- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: President Trump says he will be Suing to prevent Chuck Grassley from blocking Alina Habba
Posted on 8/26/25 at 6:19 am to RCDfan1950
Posted on 8/26/25 at 6:19 am to RCDfan1950
I think every republican senator, congressman etc, should immediately stop speaking, meeting with, or answering Grassyass's calls...no lunches, coffees, dinners...etc etc
Completely cold shoulder that bitch and anything he needs for his state
Completely cold shoulder that bitch and anything he needs for his state
0
Posted on 8/26/25 at 6:22 am to RobbBobb
quote:
The blue slip is essentially a home state Sen deciding the nomination
Exactly. Plus the GOPe never use it. Yet this old fossil is going to hide behind it to look like a gentleman.
Deep State
This post was edited on 8/26/25 at 6:32 am
Posted on 8/26/25 at 6:40 am to udtiger
The president’s appointment power is explicitly limited by the advice and consent clause. The founders inserted that clause after considerable debate. The Senate has the right to make rules for its own proceedings. This should be a 9-0 vote in favor of the Senate. The USSC will not pass judgment on Senate rules under the Political Question doctrine.
Posted on 8/26/25 at 6:42 am to cajunangelle
Omg frick grassley
Posted on 8/26/25 at 6:45 am to udtiger
quote:
It's a political question. Courts won't touch it.
It is now because she’s not been formally nominated.
If Trump formally nominates her then at least it’s a justiciable case or controversy.
I still think it’s an uphill fight for the admin because Article I, Section 5 says the Senate is free to form their own rules on how and when they give their advice and consent.
This post was edited on 8/26/25 at 6:48 am
Posted on 8/26/25 at 7:30 am to boosiebadazz
Everyone's so dramatic on here about this over little Alina. Imagine if grassley withheld a supreme court nomination from the president? Democrats simply trying to keep up with Republicans here in dirty tricks.
Posted on 8/26/25 at 8:05 am to hogcard1964
quote:
Huh? This makes zero sense.
Only if you’re retarded
Posted on 8/26/25 at 8:07 am to cajunangelle
That fossil needs to go to the house.
Posted on 8/26/25 at 8:10 am to TBoy
quote:
TBoy
serious question
Have you been gay from day 1, or did you once like women. You are definitely a beta and soy boy.....but I'm legit curious were you always gay?
Posted on 8/26/25 at 8:12 am to oklahogjr
quote:
oklahogjr
Do you think Trump is using Lawfare right now to get back at people?
Do you think the Dems weaponized the Dept of Justice and used Lawfare against Trump?
Posted on 8/26/25 at 8:20 am to Mandtgr47
quote:
you think Trump is using Lawfare right now to get back at people?
Do you think the Dems weaponized the Dept of Justice and used Lawfare against Trump?
I believe there's no way to define lawfare outside of trump feeling victimized.
Is it lawfare to prosecute someone for a crime they committed?
Posted on 8/26/25 at 10:57 am to hogcard1964
quote:
Huh? This makes zero sense.
No, it makes perfect sense considering who Grassley is and the group of GOPe/uniparty never-Trumpers, of which he is one of the leaders, in charge of the U.S. Senate.
Posted on 8/26/25 at 11:02 am to Macavity92
bullshite.
Posted on 8/26/25 at 11:03 am to oklahogjr
quote:
I believe there's no way to define lawfare outside of trump feeling victimized.
Wow...
Posted on 8/26/25 at 11:05 am to oklahogjr
quote:
I believe there's no way to define lawfare outside of trump feeling victimized.
Is it lawfare to prosecute someone for a crime they committed?
Lawfare isn't a trump thing. See Flynn for a textbook example. Lawfare is for the most part when cases are brought with no real intention of winning the case but draining the victim's financial assets, obstructing or even defaming them in the media. Make someone broke or unable to do something because they are always stuck in court and/or tarnish their reputation.
Posted on 8/26/25 at 11:06 am to oklahogjr
quote:
Democrats simply trying to keep up with Republicans here in dirty tricks.
you’re a caricature. Posted on 8/26/25 at 11:07 am to oklahogjr
quote:
Is it lawfare to prosecute someone for a crime they committed?
Is it lawfare to change the statute of limitations to go after a single person.
What did the victims of these “crimes” say? You absolute moron. I bet you believe Mar a Lago is worth 39MM. fricking idiot.
Posted on 8/26/25 at 11:51 am to BTROleMisser
quote:
bullshite
Brilliantly argued.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News