McGentrix wrote:Scalia is a supreme court justice. I am pretty sure he knows the law a bit better than ANYONE on this board.
I would hope he does. That is why his actions are so bothersome.
His actions are bothersome only because we don't know the full story. You only know what you choose to read and what the media feels you should know.
Hobitbob, why did you leave out the last paragraph on my post? That answers your question.
Foxfyre wrote:Hobitbob, why did you leave out the last paragraph on my post? That answers your question.
Beacasue I was addressing the first part, and not the last.
And because he is just looking for an argument.
Should Scalia recuse himself from the hearings? I'm thinking about that. I trust him to be a man of integrity and if he does not, his decision will be based on the letter, intent, and spirit of the law. Scalia has been 100% consistent on that and, I can't remember the circumstances, I believe he has recused himself on other decisions in which he had a conflict of interest.
If the hearing was about Cheney and any wrongdoing on his part, then yes, Scalia should recuse himself purely based on the hunting trip.
The hearing is, rather, whether the White House can use executive privilege to keep the member list private. As this decision will be based on precedent and case law, I really don't see a conflict of interest here.
pot, kettle, black! 