PDA

View Full Version : Will Elena Kagan resign?



LWW
07-02-2011, 07:12 PM
Not that she been shown to have given false testimony (http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/breaking-49-house-members-call-investiga) during her confirmation hearings.

Soflasnapper
07-03-2011, 11:26 AM
Article says:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The House members signing their letter to the Judiciary Committee calling for an investigation of Kagan's involvement in Obamacare noted in the letter that federal law prohibits a Supreme Court Justice from participating in a case where her impartiality might be reasonably questioned or where she expressed an opinion on the matter while serving in government office. </div></div>

I don't think this is true, in as much as the rules for federal judges do not apply to SCOTUS justices.

Otherwise, Associate Justice Thomas, having had his wife receive about $850k as an activist against the health care program which he perhaps illegally hid for 8 years or something, would be subject to this same allegedly mandatory recusal, as his impartiality is obviously subject to question.

This is just a pre-emptive early attack so that if Thomas is forced to recuse, they'll get her to recuse also, to defend the 1 vote margin of the 5-4 conservative majority.

LWW
07-03-2011, 04:38 PM
Why can a leftist never discuss a democrook scandal without the obligatory B-B-B-BUT (INSERT LAME ARSED MORAL EQUIVALENCE}!!!!

Soflasnapper
07-03-2011, 06:46 PM
There doesn't appear to be any scandal. You are very credulous when it comes to any charge, if the charge is against the side you disfavor. Apparently, Kagan put the filings and argument over to her assistant in the matter of the health care law's legal disputes.

What IS a key reason for recussal is MONETARY INTEREST. And there is a REAL monetary interest being asserted for Thomas through his spouse, and it is REAL money, being 85% of a million dollars. So much a monetary interest that he appears to have violated the disclosure laws, hiding this money for some 8 years.

So, note, this is not an abstract comparison of some past situation which isn't relevant here. It's an on-going situation of the very highest relevance here.

Rove didn't invent it, but he is the one best known for attacking on an issue his side is most vulnerable on, for the purpose of deflecting attention away from his own side's vulnerability.

It is my opinion that this is exactly what is happening now. Note further that the Rovian-style charge that others are doing what you don't want looked at on your side DOES NOT REQUIRE that the charge is true. And I don't think it is true in this case, given the admitted semi-recussal Kagan already is shown to have taken while in the Solicitor General's office, via her transfer of handling this and related matters to her deputy, as the record shows.

LWW
07-04-2011, 03:01 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><s>There doesn't appear to be any scandal.</s> <span style='font-size: 11pt'>WE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN AT WAR WITH EASTASIA!</span></div></div>

BLACKWHITE: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwhite#Blackwhite)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Applied to a Party member, it means a loyal willingness to say that black is white when Party discipline demands this. But it means also <span style='font-size: 11pt'>the ability to believe that black is white, and more, to know that black is white, and to forget that one has ever believed the contrary.</span> This demands a continuous alteration of the past, made possible by the system of thought which really embraces all the rest, and which is known in Newspeak as doublethink. </div></div>

This after years of wailing and gnashing of teeth from the cabal that we needed an investigation of the Bush regime concerning why they legally dismissed a set of federal prosecutors.

Qtec
07-04-2011, 03:30 AM
Changing the subject.

Q

LWW
07-04-2011, 04:17 AM
Not at all ... but I'm sure you'd like to.

Soflasnapper
07-04-2011, 04:46 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><s>There doesn't appear to be any scandal.</s> <span style='font-size: 11pt'>WE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN AT WAR WITH EASTASIA!</span></div></div>

BLACKWHITE: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwhite#Blackwhite)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Applied to a Party member, it means a loyal willingness to say that black is white when Party discipline demands this. But it means also <span style='font-size: 11pt'>the ability to believe that black is white, and more, to know that black is white, and to forget that one has ever believed the contrary.</span> This demands a continuous alteration of the past, made possible by the system of thought which really embraces all the rest, and which is known in Newspeak as doublethink. </div></div>

This after years of wailing and gnashing of teeth from the cabal that we needed an investigation of the Bush regime concerning why they legally dismissed a set of federal prosecutors. </div></div>

Charges don't make something true. Or do you think they do?

There is big casino going on in the courts with health care right now. Trillions are at stake, and there are many stakeholders with billions directly at stake.

As we've seen, the one appellate court that's weighed in so far has affirmed that the mandate is Constitutional. A tie in the SCOTUS will leave the appellate court's decision in place.

In case Thomas is forced to recuse, and the case for that is far more compelling than these so-far unsubstantiated claims against Kagan, the 5-4 majority becomes a 4-4 tie.

They are frantic to get that to a 4-3 conservative majority vote, and I suspect this is the reason for bringing these charges. There is no way to force Kagan to RESIGN, she'd have to be impeached to remove her. But all they want is to get her to recuse, to insure how the vote goes.

LWW
07-05-2011, 04:30 AM
That was the same court which ruled that the COTUS was unconstitutional you know.

Soflasnapper
07-07-2011, 06:55 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That was the same court which ruled that the COTUS was unconstitutional you know. </div></div>

No, I don't know that, because that was not true.

Was it the same 3 judges? There are more than 3, to my understanding.