sho nuff
Footballguy
Its the type of thing that has sunk other people (lower positions for sure).
Im not saying it should...but its not just some nothing here.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
🏛️ Official Supreme Court nomination thread - Amy Coney Barrett (8 Viewers)
- Thread starter Sinn Fein
- Start date
Im not saying it should...but its not just some nothing here.
Stoneworker
Footballguy
Of course the liberal-biased media is going to use words like "omission" and "failed to disclose" to imply she is nefariously hiding something. When in fact there could be a thousand benign reasons why those events weren't included (e.g. standard of materiality, deemed relevance, etc.)
If the Committee feels they need additional information not included in the original submission, they'll ask for an update. Or bring it up during the hearings.
A spokesperson for the Senate Judiciary Committee told CNN "it is a very normal practice" for Supreme Court nominees to update their questionnaire, noting that several current Supreme Court justices also supplied updated copies.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/09/politics/kfile-amy-coney-barrett-roe-v-wade-talks/index.html
General Malaise
Footballguy
This handmaid stuff is crazy. This is dystopian fiction level stuff. Wow.
jm192
Footballguy
I mean seriously though. Do you think she remembers every talk she gave 7 years ago? Of course you don't.
The devout Catholic is pro-life. People are going to act surprised she gave talks on pro-life things?
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
It’s widely reported People of Praise was the inspiration for The Handmaid’s Tale.
That may not be true
The Z Machine
Footballguy
jm192
Footballguy
The Z Machine
Footballguy
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
I don’t think the dog ate my homework is the standard here
Last edited by a moderator:
sho nuff
Footballguy
Yes...its the liberal media's fault. Of course...always easy to use that as an excuse for everything.
jm192
Footballguy
sho nuff
Footballguy
Ummm...yeah, I think applying for such a position you would remember if you gave such speeches. When you are on track to such positions, yeah, you keep records and keep stuff updated.
The Z Machine
Footballguy
I mean really, the last guy up for SCOTUS pulled out calendars from 30 years ago. These aren't regular folks.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
As a fellow academic, I can promise you that a) I didn't have a "calendar" seven years ago that I can go back and check today and b) if I did, an entry labeled "College Democrats" (or whatever) probably wouldn't jog my memory about what that meeting was about or what I said.
I've had guest appearances in seminars and student groups before, and they're mostly hazy memories because they're just an everyday part of the job. They're not exciting or novel.
I've had guest appearances in seminars and student groups before, and they're mostly hazy memories because they're just an everyday part of the job. They're not exciting or novel.
2Squirrels1Nut
Footballguy
I have my calendars back to the early 90's when I started my career and I'm a big nobody. However, after reading this thread, think I might have a bon fire tonight.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
The only two exceptions that I can think of were times when I was asked to speak about marijuana legalization and Obamacare in my role as an economist. Those were memorable because they involved getting up in front of a large public audience in the evening as part of a panel of speakers. Sitting around and conversing with a student group is a lot more pleasant, involves way less work and preparation, and isn't at all memorable.
The Z Machine
Footballguy
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
BREAKING: The South Carolina Senate debate is been cancelled because Lindsey Graham refused to take a COVID test.
Either he is afraid of the test or he has Covid.
There is no other conclusion.
He’s in a tossup race and just jumped on top of a grenade.
(incredibly enough, people sometimes survive that #truestory)
Terminalxylem
Footballguy
He doesn’t want anything to risk the SCOTUS hearing, including contracting covid or a false positive screening test?BobbyLayne said:
bagger
Footballguy
I mean maybe the Republicans think avoiding debates is a winning strategy. After Election Day if they win, then maybe it is.BobbyLayne said:
Seems like political suicide and your thought regarding the rationale behind it can be the only possible outcomes.
Fascinating for sure.
The Z Machine
Footballguy
Only political nerds are about debates. They are likely going to be even less important after this cycle.
Widbil83
Footballguy
The hearings this week should be fun. Which Democrat is going to try to one up Olbermann?
https://www.foxnews.com/media/keith-olbermann-amy-coney-barrett-trump-prosecuted-removed-society
Stoneworker
Footballguy
Kamala Harris setting a respectful tone for Democrats...doubtful of anything other than a vote along party lines...but hopefully at least no more Feinstein BS.
Democratic vice presidential nominee Kamala Harris said Amy Coney Barrett should "absolutely not" be questioned about her religious beliefs during confirmation hearings for the lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.
“But any questions that are about bias, any questions that are about perspective on adhering to jurisprudence and precedent — of course,” the senator from California said.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/kamala-harris-amy-coney-barrett-faith-off-the-table-during-confirmation
Democratic vice presidential nominee Kamala Harris said Amy Coney Barrett should "absolutely not" be questioned about her religious beliefs during confirmation hearings for the lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.
“But any questions that are about bias, any questions that are about perspective on adhering to jurisprudence and precedent — of course,” the senator from California said.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/kamala-harris-amy-coney-barrett-faith-off-the-table-during-confirmation
Much like confirming a nominee right before an election, court-packing can be good or bad depending on which party is doing it.
Republicans have been the ones doing it lately -- at the state level.
https://www.governing.com/now/Court-Packing-Its-Already-Happening-at-the-State-Level.html
Republicans have been the ones doing it lately -- at the state level.
https://www.governing.com/now/Court-Packing-Its-Already-Happening-at-the-State-Level.html
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
This isn't a Trump thing. It's much worse than that.
I mean, Trump had a Republican senate and Republican house. He could have packed the supreme court if he really wanted to, but he chose not to. Donald Trump had the option of court packing and decided that it was a bridge too far.
For state-level Republicans, however, it's all cool. These governors and state legislators decided to take this banana republic step that even Trump wouldn't take. First of all, these folks are at least as and probably more representative of red-state Republicans than Trump, so the fact that they're willing to do stuff like this suggests that it's less a Trump thing and more of a Republican thing. Second, these people who are state legislators today will be tomorrow's senators and presidential candidates. That bodes very poorly for the party's future.
In other words, I would not be optimistic about the GOP returning to normalcy after Trump. This is going to continue until the party starts paying a price for tearing down norms.
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
I could be wrong in saying this. I have no memory of Trump’s comments on court packing from the 2016-2018 era. But I’m very skeptical that Trump would have been ethically against court packing if the votes were there. McCain, Collins, Murkowski and Flake would have been against it, I’m sure. Probably others.
It would have required legislation subject to filibustering.
Also, a bunch of people in the House would have opposed it -- e.g., Amash. The House seems to be harder to round up and herd in general.
2Squirrels1Nut
Footballguy
Drunken Cowboy
Footballguy
We are already starting to see these type of candidates in federal elections. Look at the Delaware Senate race. We have QANON cultists running in Oregon and Georgia.
This election needs to be a blowout. The GOP needs to lose in red states. I want Kansas and Montana in play.
Stealthycat
Footballguy
I hope they get her in today, tomorrow, this week .... do it, get it done, ram it through
skol asylum
Footballguy
Kamala Harris just killed it. I'm seriously impressed.
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
jm192
Footballguy
whoknew
Footballguy
According to twitter, she used the term "sexual preference." I reckon she did that on purpose.
dgreen
Footballguy
I must have missed that part. I listened to abortion, guns and then ACA. Nothing was sticking.
Dianne showed her incompetence when they were talking about guns and she referenced back to Roe v saying how many people die because of guns. Then she had a long drawn out question about ACA lifetime payouts limits that Amy nicely pointed out has nothing to do with the case coming up in a couple of weeks, saying something like "the court is going to rule on the constitutionality of ACA, it's up to congress to determine the specific benefits it does or doesn't provide".
whoknew
Footballguy
It is not the preferred term because it suggests that being gay is a choice. The preferred term is sexual orientation.
dgreen
Footballguy
whoknew
Footballguy
I'm not watching so take twitter with a grain of salt, but if this is accurate, it seems concerning to punt this question. Especially for a textualist or originalist or whatever she calls herself -I must have missed that part. I listened to abortion, guns and then ACA. Nothing was sticking.
Dianne showed her incompetence when they were talking about guns and she referenced back to Roe v saying how many people die because of guns. Then she had a long drawn out question about ACA lifetime payouts limits that Amy nicely pointed out has nothing to do with the case coming up in a couple of weeks, saying something like "the court is going to rule on the constitutionality of ACA, it's up to congress to determine the specific benefits it does or doesn't provide".
@SenFeinstein: Does the constitution give the president the authority to unilaterally delay a general election under any circumstances?
Judge Barrett: If I give off the cuff answers, I would basically be a "legal pundit." I would need to consult colleagues, clerks & arguments.
Didn't hear that part either, I guess they each have 30 minutes and my commute is only half that.
For most answers I think she's doing a great job of sticking with "rule by law in consultation with the court" instead of giving answers to future hypothetical gotchas. I think that's smart. She has the votes, all she has to do is avoid the scandal.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
I think "punting" on hypothetical questions is how every nominee has handled all such questions for as long as I can remember. So I would take the answer with a grain of salt, even though it seems her likely prepared reply managed to punt in a way which seems a bit dishonest to the specific question asked. (Note- I am not saying she was being dishonest just that it seems she kind of outsmarted herself as I doubt she would "need" to consult those particular sources for this particular question.)
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
spodog
Footballguy
and the trendlines are likely running in directions that will continue to widen that gap.
whoknew
Footballguy
They may punt on some hypotheticals - I understand the case in controversy point. But the timing of the election is right there in the constitution.
If she gets asked, "State A passes a law that requires abortion providers to get certified by the State. Would that be constitutional?" That's not something she likely could or should answer.
But this question? Its pretty easy - ESPECIALLY for an originalist. "The date is prescribed in the constitution. Maybe there is some scenario that I'm not thinking of that would allow the President to move it but I can't think of it off the top of my head."
