Maurile Tremblay

Admin
  • Content count

    37,886
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Maurile Tremblay last won the day on August 30 2016

Maurile Tremblay had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

4,676 Excellent

About Maurile Tremblay

  • Rank
    Footballguy

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    San Diego Chargers

Recent Profile Visitors

40,090 profile views
  1. "The AHCA is the Harriet Miers of legislation." -- Jeffrey Young (Fair in some ways, but probably overly harsh to Miers.)
  2. Speaking of special elections, this is pretty funny. A special election was held this past Tuesday in North Philadelphia for a seat in the state house of representatives. There was only one candidate on the ballot -- Republican Lucinda Little -- obviously making her the huge favorite to win. She came in third. Two Democratic write-in candidates finished ahead of her.
  3. Right, that's what I think too. I would be totally stunned. On the other hand ask yourself these two questions: 1. Could you see someone like Vladimir Putin or Robert Mugabe doing something like that? 2. Have you seen anything from Trump that leads you to believe he has greater morality or respect for government and the people than either of those two men? Moreover, the "Fire Comey!" theme has apparently been popular lately in comments on various websites (e.g., /r/The_Donald), and for all I know, has been picked up by Hannity or someone similar. So he could fire Comey for basically the same reason that he so suddenly fired all those US Attorneys.
  4. Ezra Klein: "On Wednesday, I wrote about the closing argument President Donald Trump was making to skittish Republican legislators. Vote for the bill, he’s been telling them, or you’ll lose your seat. That night, I received a call from a Democratic senator. He’d read the piece, and it had reminded him of the closing argument President Barack Obama made to skittish Democratic legislators. Vote for the bill, Obama told them, because it’s worth losing your seat."
  5. Right. Before the election, I thought there were a lot of very important reasons to vote against Trump. I can admit to having made a mistake: I severely underestimated the quantity and strength of those reasons.
  6. People I'd support in a 2020 Presidential run: Adam Schiff Susan Collins Evan McMullin James Comey Al Franken (Non-exhaustive list because I'm not at all familiar with everybody who might be in play.)
  7. Say the allegations that Trump facilitated Russia's meddling in the 2016 election are true. Apparently that would not amount to treason. So what would it amount to? What laws might he have violated? (I think it would certainly be a "misdemeanor" as that word was understood by those who ratified the Constitution. So he should be impeached in this scenario. But what crimes might he be prosecuted for, if any?)
  8. The Steele dossier said that Carter Page, when he was in Moscow to give an anti-US speech last July, was offered a commission on the sale of 19% of Rosneft in return for causing US sanctions against Russia to be lifted. (Link.) This was before the sale occurred, so the dossier's prediction regarding the magnitude of the sale was eerily close if it was actually 19.5%. If Trump's 0.5% was a late addition, that neatly accounts for the small discrepancy.
  9. The latest: Trump is threatening that if the House doesn't pass the bill to repeal Obamacare, Trump will just go ahead and leave Obamacare in place. Comment by Susan Hennessey: POTUS nailed it. That is indeed how laws work.
  10. Someone posted but I didn't see a link. I'd love one. Reporters asked him a bunch of times if the "new information" that caused Nunes to hold a press conference and report to the White House had actually been given to him by the White House in the first place. He refused to answer.
  11. More specifically, they should have given him an up vote. Same as Gorsuch should get. They're both intelligent, knowledgeable judges who seem concerned with ruling correctly, in good faith, in accordance with the law, even if we disagree with one or both of them much of the time on particularly difficult issues. I hate what the Republicans did to Garland. I'd like that sort of behavior to stop.
  12. Maybe that's true if you view the Supreme Court as a policy-making organ. Realistically, to some extent, it is that. But ideally, it should rise above politics. Politicians should vote for stuff they personally support (or stuff that their constituents support). Judges, on the other hand, should vote in accordance with the law even if it goes against what they personally support. They should be apolitical. It's naive to think that the court will be completely apolitical. But it's a goal worth striving for, IMO, even if we can never quite get there. We should just try to inch closer to it wherever we can. Politicizing it, however, because "Yay, my team! Boo, your team!" just takes us further and further away from that goal -- which, IMO, is to our constitutional shame.
  13. This kind of ever-escalating war is exactly what I'd like to see avoided. When it comes to health care or other policy matters, fine, go to war. But leave the Supreme Court out of it, please.