Jump to content
A Merry Christmas from Surly Horns to You. ×

Supreme Court Justice Kennedy to Retire at the end of July

Hugo Stiglitz

By Hugo Stiglitz
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Johnny Sack
Johnny Sack
Mojo Hand
Mojo Hand

Oops, sock fail!   Forgot which sock you were posting under, huh?   So, you not only post under multiple socks, but you actually use them to defend your own moronic posts, to make people think that ot

El Guapo
El Guapo
udaydanceparty

udaydanceparty 33

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

I feel like you're purposefully ignoring that nobody has even presented a theory, which is a pretty crucial part of something being a conspiracy theory.  The comments are mostly, "hmm this is a fucking weird coincidence"... WHICH IT ABSOLUTELY IS, clean or not.

Is it more or less likely that someone who has achieved the highest level of success in their career path(SCOTUS) have a child who is also successful?  That seems normal to me.

Does it seem odd that someone involved in commercial real estate would borrow money from Deutsche bank?  I wouldn't expect it to be.  What exactly do you think the function of a bank is? 

Occam's razor...  A Republican justice wanted to retire when there was a Republican President in office.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BabaYaga

BabaYaga 15631

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, udaydanceparty said:

I was going to say the sad part was that even when you know you don't have anything, you still double down. 

Insert "I'm not saying it was aliens.....but it was aliens" meme.  I'm still trying to figure out if Hugo gets paid by the post, or by volume/traffic and velocity of posts he stirs up?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cheeseweasel

Cheeseweasel 26443

Posted
Posted
48 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

I feel like you're purposefully ignoring that nobody has even presented a theory, which is a pretty crucial part of something being a conspiracy theory.  The comments are mostly, "hmm this is a fucking weird coincidence"... WHICH IT ABSOLUTELY IS, clean or not.

If the roles were reversed, you and I both know this would be the lead story on Fox News for 6 months.

It's disingenuous. It's the equivalent of saying "I'm not saying it's true, but it sure does feeeeeel like...."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JBJ

JBJ 3830

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Fozzz said:

I never said he was against popular election - in my first post concerning this topic I quoted him supporting just that.  The other explanations for the existence of the electoral college have far less support than the one I have given - few at the convention accepted the argument made by Elbridge Gerry that electors were needed in order to shield the nation from the evils of "excess democracy," and it was also not meant to protect smaller states from the larger ones:

http://people.uncw.edu/lowery/pls101/wilson_chapter_outlines/The Proslavery Origins of the Electoral College.pdf

What were the reasons that Madison gave as to why the right of suffrage with respect to free and slave states was not an important consideration?  He explicitly said it was an issue of "serious nature," as I've already stated.  The slave staters also made their concerns explicit on this matter:

The founders did not want the president chosen by the legislature so that separation of powers would not be destroyed, but they would not tolerate a direct election because of the lack of suffrage in the slave states.

A) The primary concern with direct election was that the president would almost always be chosen from the most populous states.  It was the only concern voiced by anyone other than Madison, and Madison stated it as his primary concern.

B) The "northern coalition" in this discussion were 3 slaves states and 1 free state.  The New England states sided with the "southern states."  Using north-south or small-large as a guise for slave-free isn't accurate in 1780.  I think this is what is tripping you up the most.

C) Madison was from the most populous state, but it wasn't the state with the most eligible voters.  He introduced sufferage as a concern to frame direct election as a way to encourage sufferage.  And it had more to do with land-ownership and urbanism than slavery.

D) You have one thing correct.  The first concern with having a PM-type executive was him being beholden to Congress.  The first fix to this was two-fold (1) give the president a longer term than legislature (2) limit him to one term.  However, this still left the convention with two issues: (1) the group responsible for impeachment would also be selecting the replacement (2) the president would be chosen from a central location which allowed for political dealings and cabals to be made as votes are cast.

E) The answer to both of these was for a different set of electors to meet in their respective states, with sealed votes only opened in the capital once all the votes were cast.  Hence the Electoral College.

Edited by JBJ
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chuckie Finster

Chuckie Finster 23099

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

It's disingenuous. It's the equivalent of saying "I'm not saying it's true, but it sure does feeeeeel like...."

 

It's not disingenuous, because that's exactly what I'm saying.

I have no idea if it's shady, and shit like this probably happens all the time, but it sure makes me feel gross.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
  • Author
Posted
7 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

It's not disingenuous, because that's exactly what I'm saying.

I have no idea if it's shady, and shit like this probably happens all the time, but it sure makes me feel gross.

Let’s face it, anything suspicious regarding the Trump regime is fake news to them.  They’ve been conditioned so well over time with Hillary bullshit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chuckie Finster

Chuckie Finster 23099

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

When did you stop beating your wife?

I know you are patting yourself on the back for what you think is a genius retort, but this in no way applies to the current discussion.

This is like a coworker showing up to work with bruises and telling us that she fell down the stairs, and then 6 months from now we find out that her husband previously got arrested for beating his ex.  Sure there's a perfectly logical chance that she did fall down the stairs, but you're trying to tell me I'm crazy for raising an eyebrow at the situation.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
udaydanceparty

udaydanceparty 33

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, kevwun said:

Deutsche Bank is shady as fuck outside of any of their dealings with Trump.  I'd be leery of anyone who has ties to them.

Care to be more specific?  I've heard Goldman is bad but never heard that Deutsche Bank was doing anything improper.  I've heard that the bank is failing and that it's important to Germany, but not that they were shady.

It's also my understanding that they are one of the biggest banks in the world and that overlap would be pretty ridiculous if anyone and everyone that has ever done business with them is guilty by association. 

I think you have to be really careful with guilt by association in general.  Everyone who has ever had a Netflix account should not be associated with child porn thanks to that story that broke yesterday for example.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13567

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Anastasis said:

Just want to make sure that I am reading some of these posts right.  Y'all are hinting around assassination of a GOP senator to prevent a SCOTUS appointment?  Did I get that right? I mean, I suppose its a moral conviction at least. 

Broke: Assassinate one GOP senator

Woke: 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kevwun

kevwun 16449

Posted
Posted (edited)

Deutsche Bank does a lot of business with with the Russian mob and pretty much anyone who doesn't want to answer a lot of questions about where the money is coming from.

Edited by kevwun
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
udaydanceparty

udaydanceparty 33

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

I know you are patting yourself on the back for what you think is a genius retort, but this in no way applies to the current discussion.

This is like a coworker showing up to work with bruises and telling us that she fell down the stairs, and then 6 months from now we find out that her husband previously got arrested for beating his ex.  Sure there's a perfectly logical chance that she did fall down the stairs, but you're trying to tell me I'm crazy for raising an eyebrow at the situation.

Yeah that's a poor analogy because you have not established that any part of the relationship could be considered improper.  You are implying something improper is going on and not explaining why that is the case.

A commercial bank lending money to a real estate company is normal business.  What about that specific loan would lead you to believe it was not a proper relationship?   I am sure Trump was looking for the most favorable terms for his loan to increase his odds of success.  All you need is one party willing to take the other side of the agreement and the loan occurs. 

The other "nefarious" aspect to this story is that a supreme court justice retired when the current president is of the same political affiliation.  Is that collusion?  Are Russians involved somehow?  What am I missing?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cheeseweasel

Cheeseweasel 26443

Posted
Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

I know you are patting yourself on the back for what you think is a genius retort, but this in no way applies to the current discussion.

 

If you really believe that Kennedy is stepping down due to some payment scheme by Trump' thru his son that's fine.

It's also fine that I call you a nutjob (just like the people who think Obama is not an American are nutjobs).

Edited by Cheeseweasel
Link to comment
Share on other sites
udaydanceparty

udaydanceparty 33

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, kevwun said:

Literally the first search result.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/31/investing/deutsche-bank-us-fine-russia-money-laundering/index.html

Okay let's examine the story.

Quote

The latest fines penalize Deutsche Bank (DB)'s failure to deal with a stock-trading scheme that enabled some of its clients in Russia to improperly move huge sums of money out of the country and into offshore accounts, according to regulators.

....

The German lender said in September 2015 that it was closing its investment banking business in Russia and would in future work with Russian corporate clients from abroad.

So DB was helping Russian clients get their money away from Putin and we fined them for it.  I would have figured we'd want to allow that money out of Russia so their economy would collapse and Putin would get fewer tax dollars. 

  • Fuck You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chuckie Finster

Chuckie Finster 23099

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

If you really believe that Kennedy is stepping down due to some payment scheme by Trump' thru his son that's fine.

It's also fine that I call you a nutjob (just like the people who think Obama is not an American are nutjobs).

I don't know how many different ways I have to say, "nothing funny probably happened, it just makes me feel weird."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
udaydanceparty

udaydanceparty 33

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, kevwun said:

That wasn't getting money away from Putin, it was money laundering.

Why do people launder money?  Which government was supposed to receive the taxes on that money?

If these guys were committing crimes in Russia and getting their money out of the country, they weren't part of Putin's oligarch club because if they were, they wouldn't need to launder the money.

 

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
udaydanceparty

udaydanceparty 33

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

I don't know how many different ways I have to say, "nothing funny probably happened, it just makes me feel weird."

A better way of putting it is that you are ignorant about the topic but you got triggered because you saw the word "Trump".  So your brain got busy trying to figure out a way this relationship could make him look bad.

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
  • Author
Posted
6 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

I don't know how many different ways I have to say, "nothing funny probably happened, it just makes me feel weird."

The thing that concerns me isn’t as much about Trump but Kennedy and his relationship with his son regarding dark money in politics and citizens united. 

Citizen’s United was a 5-4 decision with Kennedy writing the opinion of the court.  His son was in clear position to personally benefit from the decision and it looks like he may have capitalized.

 How much influence did Kennedy’s son have on his dad’s views regarding this topic? We will never know but it stinks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13567

Posted
Posted

Russian oligarchs steal from the people of Russia.

Russian oligarchs launder the money through foreign banks so it will never be taxed in Russia.

Russia has less tax revenue to spend on helping the people of Russia.

"Seems fine to me!" - Fucking morons on SurlyHorns.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites
udaydanceparty

udaydanceparty 33

Posted
Posted

 

8 minutes ago, kevwun said:

Putin's oligarch club commits crimes inside Russia every single day with his blessing.  They also need clean money to buy real estate and other things in foreign countries.

Laundering only matters for the country of origin where the crime is committed.  It doesn't matter outside of that jurisdiction.

If it was an oligarch, the money is already legitimate before it leaves Russia.  No laundering is necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
udaydanceparty

udaydanceparty 33

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The thing that concerns me isn’t as much about Trump but Kennedy and his relationship with his son regarding dark money in politics and citizens united. 

Citizen’s United was a 5-4 decision with Kennedy writing the opinion of the court.  His son was in clear position to personally benefit from the decision and it looks like he may have capitalized.

 How much influence did Kennedy’s son have on his dad’s views regarding this topic? We will never know but it stinks. 

Awesome.. Now we are throwing baseless accusations at supreme court justices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JBJ

JBJ 3830

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Citizen’s United was a 5-4 decision with Kennedy writing the opinion of the court.  His son was in clear position to personally benefit from the decision and it looks like he may have capitalized.

How does a real estate banker benefit from Citizens United?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4580

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, udaydanceparty said:

 

Laundering only matters for the country of origin where the crime is committed.  It doesn't matter outside of that jurisdiction.

If it was an oligarch, the money is already legitimate before it leaves Russia.  No laundering is necessary.

He's right and you're wrong.  Like, embarrassingly wrong.  You've got terrible troll game.   Create some new socks and try again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cheeseweasel

Cheeseweasel 26443

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

I don't know how many different ways I have to say, "nothing funny probably happened, it just makes me feel weird."

"I'm not saying Obama isn't an American, but not seeing his birth certificate sure makes me feel weird"

Potato, Potahto.

Both nutjob statements.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
  • Author
Posted
6 minutes ago, JBJ said:

How does a real estate banker benefit from Citizens United?

Other than the fact that the banker worked for the biggest Russian money laundering bank in the world and personal finance guy to the now president of the United States? I have no idea 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gsoda3

gsoda3 3362

Posted
Posted

if you're in russia and you're rich enough to want to move money out, you're part of putin's club.  the db fiasco was a bunch of db traders in moscow manipulating mark to market prices to move money, mostly to london.  that they got caught was somewhat timely, as db had just the year before spearheaded an investigation into dirty money flowing from russia to europe and concluded there'd been a substantial amount flowing in that one direction over the past quarter decade.  that it was actually their own banking unit doing half of that amount wasn't known until a separate report came out after the traders were caught.  there's been a long history of questionable, if not downright dirty, money flowing from russia to western europe.  ever since the inception of the eurodollar about 70 years ago, when countries didn't want to hold USD in the US, money's been flowing mostly to london to hold USD.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
udaydanceparty

udaydanceparty 33

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

He's right and you're wrong.  Like, embarrassingly wrong.  You've got terrible troll game.   Create some new socks and try again.  

Elaborate. 

If someone in Venezuela is selling toilet paper on the black market and needs to get that money to a bank in the USA, when does the money laundering take place and why?

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
udaydanceparty

udaydanceparty 33

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, gsoda3 said:

if you're in russia and you're rich enough to want to move money out, you're part of putin's club.  the db fiasco was a bunch of db traders in moscow manipulating mark to market prices to move money, mostly to london.  that they got caught was somewhat timely, as db had just the year before spearheaded an investigation into dirty money flowing from russia to europe and concluded there'd been a substantial amount flowing in that one direction over the past quarter decade.  that it was actually their own banking unit doing half of that amount wasn't known until a separate report came out after the traders were caught.  there's been a long history of questionable, if not downright dirty, money flowing from russia to western europe.  ever since the inception of the eurodollar about 70 years ago, when countries didn't want to hold USD in the US, money's been flowing mostly to london to hold USD.  

Oh hey.. someone who is actually understanding what the fuck is going on in that article.  Fantastic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4580

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

"I'm not saying Obama isn't an American, but not seeing his birth certificate sure makes me feel weird"

Potato, Potahto.

Both nutjob statements.

 

That was only a nutjob statement after Obama actually released his birth certificate in June 2008.   It wasn't crazy to want to see it before then, given the mistake on his book jacket.   I don't think there's anything weird here, but there's nothing crazy about mentioning the connection. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...