General Discussion

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)

45. Did you misplace your reading glasses?

Reply to brooklynite (Reply #44)

Tue May 20, 2014, 11:45 PM

May 2014

I specifically said the contents are secret.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

98 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

How might President Warren deal with the miscreant Supreme Court? [View all] MannyGoldstein May 2014 OP

She can't do anything. hrmjustin May 2014 #1

You might be confusing her with someone else? nt MannyGoldstein May 2014 #3

No Manny. The president can't do anything to the justices. Seperstion of powers. hrmjustin May 2014 #4

Well... She Could Try... If She Were So Inclined... Happened To Samuel Chase... WillyT May 2014 #12

Impeachment authority rests with the (Republican) House of Representatives brooklynite May 2014 #14

God... You Guys Are So Narrow And Literal... She Isn't Even President Yet... WillyT May 2014 #25

So why not give Obama a Dem house and Senate treestar May 2014 #88

Workin On It... WillyT May 2014 #89

Reality just sucks the fun out of everything. Bobbie Jo May 2014 #28

I'm sorry. This is the General Discussion OP of the Week as far as I'm concerned Number23 May 2014 #59

+1 ... 1StrongBlackMan May 2014 #80

You will never get enough votes to impeach on justice on the SC. hrmjustin May 2014 #17

I wouldn't say "never", but it's a pretty steep hill. n/t winter is coming May 2014 #20

I see your point. if they did have the votes you would assume the justice would step down. hrmjustin May 2014 #21

Perhaps. I'm not thinking specifically about any justices we have now, but merely about winter is coming May 2014 #27

If a Justice were arrested for soliciting gay sex in an airport men's room... you still wouldn't. Jim Lane May 2014 #74

I agree yeoman6987 May 2014 #55

She could bring them before that other court ... Scuba May 2014 #63

People sure seem to think the "Bully Pulpit" is magical! VanillaRhapsody May 2014 #78

LOL ... 1StrongBlackMan May 2014 #81

no kidding nt arely staircase May 2014 #95

"People sure seem to think the "Bully Pulpit" is magical!" No, just neglected. Scuba May 2014 #90

so what does it mean and what does it do? VanillaRhapsody May 2014 #91

In the context I used it means reach out to the masses and inspire them to action. Scuba May 2014 #92

You don't get to make up your own definition of it.... VanillaRhapsody May 2014 #93

See? You just don't understand ... 1StrongBlackMan May 2014 #97

I saw her with COLBERT tonight and I'm a True Believer. nt UTUSN May 2014 #2

You were a "False Believer" before? VanillaRhapsody May 2014 #79

She could appoint an Attorney General that would enforce the law. n/t PoliticAverse May 2014 #5

What "law" gives the POTUS the power to ... 1StrongBlackMan May 2014 #83

Making threats like that... greytdemocrat May 2014 #6

How would President Manny "deal" with them? VanillaRhapsody May 2014 #7

I'd ask VanillaRhapsody, of course! nt MannyGoldstein May 2014 #11

I am not the one that thinks a President "deals" with the Supreme Court... VanillaRhapsody May 2014 #19

I don't see her starting an investigation for shits and giggles or to throw a scare into someone. winter is coming May 2014 #8

I get a kick out of fan fiction. JoePhilly May 2014 #9

A President can't do anything to control the Supreme Court. The Velveteen Ocelot May 2014 #10

I believe that Congress has the right to act when judges won't recuse themselves MannyGoldstein May 2014 #13

They may have the right (that is, the Constitutional power) to act The Velveteen Ocelot May 2014 #15

The gop controls congress. hrmjustin May 2014 #18

LOL ... 1StrongBlackMan May 2014 #85

She won't do anything at all..... brooklynite May 2014 #16

First, she has to be willing to run for the office. longship May 2014 #22

Hillary's said repeatedly that she won't run in 2016 MannyGoldstein May 2014 #26

Of course, Hillary hasn't suggested that someone else run brooklynite May 2014 #29

The *secret* letter again? MannyGoldstein May 2014 #31

Not so secret... brooklynite May 2014 #40

Can you provide a link to the letter? MannyGoldstein May 2014 #42

Ah! So you think the Washington Post made up a direct quote from Elizabeth Warren... brooklynite May 2014 #44

Did you misplace your reading glasses? MannyGoldstein May 2014 #45

The letter was sent to Hillary yeoman6987 May 2014 #56

And BTW, which is more presidential... MannyGoldstein May 2014 #51

You're wasting your time Cali_Democrat May 2014 #62

because none of this is actually about supporting Warren for President JI7 May 2014 #68

Bingo! n/t zappaman May 2014 #76

You want a letter, Manny????? I'm still waiting for you to provide a letter from your friend...... msanthrope May 2014 #96

Meh! longship May 2014 #35

Did Hillary deliberately lie the many times she ruled out running MannyGoldstein May 2014 #37

I thought the issue was Warren, not Hillary. longship May 2014 #53

Because the double standard is... interesting MannyGoldstein May 2014 #65

Well Hillary has explicitly said she is thinking of running, and Warren has said the opposite. longship May 2014 #66

Why do you always bring up Hillary? nt Cali_Democrat May 2014 #64

FDR had some ideas on this issue. Nye Bevan May 2014 #23

Remind me how that worked out... brooklynite May 2014 #30

If FDR had just had more self control, MannyGoldstein May 2014 #34

Assuming you can, would you really want to open that door? Throd May 2014 #24

Democratic SCOTUS justices haven't had blatant flaming conflict of interest issues MannyGoldstein May 2014 #33

But that wouldn't keep a Republican president from messing with them for political gain. Throd May 2014 #38

If Republicans could have, they would have MannyGoldstein May 2014 #41

I am guessing that SHE knows how to use a bully pulpit. Agony May 2014 #32

So you're looking for a czarina frazzled May 2014 #36

I'm looking for a president who fights like hell for the 99% MannyGoldstein May 2014 #39

So separation of powers is conditional for you depending on who sits in the oval office? Throd May 2014 #43

No. The law says that Congress can act, MannyGoldstein May 2014 #47

And you'll be fine with this if there is a Republican president and Republican majority in Congress? Throd May 2014 #50

Sorry: you said she would start an investigation of SCOTUS frazzled May 2014 #46

I'm suggesting nothing that's not codified in law MannyGoldstein May 2014 #48

The president does not rule Congress, either frazzled May 2014 #54

Remember when President Obama grabbed the "fiscal cliff" talks MannyGoldstein May 2014 #57

Add more seats to it. yourout May 2014 #49

Won't happen. IronGate May 2014 #52

"In 1869, Congress set the Court's size to nine members, where it has remained since." bobduca May 2014 #71

She can add justices mwrguy May 2014 #58

No. She. Can't. onenote May 2014 #69

She will do nothing, Rincewind May 2014 #60

Actually, the House is supposed to start the impeachment process. JDPriestly May 2014 #61

Your guess is wronger than wrong. onenote May 2014 #67

Probably not much since she will end up supporting Hillary in 2016 book_worm May 2014 #70

My thoughts? I find most of your posts to be amusing. I also find some of them lacking ... 11 Bravo May 2014 #72

she would blast them with her anti-Oligarchy ray! arely staircase May 2014 #73

hahaha. nt Cali_Democrat May 2014 #75

She woud, probably, ... 1StrongBlackMan May 2014 #77

Congress can investigate SCOTUS, specifically in the current circumstance MannyGoldstein May 2014 #82

Yeah ... 1StrongBlackMan May 2014 #86

Why wait to do something? ProSense May 2014 #84

What has she ever done to make you think she'd abuse her powers treestar May 2014 #87

Right wing senators would block anyone who was not "acceptable to them" SoCalDem May 2014 #94

She's slip on her ... 1StrongBlackMan May 2014 #98