If you criticized President Trump for attacking Judge Robart in Seattle or AG Sessions for questioning the ruling from Judge Watson—a judge on an “island in the Pacific”—I hope your comments about Judge Kelly today are reasoned and, ideally, about the merits of the CFPB dispute.
-
-
And, I don’t know what “they so far have a bad record” is referring to. Finally, if you think all Trump nominees are forever “stained” bc of GOP treatment of Obama nominees, then there’s probably no point discussing your other claims.
-
Full disclosure I’m a novice of all things judicial, obviously, but so far off top of my head Neil “Corp shill” Gorsuch with his horrible lone arguement against the trucker, and of course the 30 something year old ghostbuster who’s wife apparently works for Trump admin...
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
From what I understand succession of CFPB Director was detailed in Dodd-Frank specifically and passed by Congress. Arguing for Vacancy Act in this case seems to be just resisting something bc u don’t like outcome. No?
-
I mean, you can literally go look through the 50 pieces written on this issue in the past 5 days. “From what you understand” is literally just one side of the argument. It is an argument, and DOJ advanced a plausible one on their side.
-
Fair enough and true, if they specifically didn’t include language in D-F to subvert the Vacancy Act I guess there is an arguement.
-
Still very hard to get beyond fact there is succession language written in founding act of the bureau, he’s a Trump judge, and WH is placing someone who thinks CFPB shouldn’t even exist in charge of it
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Yeah. Go watch the Burt Lancaster speech in "Judgement at Nuremberg". That's where we're headed.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.