Clinton pledges constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United ruling

[RaphaelDLG]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/hillary-clinton-citizens-united-225658

Within thirty days, no less!  These great stories keep coming!  Thank you, Bernie!

[Illiniwek]

Where is TYT now huh?

[Pyro]

She was already against Citizens United, I thought.
Promising to introduce an amendment is hardly surprising.

[The Other Castro]

Wouldn't it be easier to just fill Scalia's seat, and wait for them to take up a similar case and overrule the previous ruling?

[NeverAgain]

Wouldn't it be easier to just fill Scalia's seat, and wait for them to take up a similar case and overrule the previous ruling?

Yes, but what is to stop Conservatives from doing the same thing if/when they take back the court. This is a great move and position by Clinton and I sure damn hope she gets in.

[Thomas D]

Wouldn't it be easier to just fill Scalia's seat, and wait for them to take up a similar case and overrule the previous ruling?

This.  You can't get 3/4 of the states to agree on anything at this point.

[Virginiá]

Wouldn't it be easier to just fill Scalia's seat, and wait for them to take up a similar case and overrule the previous ruling?

Yes. She knows this won't pass, but it's a good way to show your support. She also pledged to appoint justices who believe it should be overturned (in the same recent video). If the issues unleashed by rulings like Citizens United, SpeechNow and McCutcheon are going to be addressed, it will have to be from the Supreme Court.

Yes, but what is to stop Conservatives from doing the same thing if/when they take back the court. This is a great move and position by Clinton and I sure damn hope she gets in.

If Clinton wins and appoints a number of justices, that won't happen for decades - At the earliest.

[Mister Mets]

It's not surprising that she thinks people who made a video against her presidential campaign should be prosecuted.

[HAnnA MArin County]

It's not surprising that she thinks people who made a video against her presidential campaign should be prosecuted.

At least she isn't calling on Congress to waste millions more of taxpayer dollars on endless hearings about the corrupt coverup of Citizens United to lower her next opponent's poll numbers in 2020.

[Dr. Arch]

It's not surprising that she thinks people who made a video against her presidential campaign should be prosecuted.

At least she isn't calling on Congress to waste millions more of taxpayer dollars on endless hearings about the corrupt coverup of Citizens United to lower her next opponent's poll numbers in 2020.

Sounds familiar, but I can't quite put my finger on it... hmm...

[DrScholl]

It's not surprising that she thinks people who made a video against her presidential campaign should be prosecuted.

For crap's sake, cut the conspiracy crap. Clinton is not going to prosecute Republicans for opposing her, this is about making sure that Super PACs have to disclose their donors. If these PACs are on the up and up, they would have no problem disclosing their donors. Drug dealers and organized criminals could funnel money into elections through shadow Super PACs. This is serious.

[Lief 🗽]

This is another thing, like the public option, where she's been in favor of it from the beginning of the campaign. Weird that the media treats it like it's a new policy.

[Seriously?]

Good luck with that, Hillary! You won't get 2/3 of each branch of Congress to pass the authorization and you won't get 3/4 of the states to ratify.

Alternatively, you won't get 2/3rds of the states to call for a Constitutional Convention.

Fail. Just like your campaign come November and your pathetic attempt to jail a guy who made a video for "egging on" the Benghazi attacks.

[HAnnA MArin County]

Good luck with that, Hillary! You won't get 2/3 of each branch of Congress to pass the authorization and you won't get 3/4 of the states to ratify.

Alternatively, you won't get 2/3rds of the states to call for a Constitutional Convention.

Fail. Just like your campaign come November and your pathetic attempt to jail a guy who made a video for "egging on" the Benghazi attacks.

Quit being sexist.

[RaphaelDLG]

This is another thing, like the public option, where she's been in favor of it from the beginning of the campaign. Weird that the media treats it like it's a new policy.

Uh, "what?!?" on both counts.  Coming out for the public option was well into the primary, and she ran on keeping obamacare and pruning around the edges with no mention of a public option for quite a while.  These are big media stories because... they are at least slightly different than the ones staked in her original platform.

[Xing]

She'll need more Democrats in Congress to get this done, but I'm very glad to see her proposing this, at the least.

[Seriously?]

Good luck with that, Hillary! You won't get 2/3 of each branch of Congress to pass the authorization and you won't get 3/4 of the states to ratify.

Alternatively, you won't get 2/3rds of the states to call for a Constitutional Convention.

Fail. Just like your campaign come November and your pathetic attempt to jail a guy who made a video for "egging on" the Benghazi attacks.

Quit being sexist.

Reality is very sexist.

The House will remain Republican. The Republicans may lose a few seats in the Senate, but the Democrats do not have a mathematical way to get to 2/3rds.

And even assuming that happens, how many complete state legislatures + governors are solely controlled by the Democrats right now?

This amendment is about as dead as any Republican attempt to define marriage solely between a man and a women via amendment. And that's with Republicans in control of both Houses and a good number of state apparatuses.

Red meat for the base's consumption. Nothing more, nothing less.

[The Other Castro]

Good luck with that, Hillary! You won't get 2/3 of each branch of Congress to pass the authorization and you won't get 3/4 of the states to ratify.

Alternatively, you won't get 2/3rds of the states to call for a Constitutional Convention.

Fail. Just like your campaign come November and your pathetic attempt to jail a guy who made a video for "egging on" the Benghazi attacks.

Quit being sexist.

Reality is very sexist.

The House will remain Republican. The Republicans may lose a few seats in the Senate, but the Democrats do not have a mathematical way to get to 2/3rds.

And even assuming that happens, how many complete state legislatures + governors are solely controlled by the Democrats right now?

This amendment is about as dead as any Republican attempt to define marriage solely between a man and a women via amendment. And that's with Republicans in control of both Houses and a good number of state apparatuses.

Red meat for the base's consumption. Nothing more, nothing less.

Well yeah, that's the point. I don't think Clinton has any intention of actually getting such an amendment passed. That would be delusional and a little grandiose.

[Mercenary]

I knew she supported overturning it and all but it is good to see this kind of thing since it reminds the public about her position and reaffirms her commitment to the issue.

[HAnnA MArin County]

Good luck with that, Hillary! You won't get 2/3 of each branch of Congress to pass the authorization and you won't get 3/4 of the states to ratify.

Alternatively, you won't get 2/3rds of the states to call for a Constitutional Convention.

Fail. Just like your campaign come November and your pathetic attempt to jail a guy who made a video for "egging on" the Benghazi attacks.

Quit being sexist.

Reality is very sexist.

The House will remain Republican. The Republicans may lose a few seats in the Senate, but the Democrats do not have a mathematical way to get to 2/3rds.

And even assuming that happens, how many complete state legislatures + governors are solely controlled by the Democrats right now?

This amendment is about as dead as any Republican attempt to define marriage solely between a man and a women via amendment. And that's with Republicans in control of both Houses and a good number of state apparatuses.

Red meat for the base's consumption. Nothing more, nothing less.

Reality fails to reach you since you are one of the 10 people in the whole country who doesn't believe that Sarah Palin is a doodoo head.

You're one to talk about red meat when your party does nothing but hold partisan-driven witch hunts (Benghazi and EmailGate) in attempts to bring down Hillary Clinton.

Nice try, though.

[Ljube]

An enemy of liberty she has always been and an enemy of liberty she still is.
The worst candidate for president in my lifetime.

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

Good luck with that, Hillary! You won't get 2/3 of each branch of Congress to pass the authorization and you won't get 3/4 of the states to ratify.

Alternatively, you won't get 2/3rds of the states to call for a Constitutional Convention.

Fail. Just like your campaign come November and your pathetic attempt to jail a guy who made a video for "egging on" the Benghazi attacks.

Quit being sexist.

Reality is very sexist.

The House will remain Republican. The Republicans may lose a few seats in the Senate, but the Democrats do not have a mathematical way to get to 2/3rds.

And even assuming that happens, how many complete state legislatures + governors are solely controlled by the Democrats right now?

This amendment is about as dead as any Republican attempt to define marriage solely between a man and a women via amendment. And that's with Republicans in control of both Houses and a good number of state apparatuses.

Red meat for the base's consumption. Nothing more, nothing less.

Reality fails to reach you since you are one of the 10 people in the whole country who doesn't believe that Sarah Palin is a doodoo head.

You're one to talk about red meat when your party does nothing but hold partisan-driven witch hunts (Benghazi and EmailGate) in attempts to bring down Hillary Clinton.

Nice try, though.

That the investigations of Hillary were driven by partisan politics is one thing.  So was the Watergate Committee, and no Democrats complained about that.  So was the House Judiciary Committee's Impeachment Inquiry on Nixon, and no Democrats complained about that.

That the investigations of the Gowdy Committee and the FBI revealed facts relevant to Hillary's past performance in high office is a true statement.  The Gowdy Committee revealed that Hillary made poor decisions regarding Embassy Security.  If the host country could not guarantee the safety of our Embassy personnel, then we don't have an Embassy in that country; that's how things have always been done, and that's what Hillary should have done.  Not have an Embassy.  The FBI investigation revealed that Hillary blew off established policy and law in favor of her own desire to not be transparent, and it backfired badly.  While I don't advocate "Hillary for Prison" and while I'm not one to deny her classified information (a partisan ploy of the GOP), her handling of this issue reflects poorly on her.  They reflect a woman who doesn't follow inconvenient rules, is not honest when confronted, and is only sorry about getting caught.

America is, perhaps, long overdue for a female President.  That being said, why her?  What part of her history and background was so compelling that the Democratic Party establishment was willing to clear the field for her in an OPEN election year (shoving a popular Democratic Vice President to the sidelines)?  The last time this happened was Richard Nixon in 1960, and Nixon was a sitting VP who had extensive foreign affairs experience and had actually stepped in for Eisenhower during his 1955 heart attack.  Was Hillary really in THAT position?  Were there NO Democrats worthy of consideration for the Democratic Party primary electorate to consider, to the point that a non-Democrat (Sanders) provided the competition for the nomination?

The way Hillary has won this nomination is disgusting.  It has the aura of a debt being paid; of an IOU being cashed in.  It has little to do with qualifications, and, especially, the qualifications of character.  Hillary Clinton blows Donald Trump away in the area of self-serving and narcissism, and that's saying a lot.  Democrats, and the nation, deserved better than what the Democratic Party gave them this primary season.  America deserves better than a self-serving liar with scores to settle as their 45th President.

[Erc]

The thing had better be worried really carefully, lest a court use it down the line to severely limit additional classes of political speech.

Of course, no chance of it actually passing, so at least there's that.

[Free Bird]

She won't bite the hand that feeds her. Quit deluding yourselves.

[Badger]

Good luck with that, Hillary! You won't get 2/3 of each branch of Congress to pass the authorization and you won't get 3/4 of the states to ratify.

Alternatively, you won't get 2/3rds of the states to call for a Constitutional Convention.

Fail. Just like your campaign come November and your pathetic attempt to jail a guy who made a video for "egging on" the Benghazi attacks.

Quit being sexist.

Reality is very sexist.

The House will remain Republican. The Republicans may lose a few seats in the Senate, but the Democrats do not have a mathematical way to get to 2/3rds.

And even assuming that happens, how many complete state legislatures + governors are solely controlled by the Democrats right now?

This amendment is about as dead as any Republican attempt to define marriage solely between a man and a women via amendment. And that's with Republicans in control of both Houses and a good number of state apparatuses.

Red meat for the base's consumption. Nothing more, nothing less.

Reality fails to reach you since you are one of the 10 people in the whole country who doesn't believe that Sarah Palin is a doodoo head.

You're one to talk about red meat when your party does nothing but hold partisan-driven witch hunts (Benghazi and EmailGate) in attempts to bring down Hillary Clinton.

Nice try, though.

That the investigations of Hillary were driven by partisan politics is one thing.  So was the Watergate Committee, and no Democrats complained about that.  So was the House Judiciary Committee's Impeachment Inquiry on Nixon, and no Democrats complained about that.

That the investigations of the Gowdy Committee and the FBI revealed facts relevant to Hillary's past performance in high office is a true statement.  The Gowdy Committee revealed that Hillary made poor decisions regarding Embassy Security.  If the host country could not guarantee the safety of our Embassy personnel, then we don't have an Embassy in that country; that's how things have always been done, and that's what Hillary should have done.  Not have an Embassy.  The FBI investigation revealed that Hillary blew off established policy and law in favor of her own desire to not be transparent, and it backfired badly.  While I don't advocate "Hillary for Prison" and while I'm not one to deny her classified information (a partisan ploy of the GOP), her handling of this issue reflects poorly on her.  They reflect a woman who doesn't follow inconvenient rules, is not honest when confronted, and is only sorry about getting caught.

America is, perhaps, long overdue for a female President.  That being said, why her?  What part of her history and background was so compelling that the Democratic Party establishment was willing to clear the field for her in an OPEN election year (shoving a popular Democratic Vice President to the sidelines)?  The last time this happened was Richard Nixon in 1960, and Nixon was a sitting VP who had extensive foreign affairs experience and had actually stepped in for Eisenhower during his 1955 heart attack.  Was Hillary really in THAT position?  Were there NO Democrats worthy of consideration for the Democratic Party primary electorate to consider, to the point that a non-Democrat (Sanders) provided the competition for the nomination?

The way Hillary has won this nomination is disgusting.  It has the aura of a debt being paid; of an IOU being cashed in.  It has little to do with qualifications, and, especially, the qualifications of character.  Hillary Clinton blows Donald Trump away in the area of self-serving and narcissism, and that's saying a lot.  Democrats, and the nation, deserved better than what the Democratic Party gave them this primary season.  America deserves better than a self-serving liar with scores to settle as their 45th President.

The Watergate hearings and Nixon's impeachment were driven by "partisan politics"?!?

My God, you have no idea how truly "special " you are, do you?