Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
People are dreaming if they think Obama won't take this chance to appoint the most radical leftists he can find. Goodbye Free speech,Goodbye 2nd amendment.
Obama can only nominate. The Senate must confirm, and they won't confirm Lynch. The Senate is in recess, so it will be a month before he can even float a name.
Whatever he does will be underhanded.People are dreaming if they think Obama won't take this chance to appoint the most radical leftists he can find. Goodbye Free speech,Goodbye 2nd amendment.
Obama can only nominate. The Senate must confirm, and they won't confirm Lynch. The Senate is in recess, so it will be a month before he can even float a name.
Isn't the Senate in a formal recess right now? Until Feb 22 couldn't President Obama appoint someone without waiting for the Senate? He said he wouldn't but with the Senate Majority leader saying they will block anyone whom he nominates, might he change his mind?
Yep. Not another one will get elected.This will be the establishment Republican's last chance to redeem themselves to Republican voters. If they fail to block the nomination, they're finished.
Isn't the Senate in a formal recess right now? Until Feb 22 couldn't President Obama appoint someone without waiting for the Senate? He said he wouldn't but with the Senate Majority leader saying they will block anyone whom he nominates, might he change his mind?
People are dreaming if they think Obama won't take this chance to appoint the most radical leftists he can find. Goodbye Free speech,Goodbye 2nd amendment.
Obama can only nominate. The Senate must confirm, and they won't confirm Lynch. The Senate is in recess, so it will be a month before he can even float a name.
Isn't the Senate in a formal recess right now? Until Feb 22 couldn't President Obama appoint someone without waiting for the Senate? He said he wouldn't but with the Senate Majority leader saying they will block anyone whom he nominates, might he change his mind?
After graduating Stanford Law School in 1995, Srinivasan started working as a law clerk for two Republican-appointed judges. The first was Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III, who was nominated to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals by Ronald Reagan. Although Wilkinson was considered Republican, he expressed bipartisanship in his personal views, most notably in an Op-Ed for the New York Times. After that, Srinivasan worked as a law clerk for Supreme Court Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Many viewed O'Connor as a moderate Conservative, but in her latter years she often had the swing vote, which made her more bipartisan. That means Srinivasan's early exposure to a legal career was largely nonpartisan, despite working with two judges who had fairly conservative beliefs.{{meta.pageTitle}}Obama will circumvent the Constitution to get another radical on the court.
Who Is Sri Srinivasan, Obama's "Supreme Court Nominee in Waiting"?
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/10/us/politics/sri-srinivasan-gets-strong-push-for-appeals-court.html
Sri Srinivasan: A Seat on the Bench | Stanford Law School
Get to Know a Judge: Sri Srinivasan
Can you provide a legitimate argument against this guy?
Can you provide a legitimate argument FOR this guy?
Working Under George W. Bush
For five years, Srinivasan worked under the George W. Bush Justice Department. Bush stayed true to conservatism throughout his eight-year term, which proved to be a partisan experience for Srinivasan during his time under his Justice Department. However, many of the connections Srinivasan made while working for Bush helped get him appointed to the D.C. Circuit. According to the New York Times, Paul D. Clement and Theodore B. Olson, both solicitors general under Bush, sent a letter of support when Srinivasan was nominated for the D.C. Circuit.
Anti-Human Rights Defense
When Srinivasan worked for O'Melveny & Myers LLP, he defended Exxon Mobil in a lawsuit they faced for human rights violations abroad. During this private-sector work, Srinivasan argued that Exxon Mobil shouldn't be held accountable for these violations when they took place outside of the U.S. However, Liberals were not happy with Srinivasan's decision because of the severity of this lawsuit; an Indonesian village accused Exxon Mobil Corp's security forces of torture, murder, and other violations against their people. Similarly, Srinivasan successfully represented a newspaper publisher that fired its employees for unionizing against the publisher's biased interference in its reporting. He also defended Enron President Jeffrey Skilling, who was later convicted in a significant financial fraud. After these defense cases, Liberals weren't sure if Srinivasan shared their views, especially with regards to human rights.
Liberal Work Under Obama
Bustle
^^^read the entire article. Can you provide a viable argument against this man?
Absolutely. No problem. He will not get past the Senate. How's that? Right now, that's the only argument that matters. Once the next republican president is in power, he will get whomever he wants in. Until then, the point is moot.
Ok. You don't have one. Thank you for your time.
After graduating Stanford Law School in 1995, Srinivasan started working as a law clerk for two Republican-appointed judges. The first was Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III, who was nominated to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals by Ronald Reagan. Although Wilkinson was considered Republican, he expressed bipartisanship in his personal views, most notably in an Op-Ed for the New York Times. After that, Srinivasan worked as a law clerk for Supreme Court Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Many viewed O'Connor as a moderate Conservative, but in her latter years she often had the swing vote, which made her more bipartisan. That means Srinivasan's early exposure to a legal career was largely nonpartisan, despite working with two judges who had fairly conservative beliefs.{{meta.pageTitle}}
Who Is Sri Srinivasan, Obama's "Supreme Court Nominee in Waiting"?
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/10/us/politics/sri-srinivasan-gets-strong-push-for-appeals-court.html
Sri Srinivasan: A Seat on the Bench | Stanford Law School
Get to Know a Judge: Sri Srinivasan
Can you provide a legitimate argument against this guy?
Can you provide a legitimate argument FOR this guy?
Working Under George W. Bush
For five years, Srinivasan worked under the George W. Bush Justice Department. Bush stayed true to conservatism throughout his eight-year term, which proved to be a partisan experience for Srinivasan during his time under his Justice Department. However, many of the connections Srinivasan made while working for Bush helped get him appointed to the D.C. Circuit. According to the New York Times, Paul D. Clement and Theodore B. Olson, both solicitors general under Bush, sent a letter of support when Srinivasan was nominated for the D.C. Circuit.
Anti-Human Rights Defense
When Srinivasan worked for O'Melveny & Myers LLP, he defended Exxon Mobil in a lawsuit they faced for human rights violations abroad. During this private-sector work, Srinivasan argued that Exxon Mobil shouldn't be held accountable for these violations when they took place outside of the U.S. However, Liberals were not happy with Srinivasan's decision because of the severity of this lawsuit; an Indonesian village accused Exxon Mobil Corp's security forces of torture, murder, and other violations against their people. Similarly, Srinivasan successfully represented a newspaper publisher that fired its employees for unionizing against the publisher's biased interference in its reporting. He also defended Enron President Jeffrey Skilling, who was later convicted in a significant financial fraud. After these defense cases, Liberals weren't sure if Srinivasan shared their views, especially with regards to human rights.
Liberal Work Under Obama
Bustle
^^^read the entire article. Can you provide a viable argument against this man?
Absolutely. No problem. He will not get past the Senate. How's that? Right now, that's the only argument that matters. Once the next republican president is in power, he will get whomever he wants in. Until then, the point is moot.
Ok. You don't have one. Thank you for your time.
Sorry. That's the way that it is. No more Barry nominees. Hell, Scalia regularly told Sotomayor that she was incompetent and she is. Do you honestly want another incompetent clown appointed by this incompetent president to take this country down the road to ruin?
Frankly, I do not. I am not a "progressive" (socialist). I want an Constitutional Judge - not an activist judge who will circumvent the Constitution at every turn. We have enough radical activist judges as it is.
Isn't the Senate in a formal recess right now? Until Feb 22 couldn't President Obama appoint someone without waiting for the Senate? He said he wouldn't but with the Senate Majority leader saying they will block anyone whom he nominates, might he change his mind?
He just got through getting spanked for this.
Here is why he can't get away with it and won't try.
Is a recess appointment to the Court an option? (UPDATED)
People are dreaming if they think Obama won't take this chance to appoint the most radical leftists he can find. Goodbye Free speech,Goodbye 2nd amendment.
Obama can only nominate. The Senate must confirm, and they won't confirm Lynch. The Senate is in recess, so it will be a month before he can even float a name.
Isn't the Senate in a formal recess right now? Until Feb 22 couldn't President Obama appoint someone without waiting for the Senate? He said he wouldn't but with the Senate Majority leader saying they will block anyone whom he nominates, might he change his mind?
Senate has to vote on his pick no matter who he nominates.
Might be the best candidate for Republicans that Obama is likely to nominate. He has a history of ruling in favor of cops and corporations. Then again, he isn't a white Catholic, so wingnuts probably won't like him anyways.Everything I'm seeing says Obama wants it to be Sri Srinivasan. There will be all sorts of names thrown out there
Might be the best candidate for Republicans that Obama is likely to nominate. He has a history of ruling in favor of cops and corporations. Then again, he isn't a white Catholic, so wingnuts probably won't like him anyways.Everything I'm seeing says Obama wants it to be Sri Srinivasan. There will be all sorts of names thrown out there
Isn't the Senate in a formal recess right now? Until Feb 22 couldn't President Obama appoint someone without waiting for the Senate? He said he wouldn't but with the Senate Majority leader saying they will block anyone whom he nominates, might he change his mind?
He just got through getting spanked for this.
Here is why he can't get away with it and won't try.
Is a recess appointment to the Court an option? (UPDATED)
The Senate was holding pro-forma session every three days. Not so for this current recess.
If This Report Is Correct Mitch McConnell May Have Given Obama a Supreme Court Victory - The Gateway Pundit
But don't worry President Obama is a man of his word and he has already stated that he would not do it.
The Senate was holding pro-forma session every three days. Not so for this current recess.
If This Report Is Correct Mitch McConnell May Have Given Obama a Supreme Court Victory - The Gateway Pundit
But don't worry President Obama is a man of his word and he has already stated that he would not do it.
