The Supreme Court on Monday threw out a ruling against two Oregon bakers who refused to bake a wedding cake for a lesbian couple.
The couple, Melissa and Aaron Klein, cited religious beliefs as their reason for not providing services for a gay wedding. This touched off the latest in a series of such cases making headlines in recent years. During the court’s last term, justices ruled in favor of a Colorado baker in a similar situation, stating that a state body demonstrated improper hostility toward the baker’s religion in finding that he violated a state anti-discrimination law.
On Monday, the Supreme Court sent the Klein case back down to a lower court “for further consideration in light of” their Colorado decision. The central disputes in the case — which pits LGBT rights against religious freedom considerations — have yet to be addressed by the Supreme Court.
This was not really a surprise, but still will hit some people the wrong way. While the argument exists that the USSC has not offered a heavy duty solid ruling that defines one particular right (religious freedom vs discrimination) as superior to the other, their first ruling effectively puts both rights on equal footing. I am not sure that the court will ever necessarily go beyond that (nor should they necessarily go beyond that). That being said, there may come a day where a stubborn lower court may push for that.
The precedent for these religious liberty cases tends to hold that people should be allowed to exercise their religious rights as long as there is no real undue burden put on the person affected. For instance, it's perfectly legal for a Muslim cashier to call over a coworker to handle pork or a Christian pharmacist to allow a different pharmacist to deal with a customer picking up birth control. On the flip side, courts have ruled that the same worker may have to handle pork or provide the birth control, when their refusal to do so provides an undue burden on the patron.
So in the case of the baker baking a cake, the questions will likely be similar. Is this the only baker in town capable of baking this cake? Is there a reasonable option of this couple going to a different baker and allowing the Christian baker to maintain their religious freedoms? While it's possible that the USSC might provide an absolute ruling that one right is more important than the other, at this point in time, they did those in support of religious liberty a huge favor by requiring all lower courts to see both on equal footing.
As long as a court is required to provide equal consideration to the Religious liberties protected by the Bill of Rights, as they are to more recent protections for the LGBT, it makes it way more difficult for Judges to simply rule everything "discrimination" in a knee-jerk fashion. At the end of the day, there really needs to be a reasonable place of give and take somewhere down the middle of all of this.
85 comments:
Yeah but Trump is a racist liar who is mentally unstable, unqualified for everything and has orange skin and stupid hair.
Yep, orange man bad.
Speaker in Name Only Polosi found the problem in the Iran Issue, she Points to the USA as the problem.
Anonymous Myballs said...
Yeah but Trump is a racist liar who is mentally unstable,
Finally something I can agree you with!!!!!
ke? Is there a reasonable option of this couple going to a different baker and allowing the Christian baker
The supremes balked and the original decision will likely remain....!!!! So much for bakers too lazy to bake and serve the public...they can always close shop and practice anything they want in private.....sad...
Sarcasm is beyond Denny.
He's not the sharpest knife in the block.
ut in the Masterpiece Cakeshop decision, the justices sidestepped the question of whether baking a cake was an expressive act protected by the First Amendment, and whether requiring a baker to make gay wedding cakes is a form of compelled speech. Instead, the justices found that members of Colorado's Civil Rights Commission expressed religious bias against Phillips and did not serve as an appropriately neutral arbiter in his case. The Supreme Court therefore reversed the ruling against Phillips.
The Kleins asked the court to take their case, and the Supreme Court granted their petition only to vacate Oregon's ruling and send the case back to the Oregon Court of Appeals to be reheard in light of the Masterpiece Cakeshop ruling.
This isn't exactly a win for the Kleins. The Supreme Court wants Oregon to review the case and make sure the decision against the Kleins was not influenced by antireligious bias. The couple has claimed that the commissioner of Oregon's Bureau of Labor and Industries showed bias during the case by saying that his "goal is to rehabilitate" the couple.
Kicking the case back down suggests that the Supreme Court is reluctant to decide whether cake-making and floral-arranging are artistic, expressive actions protected by the First Amendment, which is what plaintiffs like the Kleins and Phillips have argued. The agencies who've penalized them, meanwhile, want the Supreme Court to rule that they are obligated to serve gay customers under the state's public accommodation antidiscrimination laws, regardless of how they personally feel about gay marriage.
We should expect to see more court cases like these. In fact, based on how the Oregon court rules, we could see this very case heading back to the Supreme Court in a couple of years.
Trump is a racist liar who is mentally unstable, unqualified for everything and has orange skin and stupid hair.
The supremes balked and the original decision will likely remain....!!!!
If that were true the Supreme Court would have simple refuse to hear the case. But instead, they remanding it back to the Oregon court of appeals for reconsideration in light of their Masterpiece Cake decision.
They are saying to Oregon that government hostility toward religion is unacceptable and they is what they are seeing it there.
Sarcasm is beyond Denny.
Is that antidotal asshole?????? BWAAAAAA!!!!
This is like opening your mouth and removing doubt.
If that were true the Supreme Court would have simple refuse to hear the case
They did refuse to hear the case jag off......suggest you look up the word remand.....
They are saying to Oregon that government hostility toward religion
Really cramps???
Kicking the case back down suggests that the Supreme Court is reluctant to decide whether cake-making and floral-arranging are artistic, expressive actions protected by the First Amendment, which is what plaintiffs like the Kleins and Phillips have argued. The agencies who've penalized them, meanwhile, want the Supreme Court to rule that they are obligated to serve gay customers under the state's public accommodation antidiscrimination laws, regardless of how they personally feel about gay marriage.
In our food-themed August-September issue of Reason currently on the stands (and readable online by digital subscribers here), I explore the wedding cake battle and the legal issues involved. The state is legally in the right here as far as ruling the Kleins have broken public accommodation laws. Making a wedding cake in and of itself doesn't count as a form of speech under the law, and the law does not recognize the Kleins' belief that forcing them to make a cake is the same as offering a stamp of approval and going against their faith. I concluded:
They did refuse to hear the case jag off...
Wrong again jerk off. Most of the time the Supreme Court refuses to hear the case without remand. That means the lower court's ruling automatically stands.
But in this case the Court remanded it back to the Oregon court of appeals for further consideration. That means the court believe the decision is either incorrect or incomplete with new information coming to light.
It's simply SCOTUS giving Oregon a do over. And I think Oregon will get the message.
We are paying 25 cents per gallon less then a year ago.
Except for California , they are paying more due to tax increases on fuel.
Denney writes in a food blog. Go figure.
7.2.2015 10:15 PM
Good fatty a 4 year old article
Speaker in Name Only Polosi hated that Pres. Trump used a Tariff threat against Mexico because it worked.
Now ICE is going to sweep up and deport illegals.
White Boy Robert Francis takes a page from Biden's playbook, make up imaginary friends.
"O’Rourke talked about stopping at a convenience store on his way to the event and meeting a painter named Thomas who recognized him on his way into the store. O’Rourke said the two then talked about the man’s work as a small business owner and recalled that the man was African-American. The candidate said he asked the man what America could do to make that man’s life more successful. Thomas answered the 2020 hopeful saying access to capital funds would help him."
"“I think time is running out,” Schiff told Berman. “The best way to get a witness to testify is if you can get them to testify voluntarily, and particularly I think with someone like Bob Mueller making an appeal to his patriotism, a sense of duty is the right way to go. But at the end of the day, he needs to come testify.”
Schiff said August would be too late for Mueller to testify.
“I think we’re reaching a point where if we can’t reach an agreement, and I hope we will, then we’ll have to use a subpoena,” he advised.
Denny,
Anytime the USSC references a decision and asks a court to reconsider, they are stating that the case in question (in this case Masterpiece cakeshop) is relevant to the lower court's decision, and should be considered in any new decision.
If the USSC believed that the case was not relevant and otherwise the lower court decision was without issues, they would not have vacated the previous decision and made them reconsider.
But they quite obvious see the same problem with a lack of consideration for the religious rights of the bakers in this case. It may be a "fine line" between hostility and honesty, but somethings the decision itself is what makes a ruling hostile. They can be play nice, say nice things, and still provide a ruling that is hostile to a particular legal right.
You cannot be a judge on a court, and pretend that there is no such thing as religious liberty based on the first amendment. You cannot pretend (without legal precedent anywhere) that somehow gay rights have suddenly become more important than religious liberty. While that very well may be how "society" wants to view things in 2019, the court of law requires more than just a societal change for something to be a new legal "norm".
I know that there are many political analysts who would like to see this differently... but what commonsense is saying is... well... common sense. The USSC justices are the best and smartest in their field. For political hacks to suggest that they are somehow unable to understand their own jobs is laughable.
Anonymous caliphate4vr said...
7.2.2015 10:15 PM
Good fatty a 4 year old article
Yep, the case that was turned down by the SCOTUS and germane to lil scotty's thread, the part of the story Scotty left out!!!! ......and will not be overturned.....you should learn to fucking read asshole....funny what a hard on you constantly show!!!!!! BWAAAAAAPAAAAAA!!!!!!!!
it's a 4 year old opinion piece fatman
Cali, it is about Cakes and Pie. So, Fatty be lovin' it.
Trump picks another winnah without vetting the pick himself.....seems he has a very dangerous past and quit before really being dragged through the mud.....gee another one whose clearances are problematical....!!!!
As Trump’s defense pick withdraws, he addresses violent domestic incidents
In interviews with The Post, Patrick Shanahan said he regretted explaining his son’s 2011 assault on his ex-wife with a baseball bat as an act of self-defense. His nomination as defense secretary had been delayed by an unusually lengthy FBI background check.
So much Winning.
"Trump’s Cabinet is putting his America First policies into place, including at the Department of Interior, where Secretary David Bernhardt announced a plan to open up more than 1.4 million acres of federal land through the elimination of some 7,500 regulations.
The land, under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, includes 74 national wildlife refuges and 15 national fish hatcheries. "
People feeding themselves is freedom.
Farmer in his mind only said like the idiot he is
t is about Cakes and Pie. So, Fatty be loving' it.
WOW!!!! Another solid post of why I think you and the loser are dumb beyond your years!!!!! LOLOLOLOLOL
it's a 4 year old opinion piece batman
And germane and complete to the case asshole.....get over yourself loser and get to work.....BWAAAAAAAA!!!!!!
Nancy Polosi and her lap puppy Chuck Schumer has extremely large Carbon Footprints.
CH losing again posts
and should be considered in any new decision.
Which IMHO will not chance, unlike you who thinks it is fine to discriminate...The Kleins have long since closed shop and are working out of their home with an on line presence only, which negates the problem of them being a public presence and free from the long arm of Oregon laws of discrimination....Well good for them!!!!!! Practice what you want in private and limit your ability to make money!!!!! Too bad others have recognized how affluent the gay community is and willing to spend lavishly on their affairs! Making money what its all about and most see opportunity not religious ideology.......LOLOLOL
The USSC justices are the best and smartest in their field.
That's not what you felt when they blessed the ACA,,,,,,,LOLOLOLOLO
It's been a rough day for fatty. he's had his ass handed to him by at least 4 here today
I wonder what he'll say about this tonight in Orlando......??? I AM THE GREATEST!!!!!!!!!
Trump may be about to face his biggest test yet on the economy
By Damian Paletta and
Heather Long June 17 at 8:03 PM
President Trump faces a number of major decisions on trade and the budget in the coming months just as the U.S. economy faces the biggest head winds of his tenure, forcing him to decide whether to recalibrate as recession fears mount for next year.
Trump has threatened to escalate trade conflicts with China, Mexico, the European Union and Japan, spooking business leaders and leading some to pull back investment. Similarly, budget and debt-ceiling talks with congressional leaders from both parties have sputtered, raising the possibility of another government shutdown in October.
The uncertainty — and a cooling global economy — led JPMorgan Chase on Monday to predict that there was a 45 percent chance the U.S. economy would enter a recession in the next year, up from 20 percent at the beginning of 2018.
Also Monday, a key gauge of New York’s manufacturing industry notched the biggest one-month drop ever recorded. It was the latest sign that after a relatively strong economy last year, political and economic forces appear to have combined this year in a way that has darkened the economic outlook. This could be problematic for Trump, who has tried to tout the economy’s performance as key to his reelection.
“The key question is: Can you have a smooth landing for the economy?” said Vincent Reinhart, chief economist for Mellon and a former Federal Reserve economist. “We’re going through a slowdown and nobody likes it. It doesn’t feel good.”
The economy’s softening and uncertainty around Trump’s next actions are causing a delicate situation for the Fed, which is meeting Tuesday and Wednesday. Trump is relying on the central bank to cut interest rates to boost economic growth. But Fed officials are trying to reconcile worrisome reports about the economy with other areas of relative strength, particularly the low unemployment rate and high levels of consumer spending.
Yep, the case that was turned down by the SCOTUS and germane to lil scotty's thread... and will not be overturned.
Actually Denny,
This is SPECIFICALLY the case that the USSC just VACATED and sent back to the Oregon court to use the Masterpiece ruling to reconsider.
From your link:
The final judgment has come in for Aaron and Melissa Klein, the Gresham, Oregon, bakers who had been found guilty of discriminating against a lesbian couple by refusing to bake them a wedding cake. They've been ordered to pay $135,000 to make up for the emotional damage they caused by telling this couple no. From the Associated Press and KATU in Oregon:
From today:
The Supreme Court on Monday threw out a ruling against two Oregon bakers who refused to bake a wedding cake for a lesbian couple.
The couple, Melissa and Aaron Klein, cited religious beliefs as their reason for not providing services for a gay wedding. This touched off the latest in a series of such cases making headlines in recent years. During the court’s last term, justices ruled in favor of a Colorado baker in a similar situation, stating that a state body demonstrated improper hostility toward the baker’s religion in finding that he violated a state anti-discrimination law.
It's been a rough day for fatty. he's had his ass handed to him by at least 4 here today
BWAAAAAAAAA!!!!! 4 WHAT???? Retards? Assholes? Losers? Idiots......the only thing I lost today was a quarter I dropped in the parking lot....LOLOLOLOLOL Get to work..... Since all you post is juvenile insults.....I successfully trolled the 4 morons of the right into another losing day for both you and trump.....A great day !!!!
The other day our farmer in his mind only stated plantings in the mid west were going great and there would be bumper crops of corn wheat and soy beans..... I would like whatever he is smoking....!!!!!
By Laura Reiley June 18 at 11:39 AM
In the nation’s 18 major corn-producing states, there has been one refrain for the past few weeks: To plant or not to plant? There comes a point of no return, where the cost of planting outweighs potential remuneration, where yields dwindle and there just may not be enough days for plants to mature before a hard frost.
For many American corn farmers, that point is now.
On Monday, the U.S. Department of Agriculture reported that domestic plantings were at 92 percent of farmers’ total intended acreage, the slowest pace in more than 40 years.
Ohio trailed behind, with 68 percent of its corn planted, South Dakota had 78 percent, and Michigan and Indiana each had 84 percent of their hoped-for acres planted. Last week, the USDA lowered the projected total yield to 13.68 billion bushels (last year’s corn yield was 14.3 billion bushels). And as of Monday, in anticipation of an impending shortage, corn futures continued to trade at their highest level since June 2014.
According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Centers for Environmental Information, May 2018 to April 2019 was the wettest year on record in the contiguous United States. Already-saturated ground got even more rain in May and into June, said Tyler Urban, 31, who sells crop insurance and farms corn and soybeans near Sioux Falls, S.D.
It takes that many given the size of his ass.
"It's been a rough day for fatty. he's had his ass handed to him by at least 4 here today"
This is SPECIFICALLY the case that the USSC just VACATED
Actually Lil Scotty.....I have read all that and have said numerous times that they will not change the decision......sorry if that went over your tiny little head.....
Educating Dennis.
If they don't plant corn they will plant Shorter Season Soybean.
Keep cheerleading against the US Farmers/Ranchers that feed the World.
Our farmer in his mind only added
It takes that many given the size of his ass.
Wow.....now you are fixated on my ass.....BWAAAAAAAA!!!! TOO FUNNY and most pathetic !!!!
f they don't plant corn they will plant Shorter Season Soybean.
BWAAAAAAAAAA!!!!! Sure you fraud.....Maybe they will plant green beans also......asshole....
Denny...
What part about the USSC vacating their decision goes over YOUR head? At this point in time, it's like the entire lawsuit against the Oregon couple never happened, and there was never any ruling against them. What was stated four years ago is irrelevant. It no longer legally exists.
Now, hypothetically, the Oregon court could decide to challenge the USSC and come back with a new decision with the same outcome (and claim they considered Masterpiece in doing so). I strongly suspect that this will "eventually" happen and it will force the USSC to take a side. But given the fact that Religious liberty is part of the Constitution, and there are numerous precedents in upholding Religious liberty in these sorts of case, I would be surprised if "suddenly" the USSC decided to toss it all aside and make "new" precedent.
Keep in mind that the original Masterpiece decision has stood in Colorado, and the Colorado courts have already tossed other attempts to sue them for similar allegations. That State court has accepted Masterpiece as a precedent that you cannot simply "choose" gay rights over Religious rights without an extremely good reason to do so.
The two cases are pretty much the exact same case. What makes the Oregon case different than the Colorado case?
At this point in time, it's like the entire lawsuit against the Oregon couple never happened
And I will state again....the decision will be the same as the first.....then it will go back to the supremes under appeal again....You doubt that? I got a proposition for you......LOLOLOLOL Sorry sport, but you are emotionally involved with this and your mind is clouded with bigotry of the gay community;....
Invincible ignorance is a sight to behold. Talking Denny is like talking to wall but is sure is fun to see him exposed.
Keep in mind that the original Masterpiece decision has stood in Colorado,
Which was the local govmt was biased.......that may not be in play here.....sorry sport, you lose again.....
Maybe they will plant green beans also"
Answer, Highly unlikely, given that harvest is done primarily be hand.
And I will state again....the decision will be the same as the first....
At which point Oregon will get a strong rebuke from the Supreme Court. They don't want this case back before them when the decision is obvious.
Keep in mind that the original Masterpiece decision has stood in Colorado,
No, it didn't. it was overturned.
His lawsuit came after the Supreme Court ruled in June that Colorado's Civil Rights Commission displayed anti-religious bias when it sanctioned Phillips for refusing to make a wedding cake in 2012 for Charlie Craig and Dave Mullins, a same-sex couple.
Wanna dig deeper Lil Scotty???? BWAAAAAAAA!!!!
At which point Oregon will get a strong rebuke from the Supreme Court
No it will be appealed again and maybe the supremes will finally do their job about the artistic bullshit first amendment argument.....
Denny...
First - If this is "just" your opinion. Then what does a four year old article (that precedes the Masterpiece decision) have to do with anything?
Second - If the same situation does not apply, then why did the USSC vacate the decision and claim that it does?
he's just this dumb
en what does a four year old article (that precedes the Masterpiece decision) have to do with anything?
Hey asshole, I explained that once and it seems to have gone over your head...find it yourself, you are a smart guy and shouldn't take you too long....It will be decided again the same way.....then go back for another appeal......
This boy is beyond dumb.
and cramps chimes in with less than usual......BWAAAAAAAA Was that antidotal cramps????????
Denny I think it's beyond scientific certainty that you're dumber than a box of rocks.
I see lo iq "anonymous" has spent all day in his vacation house basement. Commenting here. Best vacation ever for him.
Or maybe he just has the travel channel on.
Or an old National Geographic.
ROFLMFAO !!!!
nd scientific certainty that you're dumber than a box of rocks.
BWAAAAAAA!!!@!! THAT REALLY HURTS CRAMPS.... And God will reward your piousness of hatred toward gays, women and anything science.....road to perdition is littered with corpses of cultists like you!!!
Yep.....raining cats and assholes like you.....BWAAAAAAAA!!!!
Denny... for starters you suggested that the ruling would not be overturned, when in fact it has been. Completely vacated. So it's obvious here that you are scrambling to find a "different" argument from your original argument... even as you pretend otherwise.
It will be decided again the same way..
Well according the USSC, it cannot be decided the same way. That is the entire point of vacating the decision. They are not just vacating the decision, they are vacating the legal logic of the decision.
The Oregon court stated that this was a Private Business that did not qualify to have the exemption offered to "religious organizations, Schools, and other organizations. Seems like they also need to look at the landmark Hobby Lobby decision as well.
They basically charged them $135,000 for standing by religious principles that the USSC has over and over again has provided legal sanctuary for. There was nothing "intentional" about what the bakers did here. They did not go out of their way to hurt the couple. In fact, they have proven themselves true to their religion by making the decision to close the store and perform their bakery services online.
But the bottom line is simple. Had the USSC agreed with the underlying logic of the Oregon ruling, then they would not have vacated the decision.
So even if the Oregon courts want to come up with the same "conclusion" they will need to arrive at that conclusion in an entirely different fashion. They cannot rely on the same reasoning that they used the first time. If they do, it will simply be vacated again, and again, and again, and again.
They have to provide deference to the religious convictions that these owners held. It's would be an uphill climb to ignore both the Hobby Lobby precedent along with the Masterpiece precedent, while coming up with an entirely new reasoning than the first time...
and have it come across as reasonable.
Again, Denny. I don't disagree that some court will attempt to make the challenge. But this particular court (Hobby Lobby, Sister of the Poor, Masterpiece) has been a pretty big fan of the concept of Religious liberty. Many people believe that they might have even bent things in favor of Religious liberty. So perhaps, it would be a mistake to push the issue.
My best guess is this will be the new way forward for the USSC. They will simply "vacate" these decisions and quite possibly will "vacate" them more than once, if for no other reason to avoid the bigger issue.
Well according the USSC, it cannot be decided the same way.
The new judgement will be the same, with a different write up and findings.....The courts will not simply vacate, but will not rule that govmt was biased and uphold the oregon fines. Anything less would defy logic.....oh well....The original rulings provide plenty of deference to the religion....it just followed the law....sorry sport...this one will finally get the supremes to get off their old white asses and provide justice for all......LOLOLOL
It's almost like he never listen to a word CH said.
Do Anderson Cooper will not get any inheritance from his mother Gloria Vanderbilt. Rumour has it she told him he was an *sshole.
almost like he never listen to a word CH said.
I don't listen to bigoted assholes like you.....LOLOLOLOL
Actually, Dennis is what he is, a dumb troll.
The farmer in his mind only again shows his extreme stupidity with
is what he is, a dumb troll.
And I constantly catch my limit of idiots like you, goat fucker .....BWAAAAAAA!!!!!!
The upcoming debates between the 23 Dwarfs are going to pure popcorn popping time.
Try this, Dennis believes he is smart.
AOC offended the Jewish Community by stating the Region Centers for Illegals where like Nazi Germany "concentration camps".
This is somewhat surprising because two conservative justices stopped blatant racist Republican policies.
The Supreme Court has ruled against the Virginia House of Delegates in a racial gerrymandering case that represents a victory for Democrats in the state.
In the 5-4 ruling, the justices found that the House didn't have the standing to appeal a lower court ruling that found that the new district maps must be used ahead of statewide elections later this year. Those new maps are already in use.
Democrats had claimed that previous districts were unlawful because they featured too many black voters, diminishing their power across the state and in other districts.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote the majority opinion and was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Neil Gorsuch.
The Constitution gives the states to create the voting districts, but the Republicans blatantly tried to suppress the voting power of people of color. Welfare queens and beaners.
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/448876-supreme-court-hands-virginia-democrats-a-win-in-gerrymandering-case
Good to see their is flexablity on the High Court by the Conservaties .
"(CNN) -- Federal authorities seized about 16½ tons of cocaine Tuesday from a large ship at the Packer Marine Terminal in Philadelphia, prosecutors said.
Members of the ship's crew were arrested and federally charged. The investigation is ongoing, said a tweet form US Attorney's Office for Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
It's the largest seizure in the district's history, the office said."
US Attorney Office put the street value at $1 Billion.
hey undercover alky, aka beaners olinsky...
it's nice to see that i'm still living inside your gin-soaked skull rent fucking free.
nomorerrb.com?
really.
mail order dumped your ass for a reason alky.
This is somewhat surprising because two conservative justices stopped blatant racist Republican policies.
The Supreme Court has ruled against the Virginia House of Delegates in a racial gerrymandering case that represents a victory for Democrats in the state.
Strange ruling since the voter's rights act requires the creation of minority majority districts. Is the Supreme Court laying the groundwork to declare the voting rights act unconstitutional?
At least 23,000 attended Trump's campaign announcement rally.
But all accounts it was a stunning success. Trump must be pleased.
Looks like it.
mail order dumped your ass for a reason alky." RRB
Thing is Suddenly Single Roger has yet to discuss it. CHT caught it on Alky's lonely hearts club FB.
Best endorsement evah.....from a right leaning paper....antidotally of course.....BWAAAAAAAA!!!!
Orlando Sentinel endorses 'not Donald Trump' for president ahead of reelection kickoff
Hours before President Trump was due to hold a rally in Orlando billed as the kickoff to his reelection campaign, the Orlando Sentinel announced who it is endorsing for president in 2020: not Donald Trump.
“Some readers will wonder how we could possibly eliminate a candidate so far before an election, and before knowing the identity of his opponent,” the paper said in a scathing editorial on Tuesday. “Because there’s no point pretending we would ever recommend that readers vote for Trump.”
The Sentinel has mostly endorsed Republicans since 1960, but in recent years it has been more independent, backing Democrats in 2004 (John Kerry over George W. Bush), 2008 (Barack Obama over John McCain) and 2016 (Hillary Clinton over Trump). It endorsed Republican Mitt Romney over Obama in 2012.
President Trump speaks as he visits Lake Okechobee and the Herbert Hoover Dike in Canal Point, Fla., in March. (Joshua Roberts/Reuters)
President Trump in Canal Point, Fla., in March. (Photo: Joshua Roberts/Reuters)
More
But Trump’s erratic behavior and petulant, dishonest statements in office pushed the Sentinel to its non-endorsement.
“After 2 1/2 years we’ve seen enough,” the editorial board said. “Enough of the chaos, the division, the schoolyard insults, the self-aggrandizement, the corruption, and especially the lies.”
The Sentinel pointed to the Washington Post’s “Fact Checker,” a database that has documented more than 10,000 false or misleading claims made by Trump since he took office.
Strange ruling since the voter's rights act requires the creation of minority majority districts
They ruled on standing and the legislature lost with a weird mix of justices....ginsberg, gorsuch, thomas on the majority!!!
And trump ignored what was publicly available and still put this guy into office....maybe because he could hold it over his head?????
Investigations
As Trump’s defense pick withdraws, he addresses violent domestic incidents
By Aaron C. Davis and
Shawn Boburg June 18 at 1:15 PM
Shanahan withdraws, addresses violent domestic incidents
Acting secretary of defense, Patrick Shanahan, withdrew from consideration to head the U.S. military as reports of domestic violence in his family surfaced. (Reuters)
In the months that he has served as President Trump’s acting secretary of defense, Patrick Shanahan has worked to keep domestic violence incidents within his family private. His wife was arrested after punching him in the face, and his son was arrested after a separate incident in which he hit his mother with a baseball bat. Public disclosure of the nearly decade-old episodes would re-traumatize his young adult children, Shanahan said.
On Tuesday, Trump announced in a tweet that Shanahan would not be going through with the nomination process — which had been delayed by an unusually lengthy FBI background check — “so that he can devote more time to his family.”
Shanahan spoke publicly about the incidents in interviews with The Washington Post on Monday and Tuesday.
Which of the Three Socialist Stooges is spamming us today.
Smells like a gutter Alky.
Joe Biden longs for days with his fellow Racist in The US Senate.
What a gift, keep talking Snow White Joe.
Which loser is spamming like normal....smells like goats ass!!!!!
You only follow. Try some original thought.
AOC sees the USA as Nazi's running Death Camp .
She is all yours.
"smells like goats ass" Denney speaks from his extensive knowledge and experience.
President Trump in the last 24 hours has raised 24.8 million dollars.
And only lied 15 times in orlando !!!!! And our smelly assed goat fucking idiot slurps like a champ!!!!! BWAAAAA!!!!
Post a Comment