General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI support Hillary for Supreme Court nominee!
I don't care what the Hillary Hate Club here says. I think she would make a superb Supreme Court justice.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)Robbins
(5,066 posts)obama appoints her to supereme court and bernie gets nomination is nice deal for me.
RKP5637
(67,107 posts)Joe the Revelator
(14,915 posts)DawgHouse
(4,019 posts)Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)This is her big chance!
patricia92243
(12,595 posts)jberryhill
(62,444 posts)She is a lawyer. It's not a requirement.
rug
(82,333 posts)rug
(82,333 posts)Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)Rocky the Leprechaun
(222 posts)That's where the true power is.
Go on, Secretary Clinton - you are absolutely qualified! Do it now, and drop your campaign for President, and kickstart your campaign for a nomination from Obama to become Justice Clinton!
What a novel idea! I'll throw in $10 to start!
global1
(25,242 posts)justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)Here are the facts.
In July 2015, the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community sent what is called a security referral to members of the executive branch. A security referral is essentially a notification that classified information might exist in a location outside of the governments possession. In this case, the location was Clintons private email server.
Soon after, the New York Times incorrectly reported that the inspectors general requested a criminal investigation into Clintons email use as opposed to a security referral. But the newspaper later issued two corrections. The referral was in connection with Clintons account, not whether Clinton herself mishandled information, and did not allege criminal activity.
Officials told reporters at the time that the FBI was not targeting Clinton specifically.
As part of its inquiry, the FBI has looked into the security setup for Clintons home server and a thumb drive that has copies of Clintons work emails. But most details of the investigation have remained secret. Its even unclear at this point whether the FBI probe is just a preliminary inquiry or if it has evolved into a true investigation, according to Politico.
Shrike47
(6,913 posts)The Pukes would love to get rid of him, but that way?
DawgHouse
(4,019 posts)bigdarryl
(13,190 posts)Zing Zing Zingbah
(6,496 posts)Arazi
(6,829 posts)while we work through a confirmation process?
Since it's by no means assured he can get a justice confirmed with this Congress?
I just read the average amount of time from nomination to confirmation is usually 2.5 months so,there's no reason this can't be done before the election but I think the Republicans will do anything and everything to obstruct
Why not? He could appoint someone tonight if he wants.
Arazi
(6,829 posts)for lower court positions
I'm thinking the Senate is being held in a pro-forma session to keep those blocked. Is this the same principle or are not applicable?
(I just really respect your opinions on the legal stuff so thank you for taking the time)
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Arazi
(6,829 posts)he can appoint (like right now) or he can't because the Senate isn't technically recessed?
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)The Senate is not in recess.
Arazi
(6,829 posts)sounds like no if the Senate is technically in session
tritsofme
(17,377 posts)Orrex
(63,208 posts)I would get behind that nomination.
still_one
(92,187 posts)jberryhill
(62,444 posts)But I salute you, Admiral Akhbar
still_one
(92,187 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)leftstreet
(36,107 posts)Algernon Moncrieff
(5,790 posts)I doubt that holds true now.