The Combine Forum banner

1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,542 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Kind of a bit surprised this really hasn't surfaced yet.

Antonin Scalia, US Supreme Court justice, highly conservative and outspoken member was found dead at the age of 79 last weekend.

Now granted, the guy was 79, but was considered to be in good health. The weird part of this whole scenario is that he died suddenly (which can happen to anyone), the death has been ruled natural causes, and no autopsy was performed... even though he was found with a pillow covering his head.

Doesn't it seem a bit odd to anyone else? If someone dies suddenly, especially a very high ranking government official, no matter the age, don't you think that perhaps an autopsy is in order? Let alone the odd circumstance that he was discovered with a pillow over his head...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,004 Posts
Apparently I wasn't the only one that thinks something really stinks, a big broom used to sweep it all under the rug.

In Canada or so I am told, if there is a reason to believe its possible there was any foul play ( and this is for a "commoner", some form of autopsy is done ) its investigated, not just grabbing the nearest shovel and start digging a hole to cover up the possible evidence.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
280 Posts
Kind of a bit surprised this really hasn't surfaced yet.

Antonin Scalia, US Supreme Court justice, highly conservative and outspoken member was found dead at the age of 79 last weekend.

Now granted, the guy was 79, but was considered to be in good health. The weird part of this whole scenario is that he died suddenly (which can happen to anyone), the death has been ruled natural causes, and no autopsy was performed... even though he was found with a pillow covering his head.

Doesn't it seem a bit odd to anyone else? If someone dies suddenly, especially a very high ranking government official, no matter the age, don't you think that perhaps an autopsy is in order? Let alone the odd circumstance that he was discovered with a pillow over his head...
I get emotions run deep when it comes to politics in the U.S. and the distrust of the current pres is pretty obvious. But do you seriously think some killed the guy? It's up there with the 9/11 theories.
Personally I've woken up with a pillow over my HEAD (not face as was first suggested) many times.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,542 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I get emotions run deep when it comes to politics in the U.S. and the distrust of the current pres is pretty obvious. But do you seriously think some killed the guy? It's up there with the 9/11 theories.
Personally I've woken up with a pillow over my HEAD (not face as was first suggested) many times.
Who suggested it was over his face? The whole thing seems more than a bit odd to me. No autopsy is really odd. Sudden death is really odd. A pillow over the guys head is really odd. Combined all three things on an average citizen and I think many people would be wonder what the ****... This man was a Supreme Court Justice and it gets pushed away as eh, whatever.

Maybe its all odd and circumstantial, but then an autopsy would clear it all up, wouldn't it?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,754 Posts
I always understood that if the Dr signing off on the death certificate did not know the cause of death, an autopsy has to be done, even if family or such object to it. How can the Dr sign off and specify cause of death if he don't know?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,399 Posts
In Texas unlike alot of states, a judge or person that issues death certificates does not have to be present to issue said death certificate, an autopsy isnt standard procedure either. Having said that somethin is fishy about the whole deal, especially since the potus is skipping the funeral. First time since the 50's since that has happened, **** W did the eulogy @ the last justice's funeral. We may disagree with some of W's policies, but at least he was an honorable decent man. The current potus will probably be on the back 9 as the funeral is going on. What a piece of human scum.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,399 Posts
Can the court even run short handed?
Isn't Obama forced to appoint? He has until July 20.
Its his constitutional obligation to nominate, but it isnt a requirement that he/she is approved. If the r's had a brain they would let the process play out instead of crying wolf like they are currently doing. Let the process go on, just long enough that the potus is out of office before he/she is confirmed/denied. At least then it can't be used as a political football.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
2,526 Posts
Its his constitutional obligation to nominate, but it isnt a requirement that he/she is approved. If the r's had a brain they would let the process play out instead of crying wolf like they are currently doing. Let the process go on, just long enough that the potus is out of office before he/she is confirmed/denied. At least then it can't be used as a political football.
Which is exactly what the r's instantly, and as you point out yourself wrongly, did.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
280 Posts
I get emotions run deep when it comes to politics in the U.S. and the distrust of the current pres is pretty obvious. But do you seriously think some killed the guy? It's up there with the 9/11 theories.
Personally I've woken up with a pillow over my HEAD (not face as was first suggested) many times.
Who suggested it was over his face? The whole thing seems more than a bit odd to me. No autopsy is really odd. Sudden death is really odd. A pillow over the guys head is really odd. Combined all three things on an average citizen and I think many people would be wonder what the ****... This man was a Supreme Court Justice and it gets pushed away as eh, whatever.

Maybe its all odd and circumstantial, but then an autopsy would clear it all up, wouldn't it?
Original reports on fox and drudge said it was over his face
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,349 Posts
Could you imagine if you were the criminal in this case and you were trying to hide the crime that you would leave a pillow on his head? Obviously if strangulation was a potential issue it has obvious visual signs. I think there should have been an autopsy just so that the public knows there was no foul play. This issue will now circulate in the media for the next X years - eventually they will exhume the body and then try to figure it out. JFK conspiracy theories are not needed and could be prevented very easily by doing an autopsy now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
411 Posts
John Poindexter 1st said the pillow was on the judges head then he recant his story a day latter to claim it was above his head when found. Poindexter is a x - airborne/ranger was awarded a special medal from obuma in 09. He owns the 30000 acre ranch where the judge died / murdered . I find it fishy but I despise obuma for he is worthless corrupt muslim. It now opens obuma up to appoint some worthless liberal to fill a GOOD mans bench. RIP Judge.................
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,399 Posts
It now opens obuma up to appoint some worthless liberal to fill a GOOD mans bench. RIP Judge.................
He can't appoint, can only nominate and we need congress to participate in the process not beat their chests and repeat the nonsense that Obama is doing something unprecedented. They (r's) are making a mountain out of a mole hill, the populus is on their side if they just participate in the process and let it play out. Not just making sound bites to rabble rouse. They have plenty of sound bites the dem's put out there back in 07 when allito was nominated by Bush to make them 100% hippocrates, use their own words against them. Its quite easy to find these sound bites.

Dont get me wrong I despise the potus, but I do hold the constitution on a pedestal and want it followed under all circumstances. Kinda weird the potus invokes the constitution in this arena, but circumvents it almost every time the opportunity arises.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
780 Posts
Obama hasn't earned the right to even say Scalia's name let alone nominate someone to replace him. The Senate's job as it pertains to judicial nominees is to advise and consent. They are advising Obama that he can nominate anyone he wants, but they aren't going to confirm anybody until the next president is elected. Pretty simple really. Kind of ironic that many of the cases before the court pertained to executive orders and there constitutionality, and with Scalia's vote more than likely would have been overturned, and Obama had to go to Cuba instead of the funeral, what a piece of ****!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,542 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
He can't appoint, can only nominate and we need congress to participate in the process not beat their chests and repeat the nonsense that Obama is doing something unprecedented. They (r's) are making a mountain out of a mole hill, the populus is on their side if they just participate in the process and let it play out. Not just making sound bites to rabble rouse. They have plenty of sound bites the dem's put out there back in 07 when allito was nominated by Bush to make them 100% hippocrates, use their own words against them. Its quite easy to find these sound bites.

Dont get me wrong I despise the potus, but I do hold the constitution on a pedestal and want it followed under all circumstances. Kinda weird the potus invokes the constitution in this arena, but circumvents it almost every time the opportunity arises.
The republicans are acting like spineless, two year old morons as usual. You are 100% correct, all they have to do is let it all play out, string it along until the elections over, then move on. Granted its a roll of the dice as we have no clue who the next president will be, but there is a 50% shot at being a **** of a lot better than good ole Barry.

I hate this president and his crap policies with the red hot intensity of a thousand suns, but we have to stick to the Constitution, as you said. It is Obama's obligation to nominate someone, like it or not. Elections have consequences, this is one of them.

Does it really surprise you the president invokes the Constitution here? That's liberal policy. Stand up tall and wave the Constitution when it is in your favor, but when its not in their favor its just an old antiquated piece of paper.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,096 Posts
Can the court even run short handed?
Isn't Obama forced to appoint? He has until July 20.
The way I understand it is the court can easily operate without the ninth judge. However there is then a large likelihood of an equally split decision. This is especially true in the types of cases that find their way to the highest court.

In the event of a tied decision, virtually nothing changes in the lower courts future decisions that are based on legislation that is often technically unconstitutional, or viewed as too liberal or too conservative which is most often the whole reason for a defendant or a plaintiff asking for a Supreme Court appeal. In effect a tie vote is a judgement against that applicant and nothing will change in the lower courts decision making guidelines in the future.

The judges on the bench also vote on what cases they will hear, so again a tie vote in that process means your appeal to the high court will be discarded. I believe only about 1% of applications for appeals are selected to be reviewed. They could also temporarily reduce the number of judges from 9 to 7, which has been done before. A health issue or another death my create this scenario automatically.
.
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top