He kept us safe

[R-Jack]

If appointment is delayed until next year & Trump appoints his sister (who has already rendered a pro-Roe v. Wade decision) to SCOTUS, you can bet the republicans would be willing to impeach him.

Or they could just not appoint her.

[Diego in Seattle]

Is that really all you got?

You've now had multiple instances of not knowing what the fuck you're talking about. You might wanna back off the derogatory posts.

People who get hung up on whether the word "appoint" or "nominate" are used shouldn't go around accusing others of not knowing what they're talking about.

It's like worrying about whether "car" or "vehicle" is used in a discussion about automotive engineering.

[Dinsdale]

It's like worrying about whether "car" or "vehicle" is used in a discussion about automotive engineering.

Ohhhhhh, ohhhhhkay.


Are "banana" and "bicycle" the same thing, too?

Or closer to the point, are "prosecuted" and "convicted" the same thing?


You could, maybe, you know... admit you made a mistake, and excuse yourself from the conversation, since you've now made three absolutely dumbfuck errors.

"Nominate" and "appoint" come from 2 entirely different branches of government, so no -- it's not thew same as "car" and "vehicle," which indeed refer to the same thing when talking automobiles.

[Diego in Seattle]

Hey Dins....How did Anthony Kennedy get on the SCOTUS initially?

[Diego in Seattle]

Hey Dins....How did Anthony Kennedy get on the SCOTUS initially?

[Dinsdale]

He was nominated, confirmed and appointed.

Your point, He Who Doesn't Know What Those Words Mean?

[Diego in Seattle]

He was nominated, confirmed and appointed.

Your point, He Who Doesn't Know What Those Words Mean?

I read an erroneous website about him....How about William Brennan Jr.?

[R-Jack]

He was recess nominated.

s/Diego

[mvscal]

He was nominated, confirmed and appointed.

Your point, He Who Doesn't Know What Those Words Mean?

I read an erroneous website about him....How about William Brennan Jr.?

Brennan was a huge, gaping progtard nominated by a Republican president in a tight election year. If Barry nominates a conservative justice, he will likely be confirmed. Of course, he isn't going to do that.

[Diego in Seattle]

He was nominated, confirmed and appointed.

Your point, He Who Doesn't Know What Those Words Mean?

I read an erroneous website about him....How about William Brennan Jr.?

Brennan was a huge, gaping progtard nominated by a Republican president in a tight election year. If Barry nominates a conservative justice, he will likely be confirmed. Of course, he isn't going to do that.

He wasn't "nominated," fucknut.

[mvscal]

Of course he was, you brainless fuckwad. Recess appointments only last until the next session of Congress begins. His nomination was confirmed the following year.

Now go fuck yourself, idiot.

[Diego in Seattle]

Of course he was, you brainless fuckwad. Recess appointments only last until the next session of Congress begins. His nomination was confirmed the following year.

Now go fuck yourself, idiot.

It's still an appointment, fartbreath.

[Rooster]

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014 ... .html?_r=0

The Secret Casualties of Iraq’s Abandoned Chemical Weapons

The gist of the article is that while many of the delivery devices in Iraq are decaying, such as artillery shells and air droppable bombs, the chemical munitions inside-- particularly the blister agents like mustard gas --are still retaining their lethality, even up to 84% purity or effectiveness. The author also discusses the Pentagon's continuing push to reduce the numbers of chemical weapons discovered and keep secret the actual numbers of both munitions found and the American soldier casualties of those who either accidentally discovered them and got exposed or those troops who destroyed them in place. Frequently, these soldiers thought they were destroying standard munitions and it wasn't until they either developed blisters or displayed nerve agent exposure symptoms.

Again, we can argue about whether these were the WMD that President Bush thought they were or if these were simply old, but as this National Review article plainly shows, the question of if any of this was thought to be real actually begins back in the Clinton administration.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... trump-iraq

An Iraq of Myth and Fantasy

We need to recall a few facts. Bill Clinton bombed Iraq (Operation Desert Fox) on December 16 to 19, 1998, without prior congressional or U.N. approval. As Clinton put it at the time, our armed forces wanted “to attack Iraq’s nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors. Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world. Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas, or biological weapons.” At the time of Clinton’s warning about Iraq’s WMD capability, George W. Bush was a relatively obscure Texas governor.

[Dr_Phibes]

But that's a lawyerly approach, rather than a historical one. You're making a case, rather than understanding or expaining it. Obsessing over technicalities gets you running around in circles. The letter of the law, or the technicality which may or may not be true, (depending on your opinion) obfuscates the policy that the technicality was a vehice for. It bars any deeper investigation.

Any offensive capabilities they had were shattered ten years previous.

[mvscal]

But that's a lawyerly approach, rather than a historical one.

If by lawyerly, you mean intellectually dishonest then, yes, I would agree. We didn't invade Iraq because we suspected that he might have some old, Iran-Iraq War surplus munitions laying around somewhere.

We invaded because we were told in no uncertain terms that he had active programs. That was a lie.