It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
...the person typed...
Why?
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: EchoesInTime
Scalia was the most steadfast of the conservative justices and there were four or five big decisions that the court had to make that almost certainly would have swung another way had he still been alive but instead either defaulted to liberal because of the tie going back to lower court or could not be decided and wait for a new justice who might be more amenable to liberal ideology.
Steve Elmendorf, a campaign adviser and fundraiser who has collected $30,505 for Clinton, was retained by Goldman Sachs as one of the bank’s “primary lobbyists” working to weaken the Dodd-Frank bill. Records show that after the bill was signed into law, Elmendorf continued to work on behalf of a number of Wall Street clients to ensure the implementation was favorable to financial industry interests. Elmendorf was tapped by Citigroup, for example, to help the House of Representatives pass the Swap Jurisdiction Clarity Act, a bill strongly supported by Republican leadership in Congress to allow banks to avoid financial regulations by moving some operations overseas — a change that experts say could lead to another financial meltdown.
Elmendorf is one of many lobbyists who worked to influence Dodd-Frank now helping the Clinton campaign raise cash. Dewey co-founder Charles Baker worked on a lobbying team with DLA Piper’s Matthew Bernstein, another major Clinton fundraiser, for Citizen Financial Group to help the bank lobby on Dodd-Frank. Disclosures show the efforts included work on the Volcker Rule, derivatives regulations, and rules concerning overdraft fees, many of the top concerns for the banking industry. Arshi Siddiqui, a lobbyist with Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld who is currently helping to raise money for the Clinton campaign, worked to influence Dodd-Frank implementation on behalf of the Mortgage Bankers Association, according to disclosures. Tony Podesta, the brother of the Clinton campaign’s chairman and a fundraiser for the campaign, worked for Bank of America to influence Dodd-Frank, according to filings.
originally posted by: bobs_uruncle
Scalia was also not leaning left or right, he was the only moderate and therefore it would be a great advantage for obama/Hillary to appoint a left leaning judge, thereby stacking the deck on constitutional and other decisions. That would apply to republicans as well in appointing a right leaning judge.
originally posted by: IAMTAT
We also have Chelsea Clinton giving a speech: "Now that Scalia is gone...we can enact gun control"
twitter.com...
The 'wet works' thing I can't explain, except (as remarked) as a euphemism for 'watersports'. But it was a week before Scalia's death, there's no way anyone from DNC would have got within a mile of the ranch where Scalia died anyway (let alone inside the bedroom), and who on earth refers to a secret assassination plan in an office email ffs?
After working for the military, paramilitary organizations and CI for a number of years, I know what wetwork is
originally posted by: audubon
a reply to: bobs_uruncle
After working for the military, paramilitary organizations and CI for a number of years, I know what wetwork is
Do you think that it might distract from the fact that 'wet works' is also gay slang for, erm, urine-related antics? And could that fact be related to the fact that the emailer, Steve Elmendorf, is openly gay?
originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
"bedwetters," is the libs term for republicans. What "ledge" would republicans have been on at the time?
Perhaps [tinhat] this 'ledge' he was referring to was republicans who were in on the 'decision' to off Scalia and that's what they had to be talked down off of?[/tinhat]
And, you're correct, that thing on Soros that TAT posted should be it's own thread.
Four days before he died, Supreme Court Justice Scalia voted to stall Obama’s plan to force drastic climate-change rules on the American economy. The vote was 5-4.
With Scalia now gone, the vote would be 4-4.
With a new Obama Supreme Court appointee, if Obama could ram his choice through, the vote would be 5-4 in the President’s favor. Ditto, if the next President shares Obama’s position. And the climate-change agenda would roll ahead.
We’re not talking about small climate-change rules. We’re talking about the Big Ones.
And note: such rules could very well dovetail with the Brave New World spelled out in the upcoming TPP (the Trans-Pacific Partnership).
The opinion in these cases is the furthest extension in fact—and the furthest extension one can even imagine—of the Court’s claimed power to create “liberties” that the Constitution and its Amendments neglect to mention. This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves.”
Some justices throughout history have been compromisers and conciliators. Not Justice Scalia. He was a lion of textual orthodoxy. He was a rock of original meaning. Law students jokingly called him the pope of originalism, a phrase he loved.