Supreme Court and Dark Money

[SalinasSpartan]

On 5/5/2023 at 10:45 AM, modestobulldog said:

Dude, you need to chill out, you are going to have an aneurysm.

Teams & shit indeed.  Pelosi’s worth a quarter billion. Pelosi begs differ:

 

WASHINGTON (AP) — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Wednesday said lawmakers should not be barred from trading stock, a practice that has come under scrutiny because it gives members of Congress the opportunity to profit off insider information gained through their official duties. 

“We are a free market economy. They should be able to participate in that,” Pelosi, whose husband holds tens of millions of dollars worth of stocks and options, told reporters Wednesday. 

Pelosi has long said she has no involvement in or prior knowledge of her husband’s trading decisions and does not own any stock herself.

https://apnews.com/article/business-nancy-pelosi-congress-8685e82eb6d6e5b42413417f3d5d6775

Yea, phuck Pelosi and her insider trading, glad she’s retiring. Although Jeffries seems like he is going to suck as well. 
 

But what does that have to do with your chicken shit response? 

[SalinasSpartan]

On 5/5/2023 at 11:00 AM, modestobulldog said:

Thank you.  I am not optimistic we can fix this.

Yea, because Republicans almost universally oppose any fix. Why are you so terrified to acknowledge that on here?

Let me guess, you’ll either ignore this or use humor to deflect and run away from this topic.

[renoskier]

On 5/5/2023 at 11:44 AM, SalinasSpartan said:

But what does that have to do with your chicken shit response? 

WTF did you expect him to say?

"it sucks" pretty much sums it up

[RSF]

On 5/5/2023 at 1:34 PM, sactowndog said:

Who is you?  If you are referring to me I would have been happy to post it.   I just hadn’t seen it yet.   One reason why I read this board.  

modesto...

[SalinasSpartan]

On 5/5/2023 at 11:55 AM, renoskier said:

WTF did you expect him to say?

"it sucks" pretty much sums it up

I would like some acknowledgment from the “anti-elite” conservative crowd that Republicans members of Congress are why Congress will not reign in the elite institution that is the Supreme Court. THAT’S “wtf” I’m expecting. 

I was not expecting this cowardly “o gee gosh golly it sure does suck, I wish this code of ethics could happen but I just can’t put my finger on why it is DOA in Congress. What a mystery!” Bull shit response. When you come on here and aggressively go after “the elites” and then shrink into the corner when a topic like this comes up then I’m sorry, but “it sucks” as a response just doesn’t phucking cut it.

[modestobulldog]

On 5/5/2023 at 12:13 PM, SalinasSpartan said:

I would like some acknowledgment from the “anti-elite” conservative crowd that Republicans members of Congress are why Congress will not reign in the elite institution that is the Supreme Court. THAT’S “wtf” I’m expecting. 

I was not expecting this cowardly “o gee gosh golly it sure does suck, I wish this code of ethics could happen but I just can’t put my finger on why it is DOA in Congress. What a mystery!” Bull shit response. When you come on here and aggressively go after “the elites” and then shrink into the corner when a topic like this comes up then I’m sorry, but “it sucks” as a response just doesn’t phucking cut it.

I don’t have time to research specifics, but you and Sacto are heavily partisan and I am skeptical that this (and every evil) is all on the “Republicans”.  Having said that, if it is true that Republicans are truly the sole obstacle to government ethics reform, then that sucks and is wrong.  Whataboutism is important it the big picture.  Personally, I am shocked this stuff goes on in government.  The corporation I retired from would not have tolerated anything like what goes on in government.  About 25 years ago they implemented recurring training and testing on a variety of ethics topics.  We weren’t allowed to take significant gifts, and every gift received or given needed to be reported.  Gifts / paid meals to government employees (including professors) needed prior approval and vetting and never were significant in value.  The local government offices don’t even allow gifts of donuts for Gods sake.  My respect for Clarence Thomas has gone down through these revelations.  

[SJSUMFA2013]

On 5/5/2023 at 11:42 AM, SalinasSpartan said:

Yea but SCOTUS does things conservative like, so they don’t really give a shit that billionaire elites are paying the millionaire elites on the Supreme Court. 

Right the difference this time is that the billionaire class was smart enough to get all the people with guns on their side.

[SalinasSpartan]

On 5/5/2023 at 12:49 PM, modestobulldog said:

I don’t have time to research specifics, but you and Sacto are heavily partisan and I am skeptical that this (and every evil) is all on the “Republicans”.  Having said that, if it is true that Republicans are truly the sole obstacle to government ethics reform, then that sucks and is wrong.  Whataboutism is important it the big picture.  Personally, I am shocked this stuff goes on in government.  The corporation I retired from would not have tolerated anything like what goes on in government.  About 25 years ago they implemented recurring training and testing on a variety of ethics topics.  We weren’t allowed to take significant gifts, and every gift received or given needed to be reported.  Gifts / paid meals to government employees (including professors) needed prior approval and vetting and never were significant in value.  The local government offices don’t even allow gifts of donuts for Gods sake.  My respect for Clarence Thomas has gone down through these revelations.  

I am not saying “every evil is on Republicans”. What I AM saying is that at this time, Republicans near universal opposition to an ethics bill most assuredly IS the reason why an ethics bill is DOA in Congress.  

[UNLV2001]

[modestobulldog]

On 5/5/2023 at 11:31 AM, sactowndog said:

I’m not taking political sides here.  I’m sure some liberal justices are just as bad.  
 

But the image of Supreme Court Justices taking all this money will simultaneously throwing out laws like McCain Feingold that would have forced limits and disclosure should be extremely troubling to everyone.   

 

On 5/5/2023 at 11:42 AM, SalinasSpartan said:

Yea but SCOTUS does things conservative like, so they don’t really give a shit that billionaire elites are paying the millionaire elites on the Supreme Court. 

 

On 5/5/2023 at 12:54 PM, SJSUMFA2013 said:

Right the difference this time is that the billionaire class was smart enough to get all the people with guns on their side.

With some things going in life now, I probably shouldn’t have engaged in this thread. I am not sure how I got painted as being opposed to corruption and ethics clean up, by bringing up Pelosi I was merely pointing out the problem is larger than SCOTUS and not limited to one side of the isle.  It sucks and lack of optimism that reform will ever happen should not be interpreted that I oppose reform.  

[modestobulldog]

On 5/5/2023 at 2:00 PM, SalinasSpartan said:

I am not saying “every evil is on Republicans”. What I AM saying is that at this time, Republicans near universal opposition to an ethics bill most assuredly IS the reason why an ethics bill is DOA in Congress.  

What specific bill(s)? 

[modestobulldog]

On 5/5/2023 at 12:54 PM, SJSUMFA2013 said:

Right the difference this time is that the billionaire class was smart enough to get all the people with guns on their side.

Are you saying one side has the guns, or the b’s have conned the gun owners from both sides?

[SJSUMFA2013]

On 5/5/2023 at 2:20 PM, modestobulldog said:

Are you saying one side has the guns, or the b’s have conned the gun owners from both sides?

I’m saying that, generally speaking, enthusiastic gun owners tend to vote republican, largely because they believe that republicans will protect their gun rights. If there were to be a “people’s revolution” of sorts in the US, conservative gun owners would likely side with the cops/military, which means the revolution is over before it starts. There are certainly left-leaning gun owners, but in my experience, they seem pretty well outnumbered. 

[renoskier]

On 5/5/2023 at 2:38 PM, SJSUMFA2013 said:

I’m saying that, generally speaking, enthusiastic gun owners tend to vote republican, largely because they believe that republicans will protect their gun rights. If there were to be a “people’s revolution” of sorts in the US, conservative gun owners would likely side with the cops/military, which means the revolution is over before it starts. There are certainly left-leaning gun owners, but in my experience, they seem pretty well outnumbered. 

but it looks like any "revolution" would likely start from the "conservatives"...I don’t think our military would side with them

[SJSUMFA2013]

On 5/5/2023 at 2:46 PM, renoskier said:

but it looks like any "revolution" would likely start from the "conservatives"...I don’t think our military would side with them

A revolution that they start - like what they thought they were doing on 1/6 - would be at the behest of the billionaire class. There’s a reason that was allowed to go on for so long. 

[SalinasSpartan]

On 5/5/2023 at 2:13 PM, modestobulldog said:

What specific bill(s)? 

I didn’t mention a specific bill. I am just pointing that there will be no legislation passed because Republicans almost universally will/would oppose it. You can withdraw into a safe space and fein ignorance to this if you want, but it doesn’t change reality.

[modestobulldog]

On 5/5/2023 at 2:51 PM, SalinasSpartan said:

I didn’t mention a specific bill. I am just pointing that there will be no legislation passed because Republicans almost universally will/would oppose it. You can withdraw into a safe space and fein ignorance to this if you want, but it doesn’t change reality.

So neither side is motivated to make changes, exactly as I thought.  Have a nice day.

[modestobulldog]

On 5/5/2023 at 2:46 PM, renoskier said:

but it looks like any "revolution" would likely start from the "conservatives"...I don’t think our military would side with them

I don’t think i would classify them as conservatives, but whatever you call them, I think you are right.

[sactowndog]

On 5/5/2023 at 12:49 PM, modestobulldog said:

I don’t have time to research specifics, but you and Sacto are heavily partisan and I am skeptical that this (and every evil) is all on the “Republicans”.  Having said that, if it is true that Republicans are truly the sole obstacle to government ethics reform, then that sucks and is wrong.  Whataboutism is important it the big picture.  Personally, I am shocked this stuff goes on in government.  The corporation I retired from would not have tolerated anything like what goes on in government.  About 25 years ago they implemented recurring training and testing on a variety of ethics topics.  We weren’t allowed to take significant gifts, and every gift received or given needed to be reported.  Gifts / paid meals to government employees (including professors) needed prior approval and vetting and never were significant in value.  The local government offices don’t even allow gifts of donuts for Gods sake.  My respect for Clarence Thomas has gone down through these revelations.  

For the record, I used to be Republican, I worked for a Republican Congressperson, and I’m generally pro balanced budget and following the Constitution.  

1) I don’t think living up to the intent of the 2nd Amendment means people have to die everywhere

2) The 1st Amendment matters as our founders were well aware of the dangers of mixing religion and politics.  The social conservatism dominating today’s Republican Party ignores that completely.   They have unapologetically stated they want a “Christian Nation”.  It doesn’t matter if it is Muslim, Jewish or Christian.  Whenever you have a <fill in religion> nation it leads to authoritarianism.

3) Money in politics was once a bi-partisan issue and McCain Feingold was a bi-partisan effort.  It was Republican nominated judges (including Thomas) who ruled it unconstitutional and its monied ally’s in the Senate (generally R’s but not all) keeping it in place today.

4) I have always been against gerrymandering as the vote should be representative of the people.  The fact it takes a +3 National Dem vote for an even split in Congress is a bad structural problem.

5) the current filibuster rule is a disaster as a small minority of Senators can in the dark invoke cloture and kill bills with broad popular support.  The filibuster is fine but it needs to be in the open and clear who and why is blocking it.

6) I won’t even go into Trump and the election denial bullshit.  
 

I’m partisan yep.  An anti authoritarianism, anti corrupt Latin American Facism partisan.   And sadly that direction is the direction we are quickly moving towards.  

[sactowndog]

On 5/5/2023 at 3:11 PM, modestobulldog said:

So neither side is motivated to make changes, exactly as I thought.  Have a nice day.

No right now nothing can get out of committee because it is log jammed.  Dianne Feinstein has her age addled brain up her ass and the Committee is deadlocked.  
 

if you want to add everyone at 85 should automatically be forced to retire from any federal office I am all ears.