Constitution? Screw the Constitution

[RealDave]

Show me where the Senate leader is the one to advise & consent.

Allow me to, again, alleviate some of your ignorance.
U.S. Senate: Rules and Procedure
Short version:
The majority leader decides what comes up for a vote.
How do you not know this?

So Mitch decided not to follow the Constitution? And you support Mitch.

 

[RealDave]

Show me where the Senate leader is the one to advise & consent.

Don't have to. The Senate followed it's own rules in not bringing Garland up for a vote. You can't prove otherwise.

Therefore your incessant bitching about constitutionality is like all of your posts, worthless.

FOAD.

What ruke was that?

You are the one claiming it's unconstitutional.

Where in the rules does it say a judicial nomination from the Executive has to be brought to the chamber in an allotted time?

so they are still considering it?

Nope. Show me where in the constitution it says the process has to be resolved in a certain time frame, or ever resolved.[/QUOTE

They sre still considering Garland for the non opening on the USSC. Wow Marty, you're really failing here.

 

[martybegan]

Show me where the Senate leader is the one to advise & consent.

Allow me to, again, alleviate some of your ignorance.
U.S. Senate: Rules and Procedure
Short version:
The majority leader decides what comes up for a vote.
How do you not know this?

So Mitch decided not to follow the Constitution? And you support Mitch.

How did he not follow the Constitution?

Where does it say in the document that the Senate has to bring it to a vote? The term is advice and consent, and the advice was to wait until after the election.

 

[martybegan]

Don't have to. The Senate followed it's own rules in not bringing Garland up for a vote. You can't prove otherwise.

Therefore your incessant bitching about constitutionality is like all of your posts, worthless.

FOAD.

What ruke was that?

You are the one claiming it's unconstitutional.

Where in the rules does it say a judicial nomination from the Executive has to be brought to the chamber in an allotted time?

so they are still considering it?

Nope. Show me where in the constitution it says the process has to be resolved in a certain time frame, or ever resolved.[/QUOTE

They sre still considering Garland for the non opening on the USSC. Wow Marty, you're really failing here.

Learn to quote, you gutless hack-twat.

His nomination died when Trump won. Again, how is that unconstitutional?

 

[Crixus]

Our Constitution set our form of government where we have three independent branches & a system of checks & balances.

Republicans have crumbled it up & threw it in the trash.

They did it when Mitch McConnell declared that Trump dictates what bills get a vote in the US Senate. No more independent body & no more duty to of checks & balances.

McConnell did it with Obama's USSC Nominee.

Republicans in the Senate sit idly by as Trump breaks the law on the border. When he orders people to break the law & them fire them if they do not.

Republicans in the Senate sit idly by & watch Trump obstruct justice over & over.

Republicans in the Senate are so pathetic, that they sit idly by as Trump destroys the American Farmer & hurts US exporters.

Republicans in the Senate sit idly by as Trump steals children from asylum seekers & looses them in a system on concentration camps.

Republicans in the Senate sit idly by as Trump denies proper aid to Puerto Rico & our own military installations damaged by storms.

Republicans in the Senate keep confirming some of the worst, crooked people into key government positions.

This is all against what their duty is according to the Constitution.

But hey, the only parts of the US Constitution Republicans care about are the First Amendment to defend their racist & bigoted speech and the Second Amendment as an excuse to do nothing as children get gunned down in our schools.

You being a freshman and all I get your concern

 

[M14 Shooter]

Show me where the Senate leader is the one to advise & consent.

Allow me to, again, alleviate some of your ignorance.
U.S. Senate: Rules and Procedure
Short version:
The majority leader decides what comes up for a vote.
How do you not know this?

So Mitch decided not to follow the Constitution?

That's your claim, dickbreath.
You cant show it to be true, but it's your claim, none the less.

You are apparently unaware that the constitution gives the senate (and the house) the power to make its own rules.
One of those rules is that the majority leader decides what comes up for a vote.

Feel free to show how this violates the constitution .

.

 

[RealDave]

My mistake,. Marty's version of the Constitution says this:

he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the majority leader of the Senate when ever they feel like it., shall appoint.

So, if the Democrats take the Senate they can vote Garland in?

 

[M14 Shooter]

My mistake,. Marty's version of the Constitution says this:
he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the majority leader of the Senate when ever they feel like it., shall appoint.
So, if the Democrats take the Senate they can vote Garland in?

Hey dickbreath - why do you choose to speak from ignorance?

 

[RealDave]

Show me where the Senate leader is the one to advise & consent.

Allow me to, again, alleviate some of your ignorance.
U.S. Senate: Rules and Procedure
Short version:
The majority leader decides what comes up for a vote.
How do you not know this?

So Mitch decided not to follow the Constitution?

That's your claim, dickbreath.
You cant show it to be true, but it's your claim, none the less.

You are apparently unaware that the constitution gives the senate (and the house) the power to make its own rules.
One of those rules is that the majority leader decides what comes up for a vote.

Feel free to show how this violates the constitution .

.

So, if the Democrats would take the house & Senate they can pass a law to circumvent the Constitution?

 

[martybegan]

My mistake,. Marty's version of the Constitution says this:

he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the majority leader of the Senate when ever they feel like it., shall appoint.

So, if the Democrats take the Senate they can vote Garland in?

Now you are adding your own words, man you are really trying for a pathetic gotcha moment, and failing miserably.

If the next president is a Dem, they can re-nominate.

You don't have to like the process to admit the reality of the process.

That is the typical failing of progressive morons such as you.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Show me where the Senate leader is the one to advise & consent.

Allow me to, again, alleviate some of your ignorance.
U.S. Senate: Rules and Procedure
Short version:
The majority leader decides what comes up for a vote.
How do you not know this?

So Mitch decided not to follow the Constitution?

That's your claim, dickbreath.
You cant show it to be true, but it's your claim, none the less.

You are apparently unaware that the constitution gives the senate (and the house) the power to make its own rules.
One of those rules is that the majority leader decides what comes up for a vote.

Feel free to show how this violates the constitution .

.

So, if the Democrats would take the house & Senate they can pass a law to circumvent the Constitution?

What's that?
You cannot show how the current senate rules violate the Constitution?
I thought not.
Run along, dickbreath.

 

[Siete]

I think I remember reading the Constitution requires all three branches of government to see the report in full.

but

it's not illegal if Barr doesn't do that.

I'll see if I can find it between chores ...

 

[Oldstyle]

Our Constitution set our form of government where we have three independent branches & a system of checks & balances.

Republicans have crumbled it up & threw it in the trash.

They did it when Mitch McConnell declared that Trump dictates what bills get a vote in the US Senate. No more independent body & no more duty to of checks & balances.

McConnell did it with Obama's USSC Nominee.

Republicans in the Senate sit idly by as Trump breaks the law on the border. When he orders people to break the law & them fire them if they do not.

Republicans in the Senate sit idly by & watch Trump obstruct justice over & over.

Republicans in the Senate are so pathetic, that they sit idly by as Trump destroys the American Farmer & hurts US exporters.

Republicans in the Senate sit idly by as Trump steals children from asylum seekers & looses them in a system on concentration camps.

Republicans in the Senate sit idly by as Trump denies proper aid to Puerto Rico & our own military installations damaged by storms.

Republicans in the Senate keep confirming some of the worst, crooked people into key government positions.

This is all against what their duty is according to the Constitution.

But hey, the only parts of the US Constitution Republicans care about are the First Amendment to defend their racist & bigoted speech and the Second Amendment as an excuse to do nothing as children get gunned down in our schools.

LOL...why do I have the feeling that you have no more idea what's in the Constitution, Dave...than you do about what's in the Mueller Report?

So I can read the Mueller Report online, unredacted?

Do you even understand what a Grand Jury is...or how it operates, Dave? There is a REASON why Grand Jury testimony is secret! This isn't about Trump or Clinton or any other politician...it's about the rule of law!

 

[bendog]

Oh yeah this is about the rule of LAW. But let see war Barr tries to redact before going off the rails one way or another.

 

[Siete]

The argument for Congress obtaining Mueller’s full report on obstruction is typically based on its constitutional power to impeach: Since Congress alone has the power to take action against the president, if he has broken the law or abused his power—which is true if the Justice Department adheres to its policy of not indicting a sitting president, even if it is not settled law—Congress would by necessity need to see the evidence Mueller has gathered to determine if impeachment is warranted.

Congress has a responsibility, rooted firmly in the Constitution, to safeguard the integrity of the justice system, including to prevent obstruction of justice.

If lawmakers weren’t able to see the report (in full), then the president would effectively be immunized from accountability for wrongdoing while he is in office, putting him above the law.

 

[bendog]

The argument for Congress obtaining Mueller’s full report on obstruction is typically based on its constitutional power to impeach: Since Congress alone has the power to take action against the president, if he has broken the law or abused his power—which is true if the Justice Department adheres to its policy of not indicting a sitting president, even if it is not settled law—Congress would by necessity need to see the evidence Mueller has gathered to determine if impeachment is warranted.

Congress has a responsibility, rooted firmly in the Constitution, to safeguard the integrity of the justice system, including to prevent obstruction of justice.

If lawmakers weren’t able to see the report, then the president would effectively be immunized from accountability for wrongdoing while he is in office, putting him above the law.

Congress is also investigating election interference even without Trump's involvement. There's legitimate reason for them to know of Mueller's sources of any information about that. And grand jury testimony is not an issue

 

[jc456]

Our Constitution set our form of government where we have three independent branches & a system of checks & balances.

Republicans have crumbled it up & threw it in the trash.

They did it when Mitch McConnell declared that Trump dictates what bills get a vote in the US Senate. No more independent body & no more duty to of checks & balances.

McConnell did it with Obama's USSC Nominee.

Republicans in the Senate sit idly by as Trump breaks the law on the border. When he orders people to break the law & them fire them if they do not.

Republicans in the Senate sit idly by & watch Trump obstruct justice over & over.

Republicans in the Senate are so pathetic, that they sit idly by as Trump destroys the American Farmer & hurts US exporters.

Republicans in the Senate sit idly by as Trump steals children from asylum seekers & looses them in a system on concentration camps.

Republicans in the Senate sit idly by as Trump denies proper aid to Puerto Rico & our own military installations damaged by storms.

Republicans in the Senate keep confirming some of the worst, crooked people into key government positions.

This is all against what their duty is according to the Constitution.

But hey, the only parts of the US Constitution Republicans care about are the First Amendment to defend their racist & bigoted speech and the Second Amendment as an excuse to do nothing as children get gunned down in our schools.

1/10 score for your Trump Derangement Syndrome ranting.

You can do better.

like this...

 

[80zephyr]

Show me where the Constitution was violated when the Republicans didn't give their advice and consent.

Either Marty has not read the Constitution or he thinks there was a vote in the Senate on that nominee.

Show me where there is a time limit in the constitution on Advice and Consent.

So they are still thinking about it?

You didn't answer my question. You claimed them sitting on the nomination was unconstitutional.

How was it unconstitutional?

Because they never advised or consented?

True. I suppose they could have ruined his reputation ala Kavanaugh and then voted him down. I'm glad they didn't do that.

Mark

 

[RandomPoster]

MAGA!

 

[Votto]

Our Constitution set our form of government where we have three independent branches & a system of checks & balances.

Republicans have crumbled it up & threw it in the trash.

They did it when Mitch McConnell declared that Trump dictates what bills get a vote in the US Senate. No more independent body & no more duty to of checks & balances.

McConnell did it with Obama's USSC Nominee.

Republicans in the Senate sit idly by as Trump breaks the law on the border. When he orders people to break the law & them fire them if they do not.

Republicans in the Senate sit idly by & watch Trump obstruct justice over & over.

Republicans in the Senate are so pathetic, that they sit idly by as Trump destroys the American Farmer & hurts US exporters.

Republicans in the Senate sit idly by as Trump steals children from asylum seekers & looses them in a system on concentration camps.

Republicans in the Senate sit idly by as Trump denies proper aid to Puerto Rico & our own military installations damaged by storms.

Republicans in the Senate keep confirming some of the worst, crooked people into key government positions.

This is all against what their duty is according to the Constitution.

But hey, the only parts of the US Constitution Republicans care about are the First Amendment to defend their racist & bigoted speech and the Second Amendment as an excuse to do nothing as children get gunned down in our schools.

Stop your whining.

I don't see Trump using the IRS to come after ya.