|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News |
![]() |
Ian David
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 06:21 PM Original message |
43 House Members Slam Justices Scalia, Thomas, And Alito For Ethics Scandals |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Liberal Veteran
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 06:23 PM Response to Original message |
1. One wonders where they were when we actually held the House? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Autumn
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 06:29 PM Response to Reply #1 |
2. They had to wait until |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
The Doctor.
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 06:41 PM Response to Reply #2 |
4. It's the Dog and Pony show. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SammyWinstonJack
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 11:43 PM Response to Reply #2 |
34. +100000001 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
caseymoz
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 10:19 AM Response to Reply #2 |
68. Or it's come to a point where jaded politicians are shocked? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
harun
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 12:42 PM Response to Reply #2 |
77. +1 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Deep13
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 07:20 PM Response to Reply #1 |
8. +1 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
McCamy Taylor
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 08:02 PM Response to Reply #1 |
14. Part out oif power always tears down. Party in power writes legislation. That is how the system |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ThomCat
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 10:41 PM Response to Reply #14 |
24. That is not true. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bluenorthwest
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 07:22 AM Response to Reply #14 |
58. How is seeking to put the Supremes under the same rules as |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
fascisthunter
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 05:16 PM Response to Reply #58 |
87. I'll wait too for an answer |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
66 dmhlt
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 08:08 PM Response to Reply #1 |
15. Well, they hadn't seen SCOTUS's Official Portrait yet |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SusanaMontana41
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 10:40 PM Response to Reply #15 |
23. Now that's a photo! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Atman
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 12:30 AM Response to Reply #23 |
37. Isn't that a scene from "Idiocracy?" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
liberalmike27
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 10:18 AM Response to Reply #15 |
67. The |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AlbertCat
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 10:05 PM Response to Reply #1 |
21. One wonders where they were when we actually held the House? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AndyTiedye
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 02:50 AM Response to Reply #1 |
46. We Still Would Never Have Had the Votes to Remove Them |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
The Backlash Cometh
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 06:34 PM Response to Original message |
3. I'm loving this Friday news dump day! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
madamesilverspurs
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 06:43 PM Response to Original message |
5. Next, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SoapBox
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 06:46 PM Response to Original message |
6. ...dirty, dirty, dirty. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Iliyah
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 07:20 PM Original message |
This is different |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Iliyah
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 07:20 PM Original message |
This is different |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Iliyah
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 07:20 PM Response to Reply #6 |
7. This is different |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
la la
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 01:00 AM Response to Reply #6 |
40. those people are a combination of.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tomg
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 03:58 AM Response to Reply #40 |
48. At first I thought you |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hue
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 06:35 AM Response to Reply #6 |
54. This is the Ayn Rand "philosophy" in a Nutter shell! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TxVietVet
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 07:08 AM Response to Reply #6 |
57. They had one Laoucher in front of our Post Office. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HCE SuiGeneris
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 10:16 AM Response to Reply #6 |
66. It's not so much where we are headed. It's more pertinent to wonder where we are already. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NICO9000
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 02:25 PM Response to Reply #6 |
83. Interesting that a black woman was one of the pair |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dotymed
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 09:03 PM Response to Reply #6 |
91. Many of us worked our ASS off for Obama. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kestrel91316
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 07:37 PM Response to Original message |
9. We could have impeached all 3. Well, but for the lack of some SPINES. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cosmocat
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 06:16 AM Response to Reply #9 |
53. Make no mistake, if it was the "liberal" members of the court |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
baldguy
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 07:45 PM Response to Original message |
10. They should all be impeached, removed from office & thrown in prison. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bongbong
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 07:46 PM Response to Original message |
11. Cue wingnut whinging in 3..2..1 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DeSwiss
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 07:49 PM Response to Original message |
12. Dont dilly-dally around with 'em. IMPEACH THE BASTARDS!!! - K&R n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Overseas
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 01:32 AM Response to Reply #12 |
42. Yes please. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
McCamy Taylor
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 08:00 PM Response to Original message |
13. Good idea. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dragonfli
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 08:11 PM Response to Original message |
16. K&R Purchased Supreme Court justices are the beginning of the end for our Democracy /nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
primavera
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 11:33 PM Response to Reply #16 |
31. Maybe not |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
zippytheplatypus
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 08:31 PM Response to Original message |
17. impeachment process for SCOTUS Justices |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MilesColtrane
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 11:36 PM Response to Reply #17 |
32. The process is the same as for impeaching a president or lower court judge. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
zippytheplatypus
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 01:40 AM Response to Reply #32 |
43. the house, yeesh.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
zippytheplatypus
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 08:32 PM Response to Original message |
18. impeachment process for SCOTUS Justices |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
certainot
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 09:18 PM Response to Original message |
19. this would be over quick if the left had 1000 coordinated radio stations reaching 50mil/week |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Divine Discontent
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 08:58 AM Response to Reply #19 |
63. yep! if the Left's billionaires would invest into media purchases, we could have some fair outlets |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
certainot
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 09:31 AM Response to Reply #63 |
65. actually, if the left stopped giving those stations a free speech free ride and |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dotymed
![]() |
Fri Sep-16-11 02:17 PM Response to Reply #19 |
94. Yes, or if THE FAIRNESS DOCTRINE were REINSTATED. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BlueIdaho
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 09:54 PM Response to Original message |
20. Lady Justice may be blind but These scoundrels |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JJW
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 10:14 PM Response to Original message |
22. They don't see it that way |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
whathappened
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 11:01 PM Response to Reply #22 |
27. they use to |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
chervilant
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 11:30 AM Response to Reply #22 |
74. Sociopaths |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bertman
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 10:51 PM Response to Original message |
25. Agreed. Any judge receiving a "gift" or "contribution" from a party involved in a |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BillyJack
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 10:54 PM Response to Original message |
26. K & R n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BillyJack
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 11:02 PM Response to Original message |
28. Deep down in their hearts somewhere.....and, yes, they have hearts.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bbgrunt
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 11:17 PM Response to Original message |
29. wow. 43 out of 435. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hubert Flottz
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 11:32 PM Response to Original message |
30. They see themselves as being above the law and |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MilesColtrane
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 11:42 PM Response to Original message |
33. Nice move, but the House can't impeach these scumbags for a "high crime" if it wasn't a crime... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GreenStormCloud
![]() |
Fri Sep-09-11 11:58 PM Response to Original message |
35. Meaningless. Nothing will happen. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 12:27 AM Response to Original message |
36. Safety in numbers, eh? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stlsaxman
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 12:49 AM Response to Original message |
38. The ever-awesome Congressman William "Lacy" Clay signed!!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
shanti
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 12:57 AM Response to Original message |
39. it's about time? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tblue
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 01:17 AM Response to Original message |
41. Stinks to high heaven! Impeach!!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
samsingh
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 02:14 AM Response to Original message |
44. these 'justices' thumb their nose's at justice |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
gunnergoz
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 02:31 AM Response to Original message |
45. Voting in accordance to your stock portfolio |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polmaven
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 12:41 PM Response to Reply #45 |
76. Well, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PurityOfEssence
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 03:42 AM Response to Original message |
47. Scream louder and impeach |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 05:34 AM Response to Original message |
49. ... but Roberts wasn't unethical when he organized the fascist rally for Bush to STOP |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
disndat
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 08:48 AM Response to Reply #49 |
62. Don't forget, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 01:52 PM Response to Reply #62 |
81. No -- Professor Hill is African American -- and certainly a number of the witnesses vs Thomas |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DrunkenBoat
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 05:56 AM Response to Original message |
50. k&r. So sick of these corrupt pigs that flout the law. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
KansDem
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 04:04 PM Response to Reply #50 |
85. Me, too |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cui bono
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 06:09 AM Response to Original message |
51. Call and write your Rep and ask her/him to do the same!!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Frank Cannon
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 06:16 AM Response to Original message |
52. Now go away, or they will taunt you a second time! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GoCubsGo
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 06:54 AM Response to Original message |
55. Funny how this is the only place where I heard this news. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hue
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 07:00 AM Response to Original message |
56. Well, better late than never... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
A wise Man
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 07:25 AM Response to Original message |
59. Its all about Judges and Politicians.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
CanonRay
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 07:49 AM Response to Original message |
60. Only 10% signed the letter |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 08:09 AM Response to Original message |
61. Shameful, shameful, shameful. Nothing "Supreme" about them. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
avaistheone1
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 05:41 PM Response to Reply #61 |
88. Defintely agree. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
The Wizard
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 09:07 AM Response to Original message |
64. Too little too late |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
disndat
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 10:44 AM Response to Reply #64 |
69. As Churchill said- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HCE SuiGeneris
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 10:50 AM Response to Reply #69 |
70. Keep fighting. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DirkGently
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 10:55 AM Response to Original message |
71. Now we actually have "activist judges," but oddly,no more conservative complaints. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WillyT
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 11:06 AM Response to Original message |
72. K & R !!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lonestarnot
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 11:25 AM Response to Original message |
73. Oh HELL YES! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
leveymg
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 11:36 AM Response to Original message |
75. KNR - INDICT Clarence Thomas. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Uncle Joe
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 12:44 PM Response to Original message |
78. I wish I could recommend this more than once. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
russspeakeasy
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 12:59 PM Response to Original message |
79. A total crock of shit. It runs in their local paper and shows |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Manifestor_of_Light
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 01:03 PM Response to Original message |
80. I know of no "ethics immunity" for the Supremes. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Marnie
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 02:21 PM Response to Original message |
82. Better late than never. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JohnWxy
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 02:59 PM Response to Original message |
84. RECOMMENDED!!!!!!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bertman
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 04:31 PM Response to Original message |
86. Another 'sternly-worded letter'. Those poor justices must be quaking in their boots. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kablooie
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 05:59 PM Response to Original message |
89. The Dems aren't serious about this. Its just campaigning. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wordpix
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 09:12 PM Response to Reply #89 |
92. you apparently don't know my rep, Chris Murphy |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kablooie
![]() |
Sun Sep-11-11 04:03 AM Response to Reply #92 |
93. Oh yeah? Let me tell you something... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Deep13
![]() |
Sat Sep-10-11 08:05 PM Response to Original message |
90. Needs to be in the judiciary committee. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Wed Jun 19th 2024, 02:49 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News |
![]() |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC