Trump Indictment Monday Odds and Predictions

[jem]

you are not reading with any context or understanding.

That clause comes after a comma, therefore just about every person who understands statutory or constitutional construction or even english will tell the clause is referring to cases and the appellate jurisdiction of the court.

It means in all other cases the Supreme Ct has appellate jurisdiction unless the House makes an exception or a regulation. For instance the house could give original jurisdiction to the Sup Ct in FISA matters or maybe matters involving immigration... if it wished.


Your argument about Marbury vs Madison is interesting but as a lefty you could not seriously be in favor of giving majority rule back to the voters via the house. I can't believe you just argued laws should not be subject to Sup Ct review.

I am not pretending anything here. I am simply stating fact. What you write is true but does not go to my point. I have taken the liberty to underline in your quote the important words in the Constitution that place the House superior to The Court in all matters except those affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party. The House, if it wishes to exercise that clause, a feature of our U.S. Constitution largely overlooked, must act pre-emptively. Marbury does not, and can not, set aside the Constitution.

This often glossed over clause in our Constitution is, I am certain, what Newt Gingrich was ineptly referring to when he shocked so many.

 

[piezoe]

jem. Sweetheart. When are you going to start reading. You've just repeated exactly what I wrote, using the actual wording of the Constitution.

Should you consider giving all your former clients refunds?

 

[jem]

I tried to be somewhat restrained in my criticism but your come across as such a raging leftist prick who thinks very highly of his own ill informed thoughts...

so I will tell this to your straight..your statement is so dumb we are all worse for reading it.

piezoe said... ( i underlined it and placed the stupidity it in bold)
" . I have taken the liberty to underline in your quote the important words in the Constitution that place the House superior to The Court in all matters except those affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, "

 

[piezoe]

I tried to be somewhat restrained in my criticism but your come across as such a raging leftist prick who thinks very highly of his own ill informed thoughts...

so I will tell this to your straight..your statement is so dumb we are all worse for reading it.

piezoe said... ( i underlined it and placed the stupidity it in bold)
" . I have taken the liberty to underline in your quote the important words in the Constitution that place the House superior to The Court in all matters except those affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, "

jem. This doesn't work. We are all on to you. Just quote me please, the entire quote not leaving anything out. you have consciously and deliberately attempted to mislead readers of this thread. You are not permitted to alter my post in such a material way! By leaving out the all important, key words in the constitution your reader has no way to make sense of my quote from my post #50 that you improperly abbreviated... Perhaps I should report you to Baron for this. I'm not going to bother. On second thought it seems this jumbled reasoning of yours is a part of your nature, that you apparently can't help.

I refer you, and anyone who would like to know precisely
what I said, to my post #50, this thread.

 

[jem]

here is your post #50.

I will highlight the words I highlighted previously so I can see the dumbest quote in history of American Civics. Notice how once again Piezoe considers himself above others... (he understands this special bit of esoteric info... that is largely overlooked by others) and even Newt might know about it but he ineptly referred to it. Making Piezoe so smart.

Its fricken comedy.



"I am not pretending anything here. I am simply stating fact. What you write is true but does not go to my point. I have taken the liberty to underline in your quote the important words in the Constitution that place the House superior to The Court in all matters except those affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party. The House, if it wishes to exercise that clause, a feature of our U.S. Constitution largely overlooked, must act pre-emptively. Marbury does not, and can not, set aside the Constitution.

This often glossed over clause in our Constitution is, I am certain, what Newt Gingrich was ineptly referring to when he shocked so many.