If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Secret video of Supreme Court Justices going WILD posted on Youtube   (cnn.com) divider line 55
    More: Unlikely, supreme court justices, Supreme Court, YouTube, sketch artists, campaign finance reform, oral arguments  
•       •       •

2746 clicks; posted to Politics » on 27 Feb 2014 at 7:13 PM (33 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



55 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-27 06:14:10 PM  
Newkirk was charged with violating federal law that makes it a crime to "harangue" or utter "loud threatening or abusive language" in the Supreme Court building.

How has Scalia avoided ending up in the clink all these years?
 
2014-02-27 06:18:50 PM  
static2.wikia.nocookie.net

CHERRY! CHERRY! CHERRY!
 
2014-02-27 06:47:04 PM  
I never understood the "no recordings" bit. I get not having distractions in the gallery, but not allowing C-SPAN or something from recording something that is a public hearing that is fully transcribed seems just odd.
 
2014-02-27 06:51:40 PM  

nmrsnr: I never understood the "no recordings" bit. I get not having distractions in the gallery, but not allowing C-SPAN or something from recording something that is a public hearing that is fully transcribed seems just odd.


I blame the Illuminati.
 
2014-02-27 06:58:18 PM  

nmrsnr: I never understood the "no recordings" bit. I get not having distractions in the gallery, but not allowing C-SPAN or something from recording something that is a public hearing that is fully transcribed seems just odd.


Concerns about lawyers or even judges grandstanding for the cameras/6'o'clock news.
 
2014-02-27 07:02:30 PM  

Satanic_Hamster: Concerns about lawyers or even judges grandstanding for the cameras/6'o'clock news.


But it's transcribed. And don't they have time limits, and can't the Justices shut them up by interrupting?
 
2014-02-27 07:14:39 PM  

nmrsnr: Satanic_Hamster: Concerns about lawyers or even judges grandstanding for the cameras/6'o'clock news.

But it's transcribed. And don't they have time limits, and can't the Justices shut them up by interrupting?


He did say judges too - who's going to shut up another Justice? I'd be more worried about the latter. Like Scalia just being a f*cking wanker for 3 hours straight.

I don't buy that this was the first outburst in years though, especially if the judges had zero reaction to it, which implies it happens more often than the court source is letting on.
 
2014-02-27 07:17:17 PM  
Police officers removed Newkirk after a brief scuffle. He was charged with violating a law that prohibits "loud threatening or abusive language" in the Supreme Court building.

Also, I would love to see this guy fight the case and take it to the Supreme Court.
 
2014-02-27 07:23:42 PM  

fusillade762: nmrsnr: I never understood the "no recordings" bit. I get not having distractions in the gallery, but not allowing C-SPAN or something from recording something that is a public hearing that is fully transcribed seems just odd.

I blame the Illuminati.


Clearly it was the New World Order
 
2014-02-27 07:24:47 PM  

bdub77: Police officers removed Newkirk after a brief scuffle. He was charged with violating a law that prohibits "loud threatening or abusive language" in the Supreme Court building.

Also, I would love to see this guy fight the case and take it to the Supreme Court.


We can only hope it goes something like this.
 
2014-02-27 07:32:54 PM  

Satanic_Hamster: Concerns about lawyers or even judges grandstanding for the cameras/6'o'clock news.


Nah, who would be pathetic enough to grandstand for C-SPAN?

nationalmemo.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com

Oh, right.
 
2014-02-27 07:32:56 PM  
Very revealing. The backs of people's heads, mumbling and heavy breathing on the microphone.
 
2014-02-27 07:32:59 PM  
Four CNN links in a row?

Who the hell is running this place nowadays?
 
2014-02-27 07:36:10 PM  
1)  these antics aren't hurting

2)  People who use corporation as a pejorative don't understand what a corporation is

3)  Citizen's United was correctly decided.  Instead of trying to cap outside advertising during elections, fight for disclosure laws.
 
2014-02-27 07:36:46 PM  
that sound you hear is a thousand farkers googling "what comes after trifecta"
 
2014-02-27 07:38:46 PM  

nmrsnr: I never understood the "no recordings" bit.


Scalia doesn't show up in mirrors or on video.
 
2014-02-27 07:39:01 PM  

Tor_Eckman: Four CNN links in a row?

Who the hell is running this place nowadays?


uncommonshow.com
 
2014-02-27 08:04:30 PM  
and THREAD.

Poor Wolfy Blitzer.
 
2014-02-27 08:06:18 PM  
It must be CNN o'clock.
 
2014-02-27 08:13:33 PM  
I'd love to see one specific article, that seems of importance, written by the Guardian U.K.
 
2014-02-27 08:15:48 PM  

HowDareYouCallMeAHoser: I'd love to see one specific article, that seems of importance, written by the Guardian U.K.


It is also about being secretly watched.
 
2014-02-27 08:20:39 PM  

HowDareYouCallMeAHoser: HowDareYouCallMeAHoser: I'd love to see one specific article, that seems of importance, written by the Guardian U.K.

It is also about being secretly watched.


Of interest to anyone here who may have "shown it to the Colchester United Girls via webcam?
 
2014-02-27 08:21:52 PM  
fark you FARK(site), we ain't friends.
 
2014-02-27 08:26:18 PM  
b.vimeocdn.com
Right here. You are at CNN, Now.
 
2014-02-27 08:30:41 PM  
Show us your tits, Scalia!
 
2014-02-27 08:31:52 PM  

fusillade762: Newkirk was charged with violating federal law that makes it a crime to "harangue" or utter "loud threatening or abusive language" in the Supreme Court building.



There's no free speech in the Supreme Court.
 
2014-02-27 08:32:00 PM  
 
2014-02-27 08:38:44 PM  

Witty_Retort: The audio recordings of all oral arguments heard by the Supreme Court of the United States are available to the public at the end of each argument week.  The audio recordings are posted on Fridays after Conference.


Scalia manually scribes them onto a wax cylinder with a metal stylus.
 
2014-02-27 08:41:21 PM  

fusillade762: Newkirk was charged with violating federal law that makes it a crime to "harangue" or utter "loud threatening or abusive language" in the Supreme Court building.

How has Scalia avoided ending up in the clink all these years?


Given that Scalia is a Republican and therefore a closeted gay who's probably tapped his foot a few times in airport restrooms, and given that this guy:

i.imgur.com

is a Nazi, I also find it difficult that one of them did not find themselves in the other at some awkward point.

(It appears that the colonel is wondering the same thing.)
 
2014-02-27 09:08:15 PM  
You American's are weird. Canadian Supreme Court hearings are often aired live (and always available via online stream) through our CSPAN equivalent.
 
2014-02-27 09:21:40 PM  

Tor_Eckman: Four CNN links in a row?

Who the hell is running this place nowadays?


Fark if I know...
 
2014-02-27 09:25:06 PM  

Arkanaut: Show us your tits, Scalia!


static2.businessinsider.com
"Hey little guy, wanna see a trick? My robe is getting shorter... it's getting shorter... getting shorter..."

 
2014-02-27 09:27:38 PM  

assets.nydailynews.com
"...domi es al req-ui-em..."

 
2014-02-27 09:30:48 PM  

bdub77: Police officers removed Newkirk after a brief scuffle. He was charged with violating a law that prohibits "loud threatening or abusive language" in the Supreme Court building.

Also, I would love to see this guy fight the case and take it to the Supreme Court.


www.nationalrighttolifenews.org
"Didn't I tell you not to show your face in my f*cking courtroom again?"

 
2014-02-27 09:34:04 PM  

UncomfortableSilence: Clearly it was the New World Order


binaryapi.ap.org
"Nah, I know dose guys. Dey woulda told me if dey were gonna do anyting like dat."

 
2014-02-27 09:37:48 PM  

nmrsnr: But it's transcribed. And don't they have time limits, and can't the Justices shut them up by interr-


assets.nydailynews.com
"Da fuq are you talkin' about?"

 
2014-02-27 10:03:51 PM  

sprgrss: 1)  these antics aren't hurting


What antics? The guy being loud in the Supreme Court? We could debate if it is hurting but we can agree it is not complaining much of anything. We get one sentence about his protest and that's it. Also he was protesting the wrong case, it was a patent case not about finance.
 
2014-02-27 10:18:03 PM  
Video on the retirement of Thurgood Marshall

All this talk about Supreme Court video made me realize I didn't really know what Marshall sounded/looked like.  This is actually a quite compelling clip from Nightline in 1991 with many recognizable characters from today, including a certain Trans-Am driving VP.
 
2014-02-27 10:43:49 PM  

dookdookdook: Satanic_Hamster: Concerns about lawyers or even judges grandstanding for the cameras/6'o'clock news.

Nah, who would be pathetic enough to grandstand for C-SPAN?

[nationalmemo.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com image 638x353]

Oh, right.


You can add a large number of people to that list, from both sides of the aisle.
 
2014-02-28 12:00:38 AM  

ROBO-Jesus: You American's are weird. Canadian Supreme Court hearings are often aired live (and always available via online stream) through our CSPAN equivalent.


That's sort of the point most of us are trying to make: let the public see how the Supreme Court really works. You don't have to necessarily show them live as it happens (in case SCOTUS is really worried about grandstanding, they could have time to edit that crap out), but it's time to open things up a bit.
 
2014-02-28 12:30:42 AM  
No one will be seated during the thrilling Clarence Thomas Listening scene.
 
2014-02-28 12:43:47 AM  
FTFA: a crime to "harangue"

uh oh
 
2014-02-28 02:47:40 AM  
ox45tallboy theater

YAY
 
2014-02-28 04:48:27 AM  

dookdookdook: Satanic_Hamster: Concerns about lawyers or even judges grandstanding for the cameras/6'o'clock news.

Nah, who would be pathetic enough to grandstand for C-SPAN?

[nationalmemo.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com image 638x353]

Oh, right.


Or Newt Gingrich, back in the 1980s.  I understand Newt would hold forth to an empty room late at night, but the cameras wouldn't show it was empty, and the right wing found out about it by word of mouth and tuned in.
 
2014-02-28 05:01:06 AM  

sprgrss: 3) Citizen's United was correctly decided. Instead of trying to cap outside advertising during elections, fight for disclosure laws


No, it wasn't. The idea that money is speech is a fallacy. Money enables speech, and there is a major difference. Citizen's United also holds that money spent on an election by an outside group does not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption. Which is so amazingly laughable that we would give a 4th grader an F for any paper that contained that assertion.

It destroyed precedent, it tramples over the prerogatives of Congress- it's a steaming pile of shait. Read Justice Steven's dissent for a fuller accounting of just how awful that thing was.
 
2014-02-28 05:29:47 AM  

nmrsnr: Satanic_Hamster: Concerns about lawyers or even judges grandstanding for the cameras/6'o'clock news.

But it's transcribed. And don't they have time limits, and can't the Justices shut them up by interrupting?


upload.wikimedia.org
Yes, Cameras are not required for grandstanding.
 
2014-02-28 07:00:26 AM  

DeathByGeekSquad: You can add a large number of people to that list, from both sides of the aisle.


So you're just showing up in this thread to tell us that both sides are bad.
 
2014-02-28 07:27:37 AM  
FTA: "Money is not speech," he said. "Overturn 'Citizens United!'"

it a crime to "harangue" or utter "loud threatening or abusive language" in the Supreme Court building.


It doesn't sound very threatening.  Why not charge them with contempt?
 
2014-02-28 07:32:44 AM  

desertgeek: ROBO-Jesus: You American's are weird. Canadian Supreme Court hearings are often aired live (and always available via online stream) through our CSPAN equivalent.

That's sort of the point most of us are trying to make: let the public see how the Supreme Court really works. You don't have to necessarily show them live as it happens (in case SCOTUS is really worried about grandstanding, they could have time to edit that crap out), but it's time to open things up a bit.


Someone needs to get Clarence Thomas on camera.  It's been well known that he never asks questions (the idea being he already knows what his decision is before the arguments), but recent reports have said that now he doesn't even pretend to listen.  He closes his eyes and turns his head toward the ceiling the entire time.
 
2014-02-28 08:26:18 AM  
"There was no immediate explanation of how a camera was smuggled past security."

I have one, $12 an hour security guards. I just breezed through TSA this past weekend and forgot I had my bike multi-tool which has a knife blade on it, they never noticed.
 
Displayed 50 of 55 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report