A likely coming political battle is over the replacement of Senator Bob Menendez who is facing corruption charges dealing with bribery and non-disclosure of gifts. His trial is coming up soon, and he's likely to be found guilty of at least one. The timing of this is significant since we're in the last few months of historically unpopular governor Chris Christie's term. Democrats are likely to not vote to expel Menendez until after likely winner Phil Murphy is sworn in as Christie's replacement, arguing it's not right to have an unpopular lame duck governor appoint a replacement whose values would likely be drastically different than what New Jersey voted for in Menendez. Republicans will argue that a senator convicted on these charges should be expelled immediately, as it would be inappropriate to let a corrupt Senator remain in office.
for the purposes of this thread assume that:
1. Menendez is convicted.
2. Murphy will win the governorship. (He's up by 25-30 in the polls.)
Obama did it knowing it was symbolic, but wanted to register his opposition. He knew the qualifying votes were there, and the filibuster failed, yet felt it important to take a stand on letting people know what a POS Alito is.Whoopdee-do, this kind of political oneupsmanship is the problem. As I stated. Doesn't matter who did what before, if we make decisions out of spite or revenge, because Obama did it, or Hillary did it, or Trump did it, or Bush did it. We are only going to keep going around and around til we implode. It's time to move on, and stop letting politicians game the system. On any side that it is happening. And let things work how they are intended to work.
Just because Obama did it as a senator, doesn't mean it should have been done to him. This isn't a schoolyard playground, eye for an eye has no place in how we conduct our government.
I see, it was okay for Senator Obama but when it happened to President Obama it was wrong? Face it, the Democrats lost the election. It hurt.
Did you grow up in a house with lead based paint? Because that is a weak straw man. Take your bull**** elsewhere.
Simple facts. Obama had one opinion on appointment of justices in the last year of a president's term when he was a senator, that changed when he was president. You all lost this election. It was an important one. I expect Kennedy to be replaced, and (You will love this...) Ginsburg is not immortal.
Whoever his constituents decide should replace him? Why is this a poll?
Then it's up to the governor, not the members of a debate forum.
It's actually up to the rest of the Senate on when to expel him, assuming he doesn't resign voluntarily. This is a poll on when one would think the right time for the senate to do that is, before or after the imminent gubernatorial election.
You familiar at all with Jay Kim (R-Convict)?
House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Bud Shuster (R-Pa.), who is facing an ethics investigation himself, is not particularly eager to talk about why he and House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) gave Kim a plum appointment on the group negotiating the colossal highway bill. Shuster emphasized that Gingrich actually made the decision to select Kim, whom he described as "a very active member."
And what strengths does Kim bring to the bargaining table?
"He's a very active member," Shuster repeated.
In fact, Kim is diligently going about his business, shuttling regularly between his office to the House floor so he can maintain his perfect, largely conservative voting record and an appearance of normalcy.
The only difference between Kim and other legislators is the electronic ankle bracelet he wears under his suit pants, so federal probation officers can track his movements.
If he resigns or is convicted prior to January 16, 2018 then Governor Chris Christie will appoint his successor until the regular primary election.
However, when Obama was a Senator, he opposed a president filling a SCOTUS vacancy in his final year of the term. He even participated in the filibuster.
Obama filibustered Alito in 2006, not Bush's last year ...
I see, it was okay for Senator Obama but when it happened to President Obama it was wrong? Face it, the Democrats lost the election. It hurt.
who is facing corruption charges dealing with bribery and non-disclosure of gifts. His trial is coming up soon, and he's likely to be found guilty of at least one. The timing of this is significant since we're in the last few months of historically unpopular governor Chris Christie's term. Democrats are likely to not vote to expel Menendez until after likely winner Phil Murphy is sworn in as Christie's replacement, arguing it's not right to have an unpopular lame duck governor appoint a replacement whose values would likely be drastically different than what New Jersey voted for in Menendez. Republicans will argue that a senator convicted on these charges should be expelled immediately, as it would be inappropriate to let a corrupt Senator remain in office.A likely coming political battle is over the replacement of Senator Bob Menendez
for the purposes of this thread assume that:
1. Menendez is convicted.
2. Murphy will win the governorship. (He's up by 25-30 in the polls.)
Unless there's some news out that I haven't seen Menendez hasn't been found guilty of anything yet
It's actually up to the rest of the Senate on when to expel him, assuming he doesn't resign voluntarily. This is a poll on when one would think the right time for the senate to do that is, before or after the imminent gubernatorial election.
Looks like a hung jury.A likely coming political battle is over the replacement of Senator Bob Menendez who is facing corruption charges dealing with bribery and non-disclosure of gifts. His trial is coming up soon, and he's likely to be found guilty of at least one. The timing of this is significant since we're in the last few months of historically unpopular governor Chris Christie's term. Democrats are likely to not vote to expel Menendez until after likely winner Phil Murphy is sworn in as Christie's replacement, arguing it's not right to have an unpopular lame duck governor appoint a replacement whose values would likely be drastically different than what New Jersey voted for in Menendez. Republicans will argue that a senator convicted on these charges should be expelled immediately, as it would be inappropriate to let a corrupt Senator remain in office.
for the purposes of this thread assume that:
1. Menendez is convicted.
2. Murphy will win the governorship. (He's up by 25-30 in the polls.)
It shouldn't contingent on the election at all, it should be contingent upon when he's no longer a Senator.
A likely coming political battle is over the replacement of Senator Bob Menendez who is facing corruption charges dealing with bribery and non-disclosure of gifts. His trial is coming up soon, and he's likely to be found guilty of at least one. The timing of this is significant since we're in the last few months of historically unpopular governor Chris Christie's term. Democrats are likely to not vote to expel Menendez until after likely winner Phil Murphy is sworn in as Christie's replacement, arguing it's not right to have an unpopular lame duck governor appoint a replacement whose values would likely be drastically different than what New Jersey voted for in Menendez. Republicans will argue that a senator convicted on these charges should be expelled immediately, as it would be inappropriate to let a corrupt Senator remain in office.
for the purposes of this thread assume that:
1.2. Murphy will win the governorship. (He's up by 25-30 in the polls.)Menendez is convicted.
Only to people on the far right.The rest of us see Moore for what he is.Would you want your teen daughter sitting next to Moore on a park bench? Fill us in.Isn't it odd that the left isn't in a hurry to want to drum Senator Menendez out of office but wants to when it comes to Roy Moore, who isn't even elected, yet?
Didn't happen.The judge declared a mistrial.Read the news.It looks like Menendez will be staying in the Senate.
:lol:
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?