Bandit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-27-04 10:21 AM
Original message |
Will anyone be surprized when the Supreme Court overrules both lower |
|
court rulings? Does anyone here think the Extreme Court won't rule for Cheney? How do you think they will justify their overruling two lower court rulings? I wonder what grounds they even have to take the case in the first place. Same as when they took the Bush* vs Gore case. Bush* had no legal standing. How they took on a case without anyone having standing will always be a wonder to the legal establishment. This one will also be a wonder.
|
MadinMD
(88 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-27-04 10:29 AM
Response to Original message |
1. I honestly don't think they will overrule it |
|
Honestly, it's an open and shut case. Executive privledge simply doesn't extend to the level the Bushies are trying to make it. I figure we'll get a 5-4 or 6-3 decision on the topic. Scalia, Rhenquist, and Thomas are definate dissenters.
|
Beetwasher
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-27-04 10:31 AM
Response to Original message |
2. Actually, I Won't Be Surprised When The Rule Against Cheney and |
|
he ignores them...What are they gonna do to him if he does that?
|
prodigal_green
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-27-04 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
Beetwasher
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-27-04 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
|
But I won't be holding my breath...
|
whistle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-27-04 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
5. If Cheney defies a Supreme Court ruling against him... |
|
...that would be great. Remember Spiro T Agnew, Richard Nixon's VP? He got booted out of office.
|
tishaLA
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-27-04 10:32 AM
Response to Original message |
4. Cheney is not going to win this case |
|
I'm listening to it now and there is NO WAY they are buying Ted Olson's convoluted attempts at logic. Hell, I don't even know whether Renquist will go along with it.
|
tridim
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-27-04 10:44 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
10. The question is, would he have won if the hunting trip |
|
hadn't been made public? I think that was a major phuckup.
|
underpants
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-27-04 10:35 AM
Response to Original message |
6. The precident goes bakc to Geo.Washington and........... |
beyurslf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-27-04 10:39 AM
Response to Original message |
|
But the SC will toss it back to the lower courts and the admin will still drag its feet and put up hurdles ... anything to put off giving over documents until after the election. And when they give the documents, it will 100,000 pages of crap so it takes months to go through it all.
|
Warpy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-27-04 10:42 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
|
....has been the strategy all along. The good news is that without being charged with a specific crime, Cheney can't be pardoned by Idiot. I think Cheney will lose this one, then drag his feet until after the election. I also think the opinion will be a good read, and the dissenting opinion from Scalia, Thomas and Rehnquist will be hilarious.
|
Ready4Change
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-27-04 10:39 AM
Response to Original message |
8. I'll be surprised if they DON'T overrule the lower courts. |
kskiska
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-27-04 02:12 PM
Response to Original message |
|
From Drudge:
Supreme Court appears skeptical of letting the public have a look into private White House policy meetings, hearing a challenge to privacy claims for the vice president's energy task force. Justice Antonin Scalia warns about opening presidents to snooping outsiders and worrisome lawsuits... Developing...
|
napi21
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-27-04 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
13. Drudge isn't always right! Wait and see. |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Tue May 07th 2024, 09:18 PM
Response to Original message |