|
|
|
|
|
| Why is Hillary losing? Posted: 5/16/2008 4:45:03 AM |
On its face, that seems to suggest that Clinton could be vice president because he is only barred from being elected president a third time, not from serving as president. That's the argument of Scott E. Gant, a partner at Boies, Schiller & Flexner in Washington, and Bruce G. Peabody, an assistant professor of political science at Fairleigh****nson University in New Jersey. The two wrote a law review article in 1999 called "The Twice and Future President" and reprised the argument this summer in the Christian Science Monitor.
"In preventing individuals from being elected to the presidency more than twice, the amendment does not preclude a former president from again assuming the presidency by means other than election, including succession from the vice presidency," they wrote. "If this view is correct, then Clinton is not 'constitutionally ineligible to the office of president,' and is not barred by the 12th Amendment from being elected vice president."
Others share that opinion. Three former White House lawyers consulted by The Washington Post (two who served President Bush and one who served Clinton) agreed that the amendment would not bar Clinton from the vice presidency. A federal judge, who noted that he has "no views on the matter," said the plain language of the amendment would seem to allow Clinton to "become president through succession."
Kathleen M. Sullivan, director of the Stanford Constitutional Law Center, said the 22nd Amendment, "as I read it, does not preclude a Clinton-Clinton ticket." She added: "Bill, if elected VP, could become president in the event that President Hillary became incapacitated; he just could not run for reelection from that successor post."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/19/AR2006101901572.html
You could make a rather strong argument, as some Constitutional lawyers and experts have, that he could.
Actually, that's something the US Supreme Court should render a decision on - since it's a very gray area of Constitutional law, and certainly not in anyway clear. | |
|
| The Rezko trial is with the jury. Posted: 5/16/2008 5:43:03 AM | No Rezko verdict on first day of deliberations. By Joseph Ryan | Daily Herald Staff Published: 5/16/2008 12:12 AM "During deliberations Thursday, U.S. District Judge Amy St. Eve received two notes from the jury. "In one, a woman asked St. Eve to be let out of deliberations 30 minutes early next Thursday to attend her grandson's eighth-grade graduation. St. Eve granted the request. "The second note requested a transcript of testimony from a prosecution witness, which was denied. As is typical in such requests, St. Eve sent back a note telling the jurors to "rely on your collective recollection of the testimony" for all witnesses." http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=191789&src=3
I don't get that. In the courtroom dramas the court stenographer is allowed to read back testimony to the jury. You have to ask these questions when the arch corrupt influencer Rezko is involved. You also have to ask such questions when any signs of impropriety arise with his political cronies such as Sen. Obama. Like why did the DNC rules committee vote to completely strip Michigan and Florida of their delegates when their own rules said it could only be by half.
PhillyGuy1 | |
|
| The Rezko trial is with the jury. Posted: 5/16/2008 5:57:12 AM | Some facts about Rezko-Obama, from a Chicago newspaper :
Having a hard time keeping track of the facts? Here are eight things to know:
1. They met in 1990. Obama was a student at Harvard Law School and got an unsolicited job offer from Rezko, then a low-income housing developer in Chicago. Obama turned it down.
2. Obama took a job in 1993 with a small Chicago law firm, Davis Miner Barnhill, that represents developers -- primarily not-for-profit groups -- building low-income housing with government funds.
3. One of the firm's not-for-profit clients -- the Woodlawn Preservation and Investment Corp., co-founded by Obama's then-boss Allison Davis -- was partners with Rezko's company in a 1995 deal to convert an abandoned nursing home at 61st and Drexel into low-income apartments. Altogether, Obama spent 32 hours on the project, according to the firm. Only five hours of that came after Rezko and WPIC became partners, the firm says. The rest of the future senator's time was helping WPIC strike the deal with Rezko. Rezko's company, Rezmar Corp., also partnered with the firm's clients in four later deals -- none of which involved Obama, according to the firm. In each deal, Rezmar "made the decisions for the joint venture," says William Miceli, an attorney with the firm.
4. In 1995, Obama began campaigning for a seat in the Illinois Senate. Among his earliest supporters: Rezko. Two Rezko companies donated a total of $2,000. Obama was elected in 1996 -- representing a district that included 11 of Rezko's 30 low-income housing projects.
5. Rezko's low-income housing empire began crumbling in 2001, when his company stopped making mortgage payments on the old nursing home that had been converted into apartments. The state foreclosed on the building -- which was in Obama's Illinois Senate district.
6. In 2003, Obama announced he was running for the U.S. Senate, and Rezko -- a member of his campaign finance committee -- held a lavish fund-raiser June 27, 2003, at his Wilmette mansion.
7. A few months after Obama became a U.S. senator, he and Rezko's wife, Rita, bought adjacent pieces of property from a doctor in Chicago's Kenwood neighborhood -- a deal that has dogged Obama the last two years. The doctor sold the mansion to Obama for $1.65 million -- $300,000 below the asking price. Rezko's wife paid full price -- $625,000 -- for the adjacent vacant lot. The deals closed in June 2005. Six months later, Obama paid Rezko's wife $104,500 for a strip of her land, so he could have a bigger yard. At the time, it had been widely reported that Tony Rezko was under federal investigation. Questioned later about the timing of the Rezko deal, Obama called it "boneheaded" because people might think the Rezkos had done him a favor.
8. Eight months later -- in October 2006 -- Rezko was indicted on charges he solicited kickbacks from companies seeking state pension business under his friend Gov. Blagojevich. Federal prosecutors maintain that $10,000 from the alleged kickback scheme was donated to Obama's run for the U.S. Senate. Obama has given the money to charity.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/watchdogs/757340,CST-NWS-watchdog24.article
So where's the connection in regards to any benefit Rezko received from Obama ? | |
|
| The Rezko trial is with the jury. Posted: 5/16/2008 6:02:16 AM | | Chicago politics is not hidden... if there was anything of which to be concerned existed between Obama and Rezko it would have been open conversation in the coffee shops all over the state for years. There's nothing. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing? Posted: 5/16/2008 6:30:27 AM | ^ ^ ^ ^ Hardly need constitutional experts to tell him that. One of the requirements of being Vice President is that the person filling could constitutionally fill the office of the President should the President become incapacitated or die in office.
BTW, in the even of incapacity or death of both the VP and President, the others in line are only appointed as Acting President. There would have to be an actual election for that person to assume the office.
In fact all Vice Presidents who took over the role of President before the 25th Amendment to the Constitution were technically Acting Presidents. | |
|
| Does Barack Obama have any moral qualms at all? Posted: 5/16/2008 7:56:44 AM |
Chicago politics is not hidden... if there was anything of which to be concerned existed between Obama and Rezko it would have been open conversation in the coffee shops all over the state for years. There's nothing.
We know that Obama has no problems with stealing other peoples words and passing them off as his own with the plagiarism flap. Now we find out he has no moral qualms with stealing other peoples work and passing it off as his own:
Careful steps, looking ahead. ""You're a very powerful guy," Obama told Jones. "I've got the power to do what?" Jones responded. "You could help elect a U.S. senator," Obama said. Jones asked his protege if he had anyone in mind. "Yeah," Obama replied. "Me."" http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0705030101may03,0,1435956.story?page=4
Obama and Me. It was the year 2000, and I was a young, hungry reporter in Chicago with a young, hungry state legislator on my speed dial. By Todd SpivaK Published: February 28, 2008 "The white, race-baiting, hard-right Republican Illinois Senate Majority Leader James "Pate" Philip was replaced by Emil Jones Jr., a gravel-voiced, dark-skinned black senator known for chain-smoking cigarettes on the Senate floor. Jones had served in the Illinois Legislature for three decades. He represented a district on the Chicago South Side not far from Obama's. He became Obama's kingmaker. Several months before Obama announced his U.S. Senate bid, Jones called his old friend Cliff Kelley, a former Chicago alderman who now hosts the city's most popular black call-in radio program. I called Kelley last week, and he recollected the private conversation as follows: "He said, 'Cliff, I'm gonna make me a U.S. senator.'" "Oh, you are? Who might that be?" "Barack Obama." Jones appointed Obama sponsor of virtually every high-profile piece of legislation, angering many rank-and-file state legislators who had more seniority than Obama and had spent years championing the bills. "I took all the beatings and insults and endured all the racist comments over the years from nasty Republican committee chairmen," state Senator Rickey Hendon, the original sponsor of landmark racial profiling and videotaped confession legislation yanked away by Jones and given to Obama, complained to me at the time. "Barack didn't have to endure any of it, yet, in the end, he got all the credit. "I don't consider it bill jacking," Hendon told me. "But no one wants to carry the ball 99 yards all the way to the 1-yard line and then give it to the halfback who gets all the credit and the stats in the record book." http://www.dallasobserver.com/2008-02-28/news/obama-and-me/full
Facts you have to consider when you take the view Obama would be too morally upright to do the same things with Rezko on his campaign financing committee as Gov. Rod Blagojevich did with Rezko on his campaign financing committee. BTW, I wrote before that Rezko was on Obama's election finance committee once. I read those articles again and found Rezko was actually on those finance committee's all three times Obama ran in Illinois.
PhillyFellow | |
|
| Does Barack Obama have any moral qualms at all? Posted: 5/16/2008 8:10:40 AM | Shhh Philly, you don't want to confuse Obamamaniacs with facts! They want to think Obama is unlike any other politician in the history of politics! That he's above all the usual politicking that gets politicians ahead! Naturally it's beyond him to employ such lowball tactics.
Anybody who has gotten as far as Obama has in such a short period of time is MORE likely to employ those politicking tactics, not LESS likely.  | |
|
| Does Barack Obama have any moral qualms at all? Posted: 5/16/2008 8:58:22 AM |
Anybody who has gotten as far as Obama has in such a short period of time is MORE likely to employ those politicking tactics, not LESS likely
Actually, this primary season has proven otherwise. He's gone face to face with a Democratic Goliath - and brought her crashing to the ground.
He did that on the stump, and with considerable talent and success. | |
|
| Does Barack Obama have any moral qualms at all? Posted: 5/16/2008 9:15:05 AM | I see nothing there that implicates Obama in anything.
Let's see... we hear that Jones says he's going to make himself a Senator. We hear someone say that credit was taken from him and given to Obama. Where was Obama during all of this? Does it say? Do you know?
To imply guilt on that article toward Obama, then you can't tell anyone that Hillary's involvement with the McDougall's was anything other than criminal. Can you? | |
|
| The Rezko trial is with the jury. Posted: 5/16/2008 9:18:51 AM |
So where's the connection in regards to any benefit Rezko received from Obama ?
MG, this article has been posted on the Hillary Clinton support forums:
Curtain Time for Barack Obama - Part II Wednesday, 14 May 2008, 11:43 am Column: Evelyn Pringle http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0805/S00185.htm
It's a long involved article, and I get the feeling not everyone has read it all the way through. But you're an intelligent, well-read guy. I'm sure you wouldn't mind reading it through. Pay close attention to the fact that Stuart Levine was approved by a state senate committee to be on the planning board that granted the rights to build new hospitals while Obama headed that state senate committee. Now, if Obama were to, say, approve Rezko to be on that board that would be a clear conflict of interest because Rezko worked on Obama's campaign financing committee. But evidence has come at the Rezko trial that Levine was in Rezko's pocket so having Levine on that board was just as good to Rezko as if he himself was on it. The article also mentions that enough Rezko associates were on the board to make up a controlling bloc so that Rezko was able to control the decisions of that board. Through control of that board, Rezko was able steer multi-million dollar contracts to his business associates. Damn, that Rezko dude was a smart SOB. It reminds me of when I was reading about all the exploits of organized crime figures. I wondered if these guys are smart enough to do all this stuff why don't they just do it legally. I guess some guys just like to get it the fast easy way. A little like how Obama won his previous elected positions.
PhillyFellow | |
|
| Does Barack Obama have any moral qualms at all? Posted: 5/16/2008 9:22:08 AM |
He's gone face to face with a Democratic Goliath - and brought her crashing to the ground. This is debatable. He's barely ahead now despite being the beneficiary of a collossal contribution machine. He's got no momentum for a candidate who supposedly "earned" a mandate, which was given to him by the lefty-leaning media. When on the debate "stump", Senator Clinton clearly outshines him, displaying more talent.
Connect the dots. He's a puppet to the left-wing think tank, much like GWB is the rightie think tank puppet. I'm still waiting on how he plans to institute "change". | |
|
| The Rezko trial is with the jury. Posted: 5/16/2008 9:22:22 AM |
MG, this article has been posted on the Hillary Clinton support forums:
I'm not surprised, to be honest.
Remember, this is the same forum that supports a candidate that claims she is leading. 
He's got no momentum for a candidate who supposedly "earned" a mandate, which was given to him by the lefty-leaning media.
Really, I'd tell that to the super delegates. | |
|
| Does Barack Obama have any moral qualms at all? Posted: 5/16/2008 9:32:28 AM | Itechman, I can't prove that Obama engaged in any criminal activity in all this. That's for the federal prosecutors to determine, once they get Rezko to sing.
PhillyFellow | |
|
| |
| The Rezko trial is with the jury. Posted: 5/16/2008 10:04:36 AM | . The supers like Edwards from now on are to cover Massive loss in the next primaries...
Not good for the landslide winner since Feb to lose ... That is why Obama has to have Hillary stay in and will help with her debt... Not good to lose to a dead guy or someone that has withdrawn by huge numbers.... | |
|
| The Rezko trial is with the jury. Posted: 5/16/2008 10:19:39 AM |
Massive loss in the next primaries...
Montana 06/03 16 ( Too far away for any good feel, but looks good for Obama)
South Dakota 06/03 15 (?)
Puerto Rico 06/01 55 (?) Oregon 05/20 52 ( Obama leads by 14 %)
Kentucky 05/20 51 ( Clinton leads by 27 % )
Far from a bad situation, really. | |
|
| The Rezko trial is with the jury. Posted: 5/16/2008 10:29:15 AM | . If you lose by 20% and everyone has withdrawn?
Thats not close.
If you win by 10% and your the Candidate Thats not good.
Thats why the supers are coming out like they are.... Control Media.
Much like what is being done to McCain now...
Obama needs to go negative Now to frame McCain or he will be in the same spot they put Hillary in. | |
|
| Why is Hillary Losing? Posted: 5/16/2008 10:42:40 AM | The supers like Edwards from now on are to cover Massive loss in the next primaries...
There aren't going to be massive losses in the next primaries. Hillary won't have the same steam in Kentucky or Puerto Rico that she had in West Virginia. West Virginia was Hillary's brief, shining moment in this primary season. That moment is over. Obama will close the gap on Hillary in states where she's favored, and will trounce her in the states where he's favored.
| |
|
| |
| The Rezko trial is with the jury. Posted: 5/16/2008 10:57:31 AM | Rezko's trial has been given to the jury for deliberations. There is no more testimony remaining and the Prosecutors are done conducting the orchestra.
Obama's name came up in the trial but nothing dealing with kickbacks or wrongdoing. Like I said, no bombshells upcoming. | |
|
| The Rezko trial is with the jury. Posted: 5/16/2008 11:14:38 AM | May polls:
Kentucky (60 delegates)
Survey USA Date: 5/9-11 Clinton 62% --------- Obama 30% --------Unsure 3% -------Other 6%
Herald Leader WKYT Research 2000 Poll Date: 5/7-9 Clinton 58% --------- Obama 31% --------Unsure 5% -------Other 6%
Rasmussen Reports Date: 5/5 Clinton 56% --------- Obama 2831% --------Unsure13%
Survey USA Date: 5/3-5 Clinton 62% --------- Obama 28% --------Unsure 2% -------Other 8%
Oregon (65 delegates)
Public Policy Polling Date: 5/10-11 Obama 53% --------- Clinton 39% --------Unsure 7%
Survey USA Date: 5/9-11 Obama 54% --------- Clinton 43% --------Unsure 2%-------Other 2%
Portland Tribune by Davis Hibbitts Midghall Date: 5/8-10 Obama 55% --------- Clinton 35%
Rasmussen Reports Date: 5/1 Obama 51% --------- Clinton 39% --------Unsure 10%
The other states are small and don't have much in the way of polling, and nothing recent. Clinton is probably going to win Puerto Rico by low double digits based on a poll in April. Montana only has 16 delegates and South Dakota 23. PR has 55.
Oh, and BTW, Edwards announced today that he doesn't want to be VP.
Meanwhile, this is in the news:
Hillary Clinton's female avengers to hit Barack Obama
May 17, 2008
THE backlash from women to Hillary Clinton's almost certain defeat for the Democratic Party's nomination has started in earnest.
While many supporters accept Senator Clinton made strategic mistakes in her campaign, they are pointing to "intense sexism" in the race, where, among other things, the former first lady has been likened to the Glenn Close character in the movie Fatal Attraction - a psychopathic jilted female who haunts a suburban family, and in the end, keeps refusing to die.
An Ohio-based group of Clinton supporters has announced it will actively work against Barack Obama if he becomes the nominee for the party, saying Senator Clinton has had to fight gender discrimination from party leaders and the media.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23710227-2703,00.html
Undoubtedly there will be many, many more to come. | |
|
| The Rezko trial is with the jury. Posted: 5/16/2008 11:25:44 AM | .
Hillary won't have the same steam in Kentucky or Puerto Rico that she had in West Virginia. West Virginia was Hillary's brief, shining moment in this primary season. That moment is over. Obama will close the gap on Hillary in states where she's favored, and will trounce her in the states where he's favored.
Pueto Rico votes like 80%..... The Latino, Hispanic vote is not going to go to Obama... Kentucky??? You think Obama will come close???
Just like its going to be a cake walk to the White House.....
RNC hits Hard... They have already tied Obama to Carter with the Bush Speech in Israel.... | |
|
| The Rezko trial is with the jury. Posted: 5/16/2008 11:27:31 AM | That's great. While sexism has barely surfaced at all... what's been her most powerful demographic... white lunchpail men?
I think a bitter feminist backlash with no basis will do more to setback any feminist agendas by years. They will show themselves (unintentionally and without basis I will say) to be the "bitter frigid b**ches" that chauvinist males claim them to be. | |
|
| The Rezko trial is with the jury. Posted: 5/16/2008 11:34:55 AM |
"bitter frigid b**ches" that chauvinist males claim them to be
You don't get it???
All the Husbands ...."white lunchpail men" are saying Go Girl... GO to the "bitter frigid b**ches"Meetings....
Then they can drink the six pack eat pork rinds lite fa rts and watch somthing beside dancing with the stars...
 | |
|
| The Rezko trial is with the jury. Posted: 5/16/2008 11:36:48 AM | Oh man, what I wouldn't have given for my Ex to have had a cause to free me from having to watch "Survivor".  | |
|
|
| Page 51 of 98
|
37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77 |
|