Evers is Sleazy. Just. Sleazy.
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — One of former Gov. Scott Walker’s appointees tried to return to her job Thursday after a state appellate court stayed a court ruling that her appointment and dozens of others were invalid — only to be turned away at the door.
Ellen Nowak tried to return to her job as chairwoman of the Public Service Commission along with her assistant, Bob Seitz. A security guard stopped both of them and a human resources manager appeared and took them into a private room. When they emerged, Nowak said she had been told that Gov. Tony Evers’ administration doesn’t believe the stay reinstates the Walker appointees.
As I said in my column, it’s pretty clear how Evers and his liberal cohorts in the courts plan to rule.
Sleazy is such a soft term for lefty behavior. Really, you’re being too kind.
I’m sure the trio of appellate court judges on this one are going to love being poked in the eye with a sharp stick as they further consider the lower court’s original decision.
Two words: Merrick Garland
Liberal and sleazy is a little redundant, but probably a good redundancy in this morally corrupt climate.
My two words are “Biden Rule.”
Your move, LeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeRoy.
Merrick Garland was a legal political manuver.
What Evers did is illgal.
Get the difference?
Probably not. Liberals don’t believe in the rule of law.
Rule of law? You mean, like going to court?
“What Evers did is illgal”.
How so?
MYTH: The “Biden Rule” stands for the principle that the Senate should never confirm a president’s nominee to the Supreme Court during a presidential election year.
FACT: The “Biden Rule” had never existed until Republicans in the Senate decided to obstruct President Obama and abort their own constitutional duties to fill the Supreme Court vacancy created by Justice Antonin Scalia’s death. The rule is based on a floor speech then-Senator Joe Biden gave in the summer of 1992, but the situation that he was speaking about—a Supreme Court justice all of a sudden deciding to retire only months before a presidential election—never came to pass. Biden never spoke about what should happen if, instead, a justice passed away.
FACT: The Full Biden Rule takes into account the rest of Biden’s floor speech that Republicans conveniently leave out:
“If the president consults and cooperates with the Senate [in naming a Supreme Court nominee], or moderates his selection absent consultation, then his nominee may enjoy my support as did Justices Kennedy and Souter.”
The Full Biden Rule, then, stands for the principle that a consensus nominee that enjoys support from both sides of the aisle—like Judge Merrick Garland—should be acted upon by the Senate without reservation.
Pat:
Thanks for enlightening the peanut gallery..
What Evers did is illgal”.
How so?
He’s not allowing legally appointed appointees to do their job.
The Biden Rule’s clause regarding ‘consultation’ with the Senate was a problem for Obama. So he got what he deserved: a big fat zero.
Li’l dinktwit Leeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeroy needs your help, Pat. Give him a cane or a walker, would you?
Evers is acting exactly like the 2-year-old he always was. How much tax money is he going to piss away with his tantrums?
Patsy cites scumbags: “FACT: The “Biden Rule” had never existed…”
Yes. From the fanged mouth of Alliance For Justice. Those lovely folks who gave birth to the term “Borked” and backed the lies of Anita Hill. You are the company you keep, Patsy.
However, Creepy Uncle Joe would beg to differ, for according Creepy Joe himself the rule existed long before he ever mentioned it in the very speech these leftist scuzzes attempt to twist: “President Bush should consider following the practice of a majority of his predecessors and not — and not — name a nominee until after the November election is completed.”
And let’s look at this tidbit:
“…but the situation that [Creepy Joe] was speaking about—a Supreme Court justice all of a sudden deciding to retire only months before a presidential election—never came to pass. Biden never spoke about what should happen if, instead, a justice passed away.” -AFJ
Disregard that Creepy Joe was speaking a full six months before the election. Pay no attention to what he actually said, which was, “… assuming a justice announced tomorrow that he or she was stepping down”. Oh, and just ignore the fact that CJ’s biggest concern seemed to be missing all the partying at the Dem convention, saying, “….and the president move to name a successor, actions that will occur just days before the Democratic Presidential Convention…”. Never mind that he summarized this part of his speech, “If [President Bush] presses an election-year nomination, the Senate Judiciary Committee should seriously consider not scheduling hearings on the nomination until after the political campaign season is over.”
Just skip by all those FACT thingies left by the wayside (intentionally) by AFJ, pull a Patsy, and attach yerself to their silly Godzilla-sized straw man that it is of utmost importance whether the judge himself or God decides its time for retirement.
But there are times when you leftnuts just make it so damn easy.
Case in point….
“FACT: The Full Biden Rule takes into account the rest of Biden’s floor speech that Republicans conveniently leave out: ‘If the president consults and cooperates with the Senate [in naming a Supreme Court nominee], or moderates his selection absent consultation, then his nominee may enjoy my support as did Justices Kennedy and Souter.’ The Full Biden Rule, then, stands for the principle that a consensus nominee that enjoys support from both sides of the aisle—like Judge Merrick Garland—should be acted upon by the Senate without reservation.“
THE REAL FACT: Alliance For Justice, and therefore Patsy, is lying. The Full Biden Rule takes into account the rest of Biden’s floor speech, including that which preceded the AFJ chosen quote, and that which AFJ, and therefore Patsy, conveniently leave out: “Let me start with the nomination process and how that process might be changed in the NEXT ADMINISTRATION, whether it is a Democrat or a Republican.”
FACT: Biden spoke directly against election year SCOTUS nominations.
FACT: Biden in no way advocated that such a nomination “should be acted upon by the Senate without reservation”.
FACT: Alliance For Justice is made up of gutter-dwelling leftist scumbags who fabricate and promote lies.
Enjoy your company, Patsy.
Major j Moron,
Please enlighten us with your facts when the name, “Biden Rule” was first used, and was first implemented when it came time for a Supreme Court nominee to be chosen.
Patsy has been owned with facts. Pretty soon he’ll unroll the usual Lefty crapola that ‘facts don’t matter.’ It worked for the Collusion Delusion gang, after all.
Hey Dud, I’m still waiting for the facts. You have any?
To add a little context:
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/mar/17/context-biden-rule-supreme-court-nominations/
Nord, get ready for the foaming rebuttal coming saying it’s all a lie and Politico is scumbag fake news. Learn to get your facts from a reliable source, like InfoWars.
Pat:
I have girded my loins for the onslaught. At least I provided a source with direct quotes, unlike the deniers unable or unwilling to show their work.
I’m taking orders for bright blue MASA (MakingAmericaSmartAgain) caps. How many do you need??
Nord,
Sorry, but the t-shirts would have as much influence in making America smart again as MAGAt hats have at making America great again. The whole world is laughing at us.
Awful, just awful.
Pat:
You are probably right. But I am trying everything I can to increase the knowledge base. Looks like you are as well.
I love it when I own Dud when he can’t give facts.
Evers undid his sleeve.
Let’s celebrate…a liberal politician undid their evil…that does not happen everyday.
In reality, there is no Biden rule. It’s just a suggestion.
Whoever has the power gets to make the rules
Mar:
Exactly. Maybe you can explain that to mjmumbles…
Assuming Politico is correct, Biden wanted to delay nomination until after the elections were held. Senate confirmation would have ~60 days to happen–or not. He was NOT concerned about an 8-man Court, either.
So–in this instance–GHWBush could nominate after Clinton’s victory and after the Senate majority was decided.
IN CONTEXT, then, Biden knew that a Bush nomination of a conservative justice would fail (you can look up the results of the election all by yourselves, Patsy-the-Owned and LeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeRoy the tax-taker.) So, in context, Biden didn’t care what Bush would do; the only nomination which would be confirmed would be a liberal.
Sounds, good, eh, boys?
Too bad it’s still only half the truth, as MjM demonstrated above. I know both of you have reading-comprehension deficiency, so I’ll re-run the quote for you: <i>The Full Biden Rule takes into account the rest of Biden’s floor speech, including that which preceded the AFJ chosen quote, and that which AFJ, and therefore Patsy, conveniently leave out: “Let me start with the nomination process and how that process might be changed in the NEXT ADMINISTRATION, whether it is a Democrat or a Republican.” FACT: Biden spoke directly against election year SCOTUS nominations.</i>
That is ALL of the “context.” It’s a bitter pill for you–almost as bitter as the Mueller Collapse, I’m sure. So we’ll take the rest of the day off while you cry into your mom’s laundry baskets.
Hey Dud00,
Seeing as Major j Moron can’t answer how about you take your tin foil hat off for a second and answer.
Please enlighten us with your facts when the name, “Biden Rule” was first used, and was first implemented when it came time for a Supreme Court nominee to be chosen.
Irrelevant, Patsy-Orie-Orie-Ay. Doesn’t make a damn bit of difference. Biden wanted it that way, that’s the way it is.
Now say nighty-night to your mom and go directly to bed.
dud and mumbles:
Could you point out where in the CFR the so-called Biden Rule was codified? Thanks
Gee Dud00, unable to give a direct answer? Who owns who now?
It’s a fictitious rule that McConnell pulled out of his ass. What do you think will happen should RBG leaves the bench next year? I’m ready to place a bet that your so called Biden rule will be what’s irrelevant.
Patsy cries: “Please enlighten us with your facts when the name, “Biden Rule” was first used,…”
You should change yer name to Dorthy, cuz you sure love straw men.
But two can play:
Please enlighten us with your facts when the name, “McConnell Rule” was first used and implemented when it came time for a Supreme Court nominee to be chosen.
Nort plays second fiddle: “Could you point out where in the CFR the so-called Biden Rule was codified?”
Likewise, could you point out where in the CFR the so-called McConnell Rule was codified?
Major j Moron,
Sounds like your saying there is no such rule.
That’s a feature, not a bug.
Patsy moans: “Sounds like your saying there is no such rule.”
Did I say there was? Please point to it. I merely used the term as cited by you, twit, in destroying your citation. You can call Creepy Joe’s collection of words what ever you wish, but even your scumbag friends at Alliance For Justice called it the “Full Biden Rule“.
Why are you relying on your scumbag friends if you don’t believe them?
Major j Moron channeled his inner Jethro Bodine and said, “Why are you relying on your scumbag friends if you don’t believe them?”
I was addressing Dud00’s claim about “The Biden Rule”. You, moronically as usual, couldn’t resist chiming in to defend Dud.
You’ve confirmed, as well as Dud did, that there actually is no Biden Rule.
So you can remove your nose from Dud’s ass and move on.
Pasty upchucks: “I was addressing Dud00’s claim about ‘The Biden Rule'”
…by citing your scumbag friends who say the the rule exists. Brilliant strategy there, sistah.
Pasy lies: ” You, moronically as usual, couldn’t resist chiming in to defend Dud.”
Please point to where I defended his claim. And because you can’t, you are proven yet again to be lying hack. My response was aimed solely and directly at the lies you cited. Try to comprehend, dear.
Patsy cock-a-doodle-doos: “You’ve confirmed, as well as Dud did, that there actually is no Biden Rule.”
By citing your scumbag AFJ friends you brainlessly confirmed there is.
Major j Moron removes his nose from Dud’s ass and says that I sourced a site that says the Biden Rule exists.
When in fact, what the source that I posted, in response to Dud00’s reference to the Biden Rule, said, “FACT: The “Biden Rule” had never existed until Republicans in the Senate decided to obstruct President Obama and abort their own constitutional duties to fill the Supreme Court vacancy created by Justice Antonin Scalia’s death.”
Moron, try to comprehend that they are saying that the Biden Rule is a made up rule that the Republicans concocted in their successful attempt to block a Supreme Court nominee.
Biden discussed at that time about the “nomination process and how that process MIGHT be changed in the next administration, whether it is a Democrat or a Republican.” No where was there a motion put forth for such a rule.
McConnell obviously wanted to pay proper respect to Hands-On Joe. Clearly, Joe’s speech was memorable, so McConnell condensed its content to a “Biden Rule.” That’s common practice as a sign of great respect.
Now clean up your basement room and go to bed, Patsy. You know the rules: no computer time after 8:30.
Dud00,
Good one. But April 1st was yesterday.
Patsy TammyStammers “ When in fact, what the source that I posted, in response to…said:…”
…. “FACT: The Full Biden Rule takes into account ….”
Funny how even your scumbag friends contradict your stance, taking so much time and effort explaining a rule that doesn’t exist.
Mebbe you should seek new friends.
Well, I guess that settles it. Moron confirms there is a Biden Rule.
Patsy sighs:”Well, I guess that settles it. ”
Still lying and still not grasping the reality: I didn’t confirm the existence of any rule. YOU did.
Stay confused, gurl.
@daddio. C’mon, man! You didn’t really expect Patsy to fathom in any way the nuances of “traditional”, “unwritten”, and “courtesy”, didja? That’s asking WAAAAAY too much!
Moron puts his nose back in the warm place, hears voices and confuses really saying, “ I didn’t confirm the existence of any rule. YOU did.”
All along I’ve personally been saying that it’s a non-existent rule made up by Republicans. Even my scumbag friends state, “FACT: The “Biden Rule” had never existed until Republicans in the Senate decided to obstruct President Obama and abort their own constitutional duties to fill the Supreme Court vacancy created by Justice Antonin Scalia’s death.”
I know you’re extremely dizzy from spinning this to make it true to fit your narrative, what ever the hell that narrative is. I’ve dispelled the lie that there is a Biden Rule, and you evidently agree that it doesn’t exists. So what are you trying to argue?
Pasty obsesses over my nose: ” I’ve dispelled the lie that there is a Biden Rule…”
Keep digging, gurl. Eventually you’ll 到達中國.
At least you admit (“Even my scumbag friends…”) you hang with scumbags.
Moron moans, “you hang with scumbags.”
Appears, at this time, I’m hanging with you.
Pat …. still angry after all these years. Cheers, Pat…..
Mike!
Long time no hear. How’ve ya been buddy. Still trying to setup porn readings to children?
Dud00 references Joe Biden as, “Hands-On Joe”.
Yes, Joe has had a tendency to be a little more touchy-feely than some were comfortable with. How this effects his run for President, should he choose to run, will have to be seen. But there is an electorate that evidently feels that’s acceptable.
Now, all he has to do is sexually assault 23 women and he can be President.