Why you should fear Trump's pick for Supreme Court Judge

[onlinebiker]

And who is going to be the bastion of fairness to determine who is and who is not a fanatic?

You?


Bwaaahahahahahaha

Certainly not you, you're nothing more than a fuckhead.

I am not the one calling for restrictions to first ammendment rights.

That's all on you.

I'm not applying to your proposed post of Inquistioner....

[downbeatplumb]

He didnt get lucky. the picks were stolen
BUT the judiciary should not be politicised and certainly not for life, this whole system is flawed at its core.

If you ask the other side of the aisle, I'd bet they think just the opposite.

Well lets see, they denied Obama a pick for supreme court in an election year, BUT are forcing through a pick a few weeks before the election. 
They denied Obama hundreds of lower court seats and have been forcing though right wingers at an industrial rate. 
They are packing the courts with lackies like every dictatorship ever.

This is so that Trump can find some fault with the election so he can take it to the supreme court which he has packed with his lackies to steal the election.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world...59674.html

Donald Trump has revealed  he expects a contested presidential election that winds up in the Supreme Court’s hands, one of the many reasons he believes Senate Republicans ought to ram through his nominee to replace the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg before 3 November.
“I think it's better if you go before the election, because I think this scam that the Democrats are pulling — it's a scam — the scam will be before the United States Supreme Court,” the president told reporters at the White House, referring to states’ programmes to ramp up mail-in voting amid the coronavirus pandemic.
“I think having a 4-4 situation is not a good situation, if you get that,” Mr Trump said of a Supreme Court that could be stalemated on such a legal challenge to the election results without its ninth justice.

[arewethereyet]

Blessed be the fruit.
I see OffTrump being forced on your country soon to be renamed Gilead.

bold mine

Not a terrible idea...

[onlinebiker]

If you ask the other side of the aisle, I'd bet they think just the opposite.

Well lets see, they denied Obama a pick for supreme court in an election year, BUT are forcing through a pick a few weeks before the election. 
They denied Obama hundreds of lower court seats and have been forcing though right wingers at an industrial rate. 
They are packing the courts with lackies like every dictatorship ever.

This is so that Trump can find some fault with the election so he can take it to the supreme court which he has packed with his lackies to steal the election.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world...59674.html

Donald Trump has revealed  he expects a contested presidential election that winds up in the Supreme Court’s hands, one of the many reasons he believes Senate Republicans ought to ram through his nominee to replace the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg before 3 November.
“I think it's better if you go before the election, because I think this scam that the Democrats are pulling — it's a scam — the scam will be before the United States Supreme Court,” the president told reporters at the White House, referring to states’ programmes to ramp up mail-in voting amid the coronavirus pandemic.
“I think having a 4-4 situation is not a good situation, if you get that,” Mr Trump said of a Supreme Court that could be stalemated on such a legal challenge to the election results without its ninth justice.

Of COURSE they denied Obama's pick. That happens when you have enough votes.

And they will likely confirm Trumpcs latest nominee - for the same reason - they have the votes.....


You expect the winner to do the bidding of the loser?


.....


Hey - I thought "mob rule" was a good thing. No?


Sorry - that's how the two party system works......

(Something I keep saying I am against)...

[The Architect Of Fate]

Accepts that's not excuse they used . Because they are fucking hypocrites . And "mob rule" ( a stupid thing to call it) wouldn't support this either .


https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/...story.html

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/mos...t-vacancy/

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5173...reme-court

[Rank Stranger]

Dems will put on a show of obstruction.  They'll fail.  Whatsherface will be appointed.  And life will go on.

Dems could render this whole thing a moot point if they win big in November... and if they have the balls to end the filibuster and pack the court.



But I don't see that happening.  

[Anomalocaris]

Dems will put on a show of obstruction.  They'll fail.  Whatsherface will be appointed.  And life will go on.

Dems could render this whole thing a moot point if they win big in November... and if they have the balls to end the filibuster and pack the court.



But I don't see that happening.  

If they have the balls they’d impeach the judges trump put on the court and replace them. and then pack the Court with 4 more younger liberal justices for each elderly ones on the court.    Packing the court merely returns to status quo.   What the republicans did requires punishment Beyond status quo that must be felt until all of the current generations are dead.

[Figbash]

Another cherry-picking Christian.

Go do you, ACB, be that submissive bitch you think all women should be.

[onlinebiker]

Dems will put on a show of obstruction.  They'll fail.  Whatsherface will be appointed.  And life will go on.

Dems could render this whole thing a moot point if they win big in November... and if they have the balls to end the filibuster and pack the court.



But I don't see that happening.  

If they have the balls they’d impeach the judges trump put on the court and replace them. and then pack the Court with 4 more younger liberal justices for each elderly ones on the court.    Packing the court merely returns to status quo.   What the republicans did requires punishment Beyond status quo that must be felt until all of the current generations are dead.

In other words - you approve of what Trump has done - stack the deck as it were...

You just want to stack it YOUR way....

[The Grand Nudger]

Certainly not you, you're nothing more than a fuckhead.

I am not the one calling for restrictions to first ammendment rights.

That's all on you.

I'm not applying to your proposed post of Inquistioner....

In mere reality, being disqualified from holding a position on account of a religious commitment which prevents you from faithfully executing the duties of the office does not abrogate your rights.

It is, in fact, an expression and protection of your first amendment rights to be freed from any such position or duty. No one has to take any position that they consider to be an affront to their religious principles, and we are all empowered to resign from any such duty without fear of legal reprisal.

It would take a positively absurd notion of the 1st amendment to think that it privileges attempts at theocracy.