Skip to comments.
Bush names Miss. Judge Charles Pickering to federal appeals court
MSNBC.com ^
| DocCincy
Posted on 01/16/2004 12:14:46 PM PST by DocCincy
This is posted as breaking news on msnbc's website. Did a search and didn't see it anywhere. Nothing follows for now. Anyone know anything?
TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bush43; charlespickering; daschlesaddened; judicialnominees; pickering; recessappointment
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160, 161-180, 181-200 ... 601-619 next last
To: JohnnyZ
Come on, you are smarter than that. He had strong minority support from his own state, which will play into the process of painting the Democrat party as out of touch.
To: Dog Gone
Of course he'll get paid. I don't know where you heard that.That gets repeated over and over as gospel here on FR.
162
posted on
01/16/2004 12:42:36 PM PST
by
Howlin
To: All
the DUmmies are already b*tching about it in Breaking News. This should be fun.
163
posted on
01/16/2004 12:42:47 PM PST
by
honeygrl
(If I had a dollar for every time I had 60 cents, I would be in Canada.)
To: LdSentinal
It's to influence the outcome of the caucus vote on Monday. That is too cool - fire up the radical left fringe, just b4 the caucus??? LOL !!!!
164
posted on
01/16/2004 12:42:50 PM PST
by
11th_VA
To: Wait4Truth
Let's try for two for one deal here. Get them both!
To: YaYa123
"We defeated Judge Pickering? Victory! This calls for a drink!"
"Bush did a recess appointment? Defeat! Let's drown our sorrows! How about a drink?"
"Hey--is it cold outside? That calls for drink!"
To: BCrago66
I think recess appointees do get paid. The Constitution does not mention not paying such appointees. I cannot imagine Clintoids taking such temporary appointments without salary. So why would Judge Pickering give up his judgeship for a one-year stint that has no salary?
167
posted on
01/16/2004 12:43:06 PM PST
by
Theodore R.
(When will they ever learn?)
To: Catspaw; All
I would be happy never to hear the words "Neverland Ranch" and "Michael Jackson" again in my life--unless it's in the same sentence as "Will never be mentioned again on this news channel."
168
posted on
01/16/2004 12:43:08 PM PST
by
homemom
(Watch and be ready.)
To: Steve_Seattle
Yep
To: bourbon
HELL YEAH!
To: sciencediet
It has been three years! How much longer can Bush wait to appoint others? They're gonna make an election-year push to confirm a few, but probably it'll be 2005.
171
posted on
01/16/2004 12:43:21 PM PST
by
JohnnyZ
(This Week in Senate Races: David Beasley, Katherine Harris, Gary Hart, and Dan Blue DECIDE)
To: Howlin
Its called speculating. That's what FR is supposed to encourage. If posts were to be restricted to what was common and public knowledge, FR would be a pretty lame place.
172
posted on
01/16/2004 12:43:51 PM PST
by
KantianBurke
(2+2 does NOT equal 5)
To: SkyPilot
GWB appoints Pickering, THAT calls for a drink.
Cheers!
To: Fury
The REcess appointment lasts till next time Congress is in session; July 2005!!! Then the process starts again.
I bet the Libs have their panties in a major bunch! Tee-Hee!
174
posted on
01/16/2004 12:44:05 PM PST
by
homemom
(Watch and be ready.)
To: commish; hole_n_one
Down goes Daschle! Down goes Daschle!ROFLMAO!!!
175
posted on
01/16/2004 12:44:43 PM PST
by
Howlin
To: JohnnyZ
Ok, there's the precedent, I guess. Thanks for the info.
To: finnman69
***Chuck Schumer just pooped his pants.***
Underwear sales will be WWWAAAAYYYY up in DC! :-)
177
posted on
01/16/2004 12:44:53 PM PST
by
homemom
(Watch and be ready.)
Salary for Recess Appointees
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/5/5503.html
Sec. 5503. - Recess appointments
(a) Payment for services may not be made from the Treasury
of the United States to an individual appointed during a
recess of the Senate to fill a vacancy in an existing
office, if the vacancy existed while the Senate was in
session and was by law required to be filled by and with
the advice and consent of the Senate, until the appointee
has been confirmed by the Senate. This subsection does not
apply -
(1) if the vacancy arose within 30 days before the
end of the session of the Senate;
(2) if, at the end of the session, a nomination for
the office, other than the nomination of an
individual appointed during the preceding recess of
the Senate, was pending before the Senate for its
advice and consent; or
(3) if a nomination for the office was rejected by the
Senate within 30 days before the end of the session
and an individual other than the one whose nomination
was rejected thereafter receives a recess appointment.
(b) A nomination to fill a vacancy referred to by
paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of subsection (a) of this
section shall be submitted to the Senate not later than 40
days after the beginning of the next session of the Senate
178
posted on
01/16/2004 12:44:56 PM PST
by
Fixit
(It's about damn time.)
To: DocCincy
Great news. There's more then one way to skin a Demlib!
Congrats Mister President.
To: Petronski
I hope so! It aggrevated me no end to have Charles Schumer and Diane Feinstein get up and oppose Bush's key judicial nominations because they were "out of the mainstream of American values," as if New York and California ARE in the mainstream! Bush should make the judicial nominations, and the Dems' obstruction, a campaign issue.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160, 161-180, 181-200 ... 601-619 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson