NBC Legal Analyst Pete Williams Says it is Unconstitutional to Appoint Hillary SOS.

[MadBadger]

It will still happen anyway, but Obama would be going against the constitution.

Just an interesting fact

Just saw on MSNBC


Edit: For those who havent seen the issue, the SOS has had its pay increased while she was serving in the Senate. Therefore, she cannot be appointed into that job as to Article 1 Sec 6 Clause 2

[GodlessBiker]

1. Any clue as to WHY it would be unconstitutional?

[Vincardog]

2. I smell BS

[KansDem]

8. "NBC Legal Analyst "

I'll go with the learned crowd that is the Obama transition team...

[JaneQPublic]

68. Williams = legal issues reporter. Obama = Constitutional scholar/professor. (nt)

[KansDem]

91. And that's all we really need to know...(nt)

[high density]

3. So Clinton steps down as senator and then is appointed

Constitutional.

[polmaven]

90. Actually, he is pushing the meme

that since she was a Senator when the SOS salary was raised, it won't matter what she does now, it will be unconstitutional.

Sorry, but I will believe the Constitutional scholar over the "legal analyst", thank you.

[TheWraith]

143. Actually, he's right, it would be illegal. However, this has been skirted before.

I forget who it was, but the solution was for the position's pay to be lowered to what it was at the beginning of the person's senate term. It worked back then, at any rate. Whether that's okay by the letter of the law, I have no idea. If it weren't, you can bet that some Senator will make sure it gets attention.

[Kalyke]

162. He is right.

And, he's a bit more than a "legal issues reporter."

Granted, he worked for Republicans, but he did work as a legal assistant and at the Pentagon.

I'd rather Obama research this a bit more. It may be something Congress can overcome with a bill - but it may be a lynchpin in undermining the Obama Administration - and I don't want to see that.

[dennis4868]

4. why would it be....

unconstitutional?

[SIMPLYB1980]

5. LOL!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Williams

"Prior to joining NBC, Williams served as a press official on Capitol Hill for many years. In 1986 he joined the Washington, DC staff of then Congressman Dick Cheney as press secretary and a legislative assistant."

[bunnies]

7. pwned. nt

[MadBadger]

12. Pete Williams has been a pretty fair legal analyst for NBC

[SIMPLYB1980]

32. Fair like FAUX news.

[MadBadger]

34. Do you have evidence based on his reporting that he isnt fair?

[SIMPLYB1980]

41. Can you find any evidence that he is fair based on his reporting?

[MadBadger]

50. Again, A reporter is assumed neutral. Therefore the onus is on you to declare bias

You cant claim hes biased and not have any proof.

[SIMPLYB1980]

103. Here is one, but I will not waste anymore of my time researching this RW blowhard.

http://dailynightly.msnbc.com/2005/10/waiting_for_fit.html

He got removed from covering the CIA leak story.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dan-carol/reassign-nbcs-pete-willi_b_9814.html

[Maven]

29. HAHAHA

[Ian David]

61. Just because he's EVIL doesn't mean he's WRONG. n/t

[ashling]

6. What is his reasoning?

:shrug:

[wyldwolf]

9. her last name is Clinton

[Whisp]

10. probably the money from foreign government things her husband is into.

just a guess tho

[jenmito]

13. It's something to do with not being Constitutional to take someone out of the Senate and

appoint them to your Cabinet if it means an increase in salary.

[No Elephants]

102. No. It is about voting on a raise for the position of SOS, then becoming SOS.

[LostinVA]

156. Exactly -- so, take the raise/advantage away, and it's okay

[Lex]

11. Dude is a former employee of Dick Cheney (and you know how right he is

about the Constitution).

[MadBadger]

18. Thats kind of a cop out

[Lex]

23. in what respect, Charlie?

[MadBadger]

27. Can you give me proof by his reporting that hes unfair to the left and favors the right?

[Lex]

33. Can you prove to me that he's a neutral reporter?

nt

[MadBadger]

39. The Onus is on you my friend. A reporter is assumed to start out neutral

You were the one to make the charge that he isnt, so whats ur proof?

[Lex]

48. You were the one urging us to believe him. Why should I?

nt

[MadBadger]

51. Ok, so you have no proof.

I wasnt urging you to believe him, I just think that its a cop out to dismiss him for something you just read on Wikipedia.

[Lex]

54. 1. I trust Obama over Pete Williams. 2. His association with Cheney

kills his credibility.

[MadBadger]

58. Tim Russert was COS for Daniel Patrick Moynahan. That sure didnt kill his credibility

I never saw people here claiming he was too liberal. Instead, some said he was in the pocket of the right.

So again, based on his reporting, do you have any proof that hes biased against the dems?

[Lex]

70. Well, we'll see what kind of credibility Williams has pretty soon, won't we?

Because if this story is crap, then he's a crap peddler and thus has no credibility. I'll bookmark this thread. In a week's time, we'll know for certain.

[MadBadger]

71. So dont you think its a little unfair to pre-emptively declare he has no credibility?

[LostinVA]

77. He has no cred on this -- there is bipartisan precedence stretching back to 1909

Williams is just being a closeted dick.

[MadBadger]

85. He stated its unconstitutional, but often ignored.

Oh, and Id hardly call him closeted.

[LostinVA]

89. He isn't NOW since he was OUTED

[jenmito]

133. You obviously didn't see what he said today or you wouldn't have made such a statement

since HE SAID THERE WAS PRECEDENT and NAMED the 4 other examples. You sure are quick to attack without knowing all the facts. :eyes:

[LostinVA]

158. No, I watched it -- he said it was unconstitutional, when it patently isn't

So, take your :eyes: and quit attacking me.

[jenmito]

167. If you really DID watch it, you didn't understand it since HE named the other times

it was done-bipartisan-which your post implied he didn't make any mention of when you said, "He has no cred on this -- there is bipartisan precedence stretching back to 1909."

You have some nerve claiming I'M attacking YOU when YOU started posting to me first, accusing me of things that were totally false. :eyes: (Just look at your post #38 to me.)

[Lex]

83. No, because I have a perfect right to my opinion about him due

to his association with Cheney. We'll see if I'm right or not in a few days.

PS - I also didn't believe Iraq had WMDs, despite what the "neutral" media was pushing on that story.

[yardwork]

101. Gasp! You dare to suggest that the news media is NOT always neutral???

You can't say that!!!!


casting asparagus on news reporters who are always neutral unless proven - in a court of law - to be un-neutral.

[yardwork]

19. Right being the operative word.

See my thread just posted here.

[HughMoran]

137. Since this is the 3rd time this theory has been posted, don't shoot the source

This is a valid issue - you can blame the source if you like, but DUers who have inside info have posted that this is a real issue and may prevent Hillary from serving.

[emulatorloo]

14. Hey Pete, you forgot that Obama taught constitutional law

EOM

[S_E_Fudd]

15. Except she can ...

This has come up in the past...most recently with Lloyd Bentsen. Congress simply rolls back the increase until the member resigns.

[MadBadger]

16. Pete said that constitutional scholars say that doesnt fix things, but people just ignore it.

[S_E_Fudd]

17. Depends on the interpretation...

In either case...as a practical matter it is pretty meaningless...

[jenmito]

20. He cited "Article 1, Section 6" of the Constitution which says...

"no member of Congress can be appointed to a Federal job if, during the time they were in Congress, the salary was raised of that Federal job" which it was.

[LostinVA]

24. They are really stretching here, that's for sure

:eyes:

[jenmito]

31. They're just pointing out the Constitution. They went on to cite 4 examples of it

happening.

[S_E_Fudd]

37. And how many of those didn't get appointed?

The only reason it is getting publicity is because it is Hillary...

[LostinVA]

40. Bingo -- if it was Kerry, there wouldn't be one thread about it one here

And, it would just be mentioned in passing in the MSM (ie other times its happened).

[karynnj]

62. Actually there would be 5 of them

This seems to be a non-issue. An easy solution if people are really concerned is that HRC can decline the amount of the raise (as JK could have) It has likely happened many times in the past as Senators have entered cabinet positions. It seems likely that - Muskie, who was both a long time Senator and a S0S - at some point had voted for a raise.

[LostinVA]

80. Yeah, I checked: Saxe wasn't the first -- the first instance was in 1909

[karynnj]

97. So, there is a wealth of precedent here

[LostinVA]

159. Yes -- as recently as Bill Clinton, when Poppy helped okay Bentsen

[jenmito]

53. None of them, which they SAID. A LOT of things that don't usually get publicity will

get publicity because it is Hillary.

[LostinVA]

38. THis has been posted over and over and over again on here -- it is NOT a big deal

She -- or Kerry or whomever is in the Senate -- can still do it.

Hey, questioning PE Obama's birth certificate is also just "pointing out the Constitution." Guess what? JUST AS BOGUS.

[jenmito]

56. Why are you telling ME it's not a big deal? Did I say it IS? I didn't start

this thread. I simply quoted what was said since I was watching MSNBC. Jeez.

[LostinVA]

81. You just seemed to be acting like it was a bid deal

:shrug:

[jenmito]

86. In what regard, Charlie?

Seriously though. How?

[LostinVA]

Firstly, my name isn't "Charlie," secondly, you were very insistent

Just like you're being now.

[jenmito]

96. Um, I was quoting Sarah Palin. It was a joke which is why in my message I said

"Seriously though..." How in the world was I being very insistent? All I did was state exactly what Pete Williams said and you started posting to me. You seem a little unnecessarily defensive and "very insistent" yourself. :shrug:

[pampango]

78. Just because an article of the constitution applies to her situation, as it has to others,

doesn't make it a big deal. Bush has taught us that the constitution is a flexible document. Various articles and requirements therein can be ignored at will if they inconvenience us in achieving our goal.

I know, I know. Many will say that we have been ranting for 8 years about a president that ignores the constitution when it is convenient for him. While some here may want to now follow the constitution to the letter, others realize that the shoe is on the other foot and it is our time to take advantage. ;)

[S_E_Fudd]

25. Not unique to Hillary...

Same thing with Bentsen...Congress rolls back the increase

[jenmito]

36. They said it wasn't unique to Hillary. They cited 4 examples. n/t

[LostinVA]

82. And Poppy Bush did his

[ShadowLiberal]

142. Wouldn't that disqualify all of congress from serving in a presidential cabinet then?

Much as I agree with the need to limit pay raises on congress, it's not like pay raises done a few years ago for positions like SOS were done by a person in congress intending to take that job later.

Just so long as they don't vote for a pay raise for the job they know they're going to take when the new president is sworn in I don't see a problem with that.

[ProSense]

21. More info

here

[bunnies]

22. I bet it has something to do with her birth certificate!

Its a conspiracy I tell you!! :rofl:

[LostinVA]

26. Seriesly

Both the MSM and some DUers are beyond losing it.

[PBS Poll-435]

30. This is HUGH

And even HUGHER is that Drudge is keeping this under-wraps....

And you know how much he **hearts** Hillary.

[bunnies]

35. No kidding.

Theres more threads like this *here* than over in freeptard land. I checked this AM for comparison. It was a definite reality check.

[LostinVA]

44. This is one time I ahte being right and saying,

"I told my Bunnies so!"

Ugh. I am tired of it!

[Shiver]

28. If this is accurrate...

Then Kerry can't get the spot either.

[Sebastian Doyle]

42. Why go through all the hassle of trying to fit a senator into this job

<--- when the best qualified candidate is a governor, and doesn't have such complications.

[onehandle]

43. This again? It's BULLSHIT.

Period.

[JuniperLea]

45. Obama taught Constitutional Law...

I think he knows what he's doing.

Gosh... just saw it on MSNBC... must be true, huh? Hmmm...

[onehandle]

72. No, no! The sky is falling!

Wishful thinking in DU land if you ask me.

[JuniperLea]

92. Have DUers been without goodness so long they sabotage their own happiness?

I'm beginning to wonder...

[BootinUp]

46. Pete Williams revealed his nuttiness

maybe 5 years ago, and has gone downhill since.

[AtomicKitten]

47. Obama has yet to make a formal offer of SoS and there must be a reason why.

We can only guess.

[S_E_Fudd]

49. You know this how?...nt

[LostinVA]

52. A highly-placed source on a blog

[Lex]

55. LOL.

Primary source, obviously. :P

[S_E_Fudd]

57. Nothing more reliable than an anonymous poster...

Using inside information from an anonymous blogger...

You can take what they say to the bank!!

[LostinVA]

84. Hey, I've known them a long time and they've NEVER been wrong!

[yardwork]

100. Dick Cheney's former spokesperson is even more reliable, though.

[AtomicKitten]

59. The Obama camp has reiterated that no formal offer has been made, that the vetting process is

moving along "nicely," but it's still up in the air. What we are seeing is Kabuki Theater being played out in the press to manipulate and perhaps short-circuit the vetting process because of Bill's sticky foreign entanglements. If all goes well, the Obama camp plans to announce the formal offer at the end of this week.

[S_E_Fudd]

60. Guess I missed that announcement...

Don't see it on Change.gov...

Maybe you can send a link

[AtomicKitten]

126. you missed the announcement of a formal offer because there was none, not yet

[ProSense]

63. This was the only thing I could find

CNN:

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson is expected to be named secretary of commerce, and Obama aides also have said that the president-elect is "on track" to nominate Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York as his secretary of state after Thanksgiving.

So the poster is correct: a formal offer has not been made, and no official announcement.

[S_E_Fudd]

64. And how does this prove no formal offer has been made?...

Because CNN says so?

[ProSense]

66. Can you prove that one has been made? How do you know what has happened?

Can you even point to a rumor that said a formal offer has been made?

[S_E_Fudd]

69. No...but I didn't make the claim...

Nice try

[ProSense]

73. So you're questioning someone else's opinion when you don't know anything.

The post was an opinion supported by the fact that no formal announcement has been made. You can't prove there was an announcement so the poster is correct: everything is speculation.

[S_E_Fudd]

87. Hmmm...

I'm beginning to think you didn't actually read the original post...

For your reference...

"Obama has yet to make a formal offer of SoS and there must be a reason why. "

Looks like a blanket statement, and the assumption on which she bases her subsequent comment

I asked how she knows...

And you post an unsubtantiated report from CNN as "proof"

I didn't say a formal offer had been made and I didn't say one hadn't been made...AK did...I simply asked for her source.

If she doesn't know...that's fine...but that makes her original post incorrect and she should clarify it

[AtomicKitten]

65. thanks for the link

but I think the truth of this process holds little sway with some

[S_E_Fudd]

67. Again...

How does this prove a formal offer has not been made?

[AtomicKitten]

76. It's political theater, a dance. No worries, you can think whatever you want.

You are being taken in by the illusion of it, just as intended with this being played out in the press. But the vetting process continues and no formal offer of SoS will be made until it is completed and cleared. It is what it is.

[S_E_Fudd]

95. And you know this how?...nt

[AtomicKitten]

98. Obama is holding the Secretary of Commerce nomination.

What does that mean to you? To me it means Bill Richardson is still a viable contender for SoS. Vetting for Clinton is "on track" for SoS per the Obama camp. If she fails, it appears Richardson is on deck, ergo no formal offer has been made. It's still up in the air.

But, again, please feel free to believe whatever you want. You will have an answer by week's end, apparently.

[S_E_Fudd]

99. I don't know what it meams...

That's the point...neither do you...

There are several qualifiers available in the English language to use to indicate your statements are opinion and speculation...using them could help you avoid unnecessary confusion

[ProSense]

105. "indicate your statements are opinion and speculation" What are you trying to prove?

Based on your original question, "You know this how?", are you challenging her to prove her opinion?

Last I checked, people are allowed to have opinions. You can disagree, but challenging someone's opinion that no formal offer has been made when Obama has made no announcement doesn't make any sense.

[S_E_Fudd]

107. She didn't state an opinion...

She stated it as fact

[AtomicKitten]

109. here's a link that was posted on Huffington Post

Again, you are free to believe whatever you want. This is a discussion board.

http://m.huffpost.com/top/6978/full/

Update 11/20: The New York Times reports that suspected leaks from the Clinton team are angering Obama aides and may threaten Hillary Clinton's position.

Both sides were engaged in a delicate public and private dance, maneuvering for position and reputation in case the deal falls through. Aides in each camp have grown increasingly sour toward the other in recent days as the matter played out publicly.

In their public signals, the Clintons are trying to take the former president's activities off the table as an issue, in their view eliminating any excuses for Mr. Obama not to give Mrs. Clinton the job. Some in the Obama camp are bristling at what they see as strategic leaks by the Clintons aimed at boxing in the president-elect and forcing him to offer the post.

[S_E_Fudd]

110. Here's one for you...one that's not almost a week old...

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has agreed to stay on under President-elect Obama, according to officials in both parties. Obama plans to announce a national-security team early next week that includes Gates at the Pentagon and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) as secretary of State, officials said.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15986.html

[AtomicKitten]

112. expects to if she passes the vetting process which is still in progress

no worries, you can and obviously will believe whatever you want ... no skin off my nose, it is what it is

[S_E_Fudd]

113. In your opinion right?

:-)

[AtomicKitten]

115. Again, please feel free to believe whatever you want.

I base my opinion on the information available.

[S_E_Fudd]

116. Really...

Or only information you want to believe?

[AtomicKitten]

120. really, you can believe whatever you want, but be sure to clap loud enough for Tinkerbelle

[S_E_Fudd]

114. Really? It is?

On Thursday night, aides said that the vetting issues have been resolved, and the selection could occur soon, perhaps immediately after Thanksgiving.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/11/20/hillary_clinton_nomination_is.html

[AtomicKitten]

118. sounds like the same blog chatter you & yours were dissing upthread

Can't have it both ways.

Believe whatever you want. You seem to require that blankie.

Me? I'll wait until Obama makes a formal announcement of the job offer.

[S_E_Fudd]

121. But I didn't claim them as fact...

You did...

Do you think they are reliable or not?

Or are only those that fit your preconceived notions reliable?

[AtomicKitten]

124. "on track" in vetting does not equal a formal offer. Sorry. I know how much you want to believe.

clap louder

[AtomicKitten]

136. >>>>>> Hey, where's that link to Obama formally offering (nominating) Clinton for SoS?

Since I can't prove a negative - that she, in fact, has not been formally offered SoS - this is your opportunity to explain why you've gone down the rabbit hole on this. First of all, you're wrong. And the fact that it looks like he's going to nominate her, maybe, next week doesn't count. Please show me where he formally offered her the job and I'll be glad to stand corrected. Secondly, who the hell cares about this minutia anyway? I have to stop following people down the rabbit hole. It's just that some people here whenever the Clintons are involved lose their damn minds. They see them in a bubble that has no connection with reality. The denial of some of the most nasty shit that went down during the primaries is insulting. Really. But, hey, I digress.

It's a new day. Let's save our arguments for foreign policy and so much more when the show actually starts 1-20-09. I can't wait. :)

[S_E_Fudd]

148. Are you purposely being obtuse?

As I have said MORE THAN ONCE now..I don't know if she was offered it or not...

But I wasn't claiming he had one way or the other YOU WERE

[AtomicKitten]

153. So, where's the link? You adamantly disagreed that no formal offer had been made.

Your proof would be a link to a formal offer.

Still waiting.

[S_E_Fudd]

163. C'mon...

You have to be smarter than this...

Point to exactly where I said an offer had been made...

[AtomicKitten]

164. So you've got nothing, right? Check.

[S_E_Fudd]

165. With reference to my previous post...

I guess not

[WildEyedLiberal]

144. Honestly.... HOW did the Obama camp not see this coming?

I was so ridiculously impressed by Obama's seamless campaign. I was also impressed with the transition... up until all the Hillary BS started coming to light. And now Obama's camp is angry at the leaks and the media circus? With all due respect to the President-Elect, WTF did he THINK was going to happen? Did he honestly think considering Hillary Clinton for a major cabinet post would be a drama-free and private affair? Of COURSE these are "strategic leaks designed to box in the President-elect and force him to offer her the post." That's what all this bullshit has been since her name was first floated.

[AtomicKitten]

146. It turns out the Clinton camp fabricated the SoS offer. Link inside:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=7928330&mesg_id=7928330

[WildEyedLiberal]

147. I suspected that from the beginning

Her people make a tentative exploration sound like a done deal, force Obama into bumping her up the priority list, box him into choosing her or else look like he led her on.

That is 100% typical of the Clinton MO, so color me not surprised by any of this, at all...

[AtomicKitten]

161. Even more mind-numbing are those

that absolutely refuse to believe it. I used to be one of that herd. The thing is, the Clinton mess has been so overt the last couple years, only a blind man could miss it.

[PBS Poll-435]

104. It means, to me, that Obama is announcing, (or leaking,) his picks in waves.

First State.

Then Treasury/Financial Team.

Then Commerce.

Then Transportation.

.
.
.

[onehandle]

79. The offer has been made. The announcement will be after Thanksgiving.

This much we know.

It may not be Hillary. But it's going to be.

[AtomicKitten]

94. Vetting comes BEFORE the formal offer, and she is still knee-deep in vetting.

If she satisfies Obama's vetters who have famously said, "candidates are considered guilty until proven innocent," then the vetting which is now described as "on track" will be completed. Obama expects the process to be done by week's end. If she fails the vetting, he will nominate someone else, and I have no doubt others are up for consideration and are also probably being vetted quietly, the way it was meant to be done.

[Beacool]

74. Frankly, I don't give a damn anymore.

As much as I think that Hillary would be an awesome SOS, I'm not thrilled at the prospect of seeing her in a job where she will lose her independence and serve at someone else's pleasure. Aside from all the work that needs to be done with the domestic agenda, particularly her "baby" health care. She may not have seniority in the senate, but she does have plenty of pull. I hate to see her leave the senate, her voice and dedication are needed there.

:(

[LostinVA]

75. If HRC accepts the position, the "Saxe Fix" will kick in -- it's a Dem Congress

Good grief, even Poppy Bush okayed a Saxe for Bill Clinton. This is NOT a big deal -- only the MSM and some posters are making it such. There is a precedent going back to 1909. The ONLY question is: would teh salary have to be rolled back to - pre-2006 or pre-2000?

[Thrill]

88. This probably explains why. Axelrod said the Commerce Secretary wouldn't be named this week

.

[PBS Poll-435]

93. We just need to wait 24 "business hours."

[ecstatic]

106. msnbc lady says they can just go back to the old pay rate

to work around the issue. It has happened to past presidents, or at least that's what she said.

[last1standing]

108. From what I read it does mean that Clinton is inelegible, however...

Wouldn't that have precluded any Senator (i.e. McCain) who held office when Congress increased presidential pay (during Clinton's term but took effect only when bush* took office) from being appointed as President?

Obviously, this section of Article One did not take into account modifying information such as inflation or increased responsibilities and should be repealed.

However, does Obama want to start his tenure with a breach of the Constitution? A small one, yes, but a breach nonetheless.

[MadBadger]

111. You arent appointed President, you are elected.

[northernlights]

119. unless you're *

in which case you're not elected, you're Selected. Or appointed by SCOTUS.

[last1standing]

122. 'Appointed' is a somewhat elastic term in that respect.

Do the people appoint a president? Remember, it is not the will of the people that decides an election but the decision of representatives from each state who make their decisions based on the will of their electorate. In this regard you could say that the electoral college 'appoints' the new president.

[polichick]

117. It's true - but Obama can get around it the way others have if he wants to.

[ErinBerin84]

123. I saw that too.

Pete Williams pointed out other times in presidential history that this has happened and said they can get around it, but I think the pay rate would just be lowered to the rate that it was at before the vote. Interesting though.

[Lyric]

125. It's called the Saxbe Fix

They just reduce the salary back to the level it was before she took office.

But you probably knew that already.

:eyes:

[GreenPartyVoter]

127. I didn't know about either things, myself.

[Metric System]

128. "Obama would be going against the constitution." It's funny, I said in a thread days ago that

the Usual Suspects would eventually embarrass or attack Obama as long as it helped in their anti-Hillary agenda. And here we are.

[Catherine Vincent]

129. I'm not into shooting the messenger but it figures you would

post this nonsense. :eyes:

[Thrill]

130. If thats the Constitution Obama and Hillary should respect it. We can't bash Bush and his cronies

for shitting on the Constitution. And then try to overlook parts of it when its convenient.

[pampango]

149. Well said. We don't want to be guilty of the dreaded "hypocrisy",

especially on something as important as the Constitution. :)

Besides, it seems that other presidents "gotten around" this with respect to their appointments, while respecting the Constitution at the same time.

[laugle]

131. Why am I not surprised this

CRAP is on MSNBC?? I've seen nothing on this anywhere else in the MSM! When I see crap, I turn the channel..............no wonder they always have the lowest ratings.

MSNBC shows are not news, they are entertainment! There agenda is always about causing conflict and divisivness, 2 things we don't need right now! They care only about ratings and don't give a damn about the mess our country is in, and that many people are hurting and going hungry.

[mtnsnake]

132. Article 2, Section 73, Clause 14 says you and Pete Williams should go fly a kite

I just heard it on CNN.

[Rockholm]

134. If Pete lived in CA, he couldn't get married.

[KamaAina]

135. Actually, the SoS is not appointed, merely nominated

S/he must then be confirmed by the Senate.

Next?

[TexasObserver]

138. Pete Williams is a Cheney asset.

[bluedawg12]

139. I thought Pete was the pentagon correspondent? Former Chney staff?

Petey in younger days.
Pete Williams as Assistant Secretary of Defense at a press briefing, 1991


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Williams

>>Pete Williams is an NBC News correspondent based in Washington, D.C. He has been covering the Justice Department and the U.S. Supreme Court since April 1993. Williams was also a key reporter on the Microsoft anti-trust trial and Judge Jackson's decision.

Prior to joining NBC, Williams served as a press official on Capitol Hill for many years. In 1986 he joined the Washington, DC staff of then Congressman Dick Cheney as press secretary and a legislative assistant. In 1989, when Cheney was named Secretary of Defense, Williams was appointed Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs. He also served as spokesman to the Pentagon. While in that position, Williams was named Government Communicator of the Year in 1991 by the National Association of Government Communicators.<<

[Jamastiene]

140. News Flash!

Bush wiped his ass with the Constitution and flushed it ages ago. We no longer use that document in this country. Next question?

[grantcart]

141. Pete Williams vs Barack Obama

now which one do you think is more likely to actually know the case history on this?

Resolution passes to lower SOS salary problem solved.



BTW It has nothing to do with Hillary it would apply to all Senators and Congressman in office.


Lower the salary everything finished. happened before will happen again.


And it will be posted here 8 more times.

[dkf]

145. I'd be disappointed if Obama used a shenanigan to go around the constitution.

I thought he was better than that.

[sufrommich]

150. lol,saw it coming from a mile away.

There goes Obama,under the bus. I'm sure you would be equally disappointed in Obama's "disregard" for the constitution were it Kerry who was chosen as opposed to Clinton.:eyes:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

151. ROFLMAO!!!!!!!

You are too much!!!!!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[LostinVA]

152. The "Saxe Fix" is a shenanigan now?

[JVS]

157. Yes, he must preserve the constitution at all costs.

[AlCzervik]

154. Can't she just resign her senate seat and the accept the SOS job?

[LostinVA]

155. No -- it's written so that can't happen

It was created so someone couldn't create a job or/and bump up the salary for themselves -- to stop corruption. But, it excludes lots of good people, so the "Saxe Fix" kicks in -- they roll back the salary to what it was before the person took a seat in Congress. It's been done several times, starting in 1909, and both parties have taken advantage of it -- most recently Bill Clinton.

The only question would be with HRC is this: does the salary have to be rolled back to before 2006 or 2000?

[Dinger]

160. Wow, Look At All The Recs For This Thread!

Wowee!

[pecwae]

166. What, no recs?