

Re: Supreme Court bans warrantless cell phone searches

Postby Political Plague » Fri Mar 18, 2016 3:14 pm

Am I the only one who suddenly feels like Scalia's death was not an accident whatsoever now? It's obvious to me that there were motives at this point. Blatantly obvious.

Judge Merrick Garland comes from the Most Liberal Court of Appeals in the country and he voted to leave the DC gun Ban In affect, so he is anti-second amendment. He is probably OK with Parting out Babies, and Closing Coal Mines before you have an alternative.
Political Plague
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 4:36 pm

Re: Supreme Court bans warrantless cell phone searches

Postby Pappy » Fri Mar 18, 2016 5:28 pm

Political Plague wrote:Am I the only one who suddenly feels like Scalia's death was not an accident whatsoever now? It's obvious to me that there were motives at this point. Blatantly obvious.

Judge Merrick Garland comes from the Most Liberal Court of Appeals in the country and he voted to leave the DC gun Ban In affect, so he is anti-second amendment. He is probably OK with Parting out Babies, and Closing Coal Mines before you have an alternative.

Aren't we all?
Pappy
Hardee's Parking Lot
 
Posts: 6847
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 7:16 pm

Re: Supreme Court bans warrantless cell phone searches

Postby Cate McCalley » Sat Mar 19, 2016 7:40 am

Political Plague wrote:Am I the only one who suddenly feels like Scalia's death was not an accident whatsoever now? It's obvious to me that there were motives at this point. Blatantly obvious.

Judge Merrick Garland comes from the Most Liberal Court of Appeals in the country and he voted to leave the DC gun Ban In affect, so he is anti-second amendment. He is probably OK with Parting out Babies, and Closing Coal Mines before you have an alternative.


If I (a simple uneducated woman) knew the coal fields needed alternative industry forty years ago, how is it the decision makers getting billions of coal severance monies over the decades didn't know? It wasn't that they didn't know. They did. One would only need to look at the steady decline of coal production over the last 3 decades to figure it out.

It wouldn't have mattered if all these years, half the people in the coal fields of Appalachia would have been behind creating alternative industry. King coal and all it's minions would not have allowed it. Those advocating it would have been targeted as "trouble makers", "outsiders" "commies" "lebo's" "elitist", or any other label that threatened the status quo of King Coal and it s minions. That's the power people hand over while embracing a single industry instead of a diverse economy. The only one certain thing you can count on is change. Good leaders are visionaries. They don't accept what is and never get up on what can be. They accept change and prepare for it.

Now that the day of reckoning is upon the coal fields, it's easy to blame a sitting President. Easy to lay the blame on any and everything and reject the reality that dependence on a single industry is fool hearty. It's just not reasonable.


Time & Tide Changes Everything
User avatar
Cate McCalley
(no custom rank chosen)
 
Posts: 10042
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 8:54 pm

Re: Supreme Court bans warrantless cell phone searches

Postby goat47 » Sat Mar 19, 2016 12:33 pm

Rumors are the GOP Senate will hear Merrick Garland and maybe appoint him to the Supreme Court..... that better not happen if they want to keep their jobs.
goat47
(no custom rank chosen)
 
Posts: 2154
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 3:12 pm

Re: Supreme Court bans warrantless cell phone searches

Postby GFunkMoneyDog » Sun Mar 20, 2016 8:52 am

Apple engineers plan on quitting if forced to break into the iPhone.
"The darkest souls are not those which choose to exist within the hell of the abyss, but those which choose to break free from the abyss and move silently among us." - Dr. Samuel Loomis
User avatar
GFunkMoneyDog
The Godfather
 
Posts: 20927
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:59 am

Re: Supreme Court bans warrantless cell phone searches

Postby GFunkMoneyDog » Tue Mar 22, 2016 9:48 am

Well, well, well. After doing some digging on Obama's Supreme Court nominee I have discovered that he was neck deep in the Oklahoma City Bombing.
"The darkest souls are not those which choose to exist within the hell of the abyss, but those which choose to break free from the abyss and move silently among us." - Dr. Samuel Loomis
User avatar
GFunkMoneyDog
The Godfather
 
Posts: 20927
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:59 am

Re: Supreme Court bans warrantless cell phone searches

Postby VoteMout » Tue Mar 22, 2016 10:57 am

GFunkMoneyDog wrote:Well, well, well. After doing some digging on Obama's Supreme Court nominee I have discovered that he was neck deep in the Oklahoma City Bombing.


Explains why Clinton nominated him for the Supreme Court.
VoteMout
 
Posts: 749
Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 7:26 pm

Re: Supreme Court bans warrantless cell phone searches

Postby Political Plague » Tue Mar 22, 2016 3:36 pm

Before Merrick Garland became a judge he held top posts in the Clinton Justice Dept. He was over the investigations of the Atlanta Olympics Bombing, the Unabomber Case, and the Oklahoma City Bombing. He has put in his dirty work and now wants paid for it.
Political Plague
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 4:36 pm

Re: Supreme Court bans warrantless cell phone searches

Postby CrissyAlwaysSunny » Wed Mar 23, 2016 12:44 pm

Political Plague wrote:Before Merrick Garland became a judge he held top posts in the Clinton Justice Dept. He was over the investigations of the Atlanta Olympics Bombing, the Unabomber Case, and the Oklahoma City Bombing. He has put in his dirty work and now wants paid for it.


Neck deep with the Clintons. He's not dirty. He's filthy!
CrissyAlwaysSunny
 
Posts: 1336
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2014 8:07 am

PreviousNext

Return to Crime & Punishment

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest