- Joined
- Oct 12, 2005
- Messages
- 281,619
- Reaction score
- 100,389
- Location
- Ohio
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
wishful thinking. what mistakes?Soon the Supreme court will be 2 to 1 liberal to conservative justices. Then we will correct the mistakes of the trump years.
Then to work on the trump appellate court appointments
Trump says he wants to fill Supreme Court seat quickly in case justices need to settle election dispute
Political opponents said Trump wants a bigger Supreme Court as soon as possible to fix the presidential election in his favor.www.usatoday.com
Sorry for your suffering. TDS is truly a terrible disease that obviously has long term cognitive effects.I read several of your posts. Take your time and try to process my next statement.
WRITTEN TRUMP-SPEAK COMES ACROSS AS GIBBERISH.
And? Would you prefer a 4-4 decision that leaves the election in limbo if there is an issue?
4-4 decision over what exactly? To allow states to stop counting ballots because of massive turnout? To disallow it? I'd hope a 4-4 gridlock in some cases stops party shenanigans or at least does not lend legitimacy to any attempts to prematurely stop the count.
The funny thing is it's beginning to look like a landslide. If it were close, requiring recounts like in 2000, there might be a last-minute need for SCOTUS. Trump seems to be gearing up to bring the courts in early though, to stop even the first round of counting if it looks like he's going to lose.
So yeah in the scenario Trump is imagining, I think no decision would be better than the wrong one.
The simple fact is rushing to get a court pick in just before an election whose results he fully intends to contest is leaning on the scales a little too heavily. And having a candidate for a justice coming in knowing that and refusing to say whether or not she'll play along is an indication he's picking the right person to do that particular job.
Yes....imagine if a case like 2000 happens again and it goes to the Supreme Court, same as last time, and it's 4-4. That instantly creates a significant constitutional crisis. I don't see there being anything beyond that catching a favorable ruling from SCOTUS on Trump's side, even if ACB is appointed. I don't see the most likely alternative being a good one with 8 members.
No doubt it will be ugly but four more years of Trump could be worse.
Worse than a war over who gets to be President like a 3rd world nation?
look I don't see it getting that bad, but America already in uncharted territory to an extent: The nation has failed this constitutional crisis: a republican-led senate has been wilfully enabling the blatant criminality of a president. It was a test they passed with Nixon, not his time.
Now if the judiciary is on board with that as well - in order to 'keep the peace' - that is another step toward authoritarian rule.
Conservative rulings doesn't mean they're wrong. Time for you to move on dude, you don't have a winning hand. She's a ****ing genius compared to the leftwing idiots questioning her in that Senate hearing. It's laughable watching them flail in their attempt to discredit her with their books of papers, while she sits there batting the feeble attempts without a single note in front of her.
OK fine....what is the worst than that has happened during Trump's 4 years that you're saying he did or is responsible for?
OK fine....what is the worst than that has happened during Trump's 4 years that you're saying he did or is responsible for?
She is much smarter than most of the republicans too-and they know that too and don't attempt to outshine Barrett's intellect. Now Ted Cruz might be brighter-and perhaps he should be on the court, but he realizes she's an intellectual peer. Hawley is brilliant as well-summa at Stanford, JD Yale and he clerked for CJ Roberts
I look forward to her being on the court and that she is going to replace someone who was a hard core socialist is even better news
1) Ted Cruz being an intellectual heavy weight.
2) RGB being a socialist.
3) Dems stopped the tradition of cross aisles on nominees because Merrick's seat was flatout stolen. Thus, you could say Mitch McConnell ended that tradition.
4) The best we can hope for is that a right-winger is a total joke-buffoon (like 90% of Republicans and their voters), rather than being a corrupt and competent fascist. Looks like Amy is on the competent end of the spectrum, meaning she knows full well what she's doing in not answering soft-ball questions like 'Can a president pardon himself from corruption charges?' or 'Is it legal to allow armed right-wingers to engage in voter-intimidation?' or 'Should the loser facilitate a peaceful transition of power?'
Cruz's record academically is much better than Obama's. Did not you tell us Obama was a genius?
how was Garland's seat "Stolen"? WTF do you think this seat belongs to?
I don't recall ever calling Obama a genius. I said he's almost infinitely smarter than Trump. However, it's possible that Trump is actually smart but is so incredibly lazy that he's functionally retarded.
As for Cruz, regardless of what his academics are, he talks like a buffoon and spews some of the least intellectual arguments I've ever heard. He's not a good debater, he's just good at word-salad-speak and sounding smart to less intelligent people. There are people who think Ben Shapiro and Dave Rubin are super-geniuses, but that doesn't make them particularly bright.
Garland's seat was blocked when Obama had a year to go on his presidency, then Republicans immediately took the seat when they secured the presidency.
If you pull out a chocolate bar and try to eat it, but I grab the chocolate bar from you and give it to my friend... that's theft.
Yes antifascist action prevented Britain from becoming a vichy puppet state of the nazis by crushing Mosely and bravely fought against the nazis. There werent just communists who were antifascists.You do. Again, this just highlights that you questioning someone else's intelligence here is funny. You're going around with symbols you don't even know where they come from.
View attachment 67299732
if you had a law degree with many years of practice in high level constitutional cases and federal appellate issues, I doubt you'd make that claim.
Garland didn't have the votes to win a nomination.
Who, Trump?
Killing a mass testing plan that Kushner - the one good thing he seems to have managed to do - came up with because he calculated that a lot of liberals would die in blue states and he could thus gain politically by blaming blue governors was straight-up evil.
As was, as he admitted, lying and denying about COVID, allowing it to explode in the states that it didn't have to, and now we have 215,000 in the ground.
Remember what we did when 3,700 people died on a certain September? We ended up invading two countries, getting over a hundred thousand civilians there killed, getting several thousand of our troops killed, spent trillions, acquiesed in mass government surveillance and letting security guard rejects feel up grandma and her grand daughter at the airport.
215,000 what happens? You lot make wearing a ****ing mask your hill to die on. Because, dear lord, it's ever so slightly uncomfortable. Trump and Trumpism are poisons.
You mean like Kagan's and Sotomayor's?Amy Coney Barrett’s Judicial Neutrality Is a Political Fiction
Illuminating monologue by Eric Levitz allows one to cut through Barrett's obfuscating bullshit at the confirmation hearing and pin her down for what she obviously is ... uber-conservative.
No judge is recommended by the Federalist Society unless they have an abundant history of conservative rulings and papers. Barrett came highly recommended.
And make no mistake, the Federalist Society acts as a conduit for judicial dark money donations from wealthy conservative individuals and organizations.
For example, some entity (Mercer family? Koch family?) wrote the Society a $17 million check to recommend/lobby for Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
Republicans Oppose Court Packing (Except When They Support It)
Good. That works for me, after all the liberals on the court that have made NO EFFORT to maintain "Judicial Neutrality".Amy Coney Barrett’s Judicial Neutrality Is a Political Fiction
Illuminating monologue by Eric Levitz allows one to cut through Barrett's obfuscating bullshit at the confirmation hearing and pin her down for what she obviously is ... uber-conservative.
No judge is recommended by the Federalist Society unless they have an abundant history of conservative rulings and papers. Barrett came highly recommended.
And make no mistake, the Federalist Society acts as a conduit for judicial dark money donations from wealthy conservative individuals and organizations.
For example, some entity (Mercer family? Koch family?) wrote the Society a $17 million check to recommend/lobby for Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
Republicans Oppose Court Packing (Except When They Support It)
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?