Breaking: SUPREME COURT Victory for Cheney

[newsguyatl]

About to break guys, 7 to 2, they vacate.

Cheney (thanks to his pals) wins.

[wndycty]

1. Should be an interesting day. . .

:kick:

[SoCalDem]

2. Did we expect anything different?? Nope ..

Move along..nothing to see here.. :(

[slinkerwink]

3. victory in what case?

[SoCalDem]

4. The energy meetings in 2001.. (the ones that set up the California mess)

:(

[slinkerwink]

6. fuck

:-(

[leesa]

30. Far more than that. These meetings set up everything.

Afghanistan (pipeline), Iraq (oil), California and the other states that were ripped off, probably the blackouts, the raping of the environment.

These are very critical papers and I think they WILL come out.

[chimpymustgo]

5. Dammit. 7-2. Only Ginsberg and Souter dissent.

We have got to get the GD SC back!

[nostamj]

11. did you hear that CNN CRETIN (Kagan?)

"well, that was... predictable" (the PARTISAN vote of the SCOTUS)

[GiovanniC]

43. It WAS Predictable

Most of us called this one.

[Selteri]

16. The Justice did say

It's a sad day for America is a justice can be bought so easily...

What was the real cost for 7 then?

I only hope this will cause a repercussion that leads to transparent government laws.

[mmonk]

good luck

in getting the court back.

[MadAsHellNewYorker]

7. WTF is up with this court?!?!?!

Its ok for police to demand your ID, not allowing you your privacy,
but OK NOT to release documents that allowed the scamming of millions of people for billions of dollars?

Does it even matter if bush is allowed stack the SCOTUS with more "conservative" judges?

[gWbush is Mabus]

22. EXACTLY

We have no privacy - we have to tell police our names, but when we just want to know the NAMES of those at the energy meetings - we can't - due to privacy!


that is hypocritical

[Kahuna]

8. Was there ever any doubt?

nt

[Mandate My Ass]

9. Damn

n/t

[doni_georgia]

Cheney will be in Macon next Thursday

Wonder if there are any protest plans?

[Career Prole]

10. 7-2, but who cares?

It's still tragic.
:grr:

[myrna minx]

12. Gawd...they are the Court that keeps on giving.

This makes me sick. :puke:

[Cheswick2.0]

13. toobin fails to make a point on CNN

He said that this court is conservative and protects the privacy of the office of president. Not when Clinton was president they didn't. They are not conservative they are right wing and there is a difference.

[shoelace414]

18. oh yea

"you can sue in civil court a sitting president" - Supreme Court

[Killarney]

31. good point. they are not consistent

it all depends on who it's about - a republican or a democrat

[Not Me]

14. These were, afterall, the same people who elected Bush/Cheney

n/t

[MaryH]

19. TOO BAD - BUT NOT UNEXPECTED

This may help to make Cheney look worse. Everyone knew about his ties to Scalia and gang. It may backfire.

I am always the optimist.

[sendero]

21. You know what...

... sometimes looking for the silver lining is about all you can do. You may very well be right, but since this was not the usual 5-4 vote, I'm not sure.

Anyway - welcome to DU :)

[shoelace414]

15. It seems

like the current supreme court always helps those in power and screws those without power.

look at any case, who has more power between those two parties, that's who usually wins.

[lovedems]

17. How long until we see a gloating Dickhead?

So the SCOTUS gives these assholes a pat on the back for their secrecy. Not surprised at all.

[sui generis]

20. like much in the past few years

the Supreme Court is turning out to really be something of the antithesis of what we were duped into believing it to be in social studies, and even later in political science.

Charged with providing the final interpretation of law and setting the ultimate legal precedent they step in to manage election fraud and state that their decision should not be used as precedent, and they clearly display an irrational bias in any decision involving the executive branch, for whom they are supposed to be a "check and balance", not a bunch of doddering old "yes" men (and women).

[wtmusic]

23. Link

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/06/24/scotus.cheney.taskforce.ap/index.html

[sdfernando]

Breaking News!

Democracy in the USA died today.

[GiovanniC]

46. Actual Time of Death:

December 12, 2000

http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-949.ZPC.html

[0007]

54. Fuck A Duck!

[NeonLX]

24. Time to use the "F" word.

It's official, we're now in a FASCIST state. It's government by & for the very rich, with a bunch of cheerleading uber-nationalist jingoism thrown in to keep the sheeple in line.

And it's time to use the other "F" word too--we're F*CKED.

[tnlefty]

44. Just heard Rep. Stenholm (D-TX) state: "anything resembling a demo-

cracy in this house is purely coincidental". He was raising hell on the house floor a few minutes ago about the way that the democrats are continuing to be shut out of the process. Sad state of affairs.

[wtmusic]

25. How many ducks does a SC vote cost

"You go ahead, Tony, that one's yours!"

[Solly Mack]

26. Tell me again how optimistic I should be? Anyone?

Good to be a nation of laws, init? lololol

I'm laughing to keep from crying.

[j4rester]

27. It isn't over yet

"Justices said 7-2 that a lower court should consider whether a federal open government law could be used to get documents of the task force."
They are sending it down to a lower court (weasels):

"Thursday's decision buys the administration more time. If it loses in the appeals court, the administration can return to the Supreme Court in another extended appeal before having to release information as to whether Cheney's task force was cozy with energy executives, including those with his former company, Halliburton."
AP

[Solly Mack]

32. So a teeny tiny glimmer of hope.

[newyawker99]

55. Hi j4rester!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[kentuck]

28. There must be something so devastating in those records that....

our nation could not stand the publication of the facts, at least Bush and Cheney could not stand the publication...

[vetwife]

29. there is no balance of power..Just power !

Looks like there is something the congress could do. Bring him in and make him testify. If he don't. then charge him for contempt of Congress. If he claims Executive priviledge then make him look really guilty. There needs to be a house cleaning on Abuse of Power charges whether they stuck or not. Whether they were impeached or not. It would be there. They need to bring Abuse of Power up on all of these folks. or just tear up the contitution. It ain't worth the paper its written on. These folks are so guilty of so much they are not going to be simply be VOTED OUT ! We are on the edge of the world and that is a fact ! Democracy did not die today..it died in 2000. We just buried it today !

[kentuck]

34. People no longer have a right to know...

anything...The SC has ruled that secret meetings and such are the business of the individuals involved and of no concern to the Americans that pay their salaries??

[chimpymustgo]

40. Those papers reveal the whole plan.

And Bush and his cabal would all be indicted if exposed.

[Occulus]

51. Were that to happen,

the entire nation would be stuck in chaos. It could very well lead to Very Bad Things for all of us.

Here's my post on this thread's sister in LBN:

Everyone, TAKE A BREATH.

This may not be as bad as we're all envisioning.

Stop and think for a moment: The SCOTUS surely knows more than we do about the ETF papers. Now, I'm not saying that to excuse their decision, but rather to explain it.

Perhaps the infomation contained within those documents really are explosive- so very explosive that the SCOTUS reasonably foresaw violence and civil unrest were the information to be disclosed to the public right now.

Maybe, just maybe, the SCOTUS is taking a "wait and see" attitude re "F-9/11". Maybe they're thinking that if the heat is turned to the right temperature, Bush* and his cabal will be cooked in a much more civilized manner.

Consider for a moment that the SCOTUS did not dismiss the case outright, as it could have done. That it failed to rule itself on such a matter, instead punting it back to a lower court, leaves open the possibility that this issue will be resolved after Bush* and his cabal are gone; this would bolster the case against him after he leaves.

Please, people, keep in mind that our elected officials and our courts are put in place to first and foremost protect the Constitution and the people. If that protection includes keeping certain documents out of public view that would only inflame the passions on both sides of the political spectrum, so be it. For now.

This isn't as obvious a slap in the face to the people and accountability as it might seem. If those documents really are as damaging as we all believe they are, hell, it could well spark a civil war- something nobody wants. Far better to let a film spark it in a quieter, more controlled, legal manner. By all accounts, there's an awful lot of evidence contained in F-9/11- likely enough to sink Bush's* election chances.

Does anyone here really think Bush* will last past the election? Does anyone here really think the next admin would allow those documents to remain secret? Does anyone here realize SCOTUS could reverse itself on this decision after the election- after Bush* has lost?

On one hand, they're all corrupt. On the other, they're making a very devious ploy, taking the chance that releasing these documents would cause everything to fall apart in an uncontrolled manner. Which is true has yet to be settled; that issue isn't yet closed.

Some foods you have to boil; others, you can't, or it'll destroy the meal. I'd rather have a controlled simmer until cooked than a rolling boil that gets my stove all wet on this one.

[terrya]

33. If Kerry is smart, he'll immediately pick this up as a campaign issue.

Needless to say, this is a bad decision.

But Kerry can campaign on a pledge to open up executive branch deliberations such as the secret energy task force. This could be a good issue for Kerry.

[Vickers]

35. I sure hope so. Either that, or an honest person with access will leak

the info.

Bwahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!

Eh, I tried to say it with a straight face.

:shrug:

[kaitykaity]

36. NOT a victory. The case is still alive.

Just sent back to the lower court.
(Heard on a news report on AAR.)

[MallRat]

37. But now Cheney can run out the clock.

If the Appeals Court orders him to release the documents, Cheney can just go back to the Supreme Court again with another appeal. By the time all of this is through, Election Day will have come and gone.

-MR

[Beetwasher]

38. Yeah, But Honestly

How much impact would this specific case really have on the election? At this point it would be like pissing in the ocean...Didn't this go to the SC because a lower court ruled AGAINST Cheney? I don't think the SC will hear a case again that they already kicked back to a lower court...

[GiovanniC]

47. If Those Papers Show...

Them divvying up Iraq well before 9/11, I think that would have a massive impact on the election.

[Beetwasher]

48. Possibly

:shrug:

There's so much now though. Yes, it's a damn shame if this doesn't come out before the election, and it's disheartening, but I'm hoping the lower court will uphold their earlier verdict and do the right thing anyway...

[bossfish]

52. The issue is too arcane

For the media and the sheeple to get their brains around.

Now, if there were BJs and cigars....

[napi21]

39. CNN just reported that too. It's not dead.

I've also been wondering why there haven't been any leaks. There are an awful lot of people who work in the WH as well as many people going in and out every day. I've very surprised that no one has leaked the names of people they saw there for this meeting. After all, they didn't have to be in the meeting to see who went in and out.

[chimpymustgo]

42. More silver lining: Cheney more likely to remain on the ticket.

And they're going to get more smug and overconfident.

[GreenPartyVoter]

41. AP article about it

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court refused Thursday to order the Bush administration to make public secret details of Vice President Dick Cheney's energy task force, but kept the case alive by sending it back to a lower court.

Justices said 7-2 that a lower court should consider whether a federal open government law could be used to get documents of the task force.

The decision extends the legal fight over the information. Justices could have allowed a judge to immediately move ahead with ordering the release of the papers.

The issues in the case have been overshadowed by conflict-of-interest questions about Justice Antonin Scalia.

http://apnews1.iwon.com/article/20040624/D83DEE580.html

[tom_paine]

45. GOD DAMN THOSE CROOKED POLS TO HELL!

We DO NOT HAVE A "Supreme Court" and Imperial Amerika is a lawless nation...and a Third-World Nation!

That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies...

:mad: :grr: :mad: :grr: :grr: :mad: :grr: :mad: :grr: :grr: :mad: :grr: :mad: :grr: :grr: :mad: :grr: :mad: :grr: :grr: :mad: :grr: :mad: :grr: :grr:

[truthspeaker]

49. Bribery, blackmail, or intimidation?

Or a little of all three?

[Generic Other]

50. Wait. Not a VICTORY for Cheney

They sent it back to the appeals court which already ruled he had to cough up the documents, right? So? Doesn't that mean Cheney's fucked?

[zanana]

56. Does this set a precedent?

Or is it one of those Election 2000 deals where the rules favor Bush/Cheney, but just this once?

[kiahzero]

53. Did anyone both to actually read the decision?

I haven't found a link to it, yet. Have those who are claiming that the end is nigh found one, or are they just talking out their ass?