Ginsburg's last wish was to 'not be replaced until a new president is installed': report (1 Viewer)

[year2late]

Ginsburg's last wish was to 'not be replaced until a new president is installed': report

The late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg told her granddaughter that her dying wish was not to be replaced until a new president is sworn into office, NPR reports.

www.foxnews.com

Ruth Bader Ginsburg dies at 87
The late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's last wish was to not be replaced until a new president was sworn into office, NPR reports .


"My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed," Ginsburg told her granddaughter just days before her death, according to NPR.

The liberal icon's death Friday will ignite a political firestorm over whether a new Supreme Court Justice should be nominated and confirmed before the November election

.

Fat chance, Mitch McConnell will show his hypocrisy and Lindsey Graham will show himself to be a liar,

 

[Mr Person]

Ginsburg's last wish was to 'not be replaced until a new president is installed': report

The late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg told her granddaughter that her dying wish was not to be replaced until a new president is sworn into office, NPR reports.

www.foxnews.com

Fat chance, Mitch McConnell will show his hypocrisy and Lindsey Graham will show himself to be a liar,

Will?

They hardly waited to catch their breath before announcing they were going to ram through a nominee despite the lying bull**** they spewed to justify stealing Garland's seat through a refusal to do their duty of providing advice and consent. All along I've been saying I did not think the Democrats should retaliate with anything like court-packing. I changed my mind. They should:

- Expand the number of justices to counter the effect of GOP scumbaggery (or possibly, go farther than countering, as punishment/retaliation);

- Admit Puerto Rico and D.C. as states;

- Pass legislation requiring 60 votes for judicial nominee, and set any limitations on when a nominee might not be voted on in stone. It's important that this is legislation, not tradition, for the modern GOP is without honor.




Trumpists spent the last decade and a half, perhaps two decades, telling "the left" (which these days means anyone who isn't a Trumpist) that it is an enemy to be fought, not a group of people with different policy opinions. Time we took them at their word.

 

[Bum]

I see the Right attempting to force through a SCOTUS appointee, and the Left moving to pack the SCOTUS the same way Roosevelt attempted to in 1937 if trump is successful.

 

[Cardinal]

Well, obviously in any practical sense what Ginsburg's last wish was doesn't really matter. What will matter is what the Democratic response to her replacement will be.

The abolishment of the legislative filibuster has already entered the Democratic mainstream. And now so has adding seats to the courts. Replacing Ginsburg was the final straw required in order to radicalize the Democrats in this sense. Without this, it's unlikely that enough Democrats could have been brought on board with the idea of expanding the courts.

Of course, in the governing sense, what "radicalize" means for a Republican is very different than what it means for a Democrat.

 

[Excon]

1. Her last wish regarding the filling of a SCOTUS seat is irrelevant.

2. It is not hypocritical to fill the seat, And the left would be doing the same if they were in such a position.

 

[Jredbaron96]

If they do, then the time is nye to stack the courts.

Only in America can a leader whom the majority of voters did not select submit a high court judge and have them approved by a congress that does not represent the majority of the populace. Tyranny by majority.

 

[Manc Skipper]

1. Her last wish regarding the filling of a SCOTUS seat is irrelevant.

2. It is not hypocritical to fill the seat, And the left would be doing the same if they were in such a position.

It is when only four short years ago you argued the exact opposite regarding an Obama pick..

 

[Chomsky]

Will?

They hardly waited to catch their breath before announcing they were going to ram through a nominee despite the lying bull**** they spewed to justify stealing Garland's seat through a refusal to do their duty of providing advice and consent. All along I've been saying I did not think the Democrats should retaliate with anything like court-packing. I changed my mind. They should

Well - McConnel had to lock-down his cat-herd from errant messaging or locking themselves into a position. Crass or not, I see why he did it, though I don't see why it wasn't done via private phone call.

- Expand the number of justices to counter the effect of GOP scumbaggery (or possibly, go farther than countering, as punishment/retaliation);

- Admit Puerto Rico and D.C. as states;

- Pass legislation requiring 60 votes for judicial nominee, and set any limitations on when a nominee might not be voted on in stone. It's important that this is legislation, not tradition, for the modern GOP is without honor.




Trumpists spent the last decade and a half, perhaps two decades, telling "the left" (which these days means anyone who isn't a Trumpist) that it is an enemy to be fought, not a group of people with different policy opinions. Time we took them at their word.

Statehood for DC especially is a no-brainer. They've got to do it. Perhaps for PR too, as you mention.

I'm not crazy of the politics of packing the court, but I might come along on it.

As for predictions: I believe it is in Trump & McConnel's interest to stage a rallying political battle over the nomination going into the election, but to have the appointment vote after.

 

[Mr Person]

Well - McConnel had to lock-down his cat-herd from errant messaging or locking themselves into a position. Crass or not, I see why he did it, though I don't see why it wasn't done via private phone call.

Statehood for DC especially is a no-brainer. They've got to do it. Perhaps for PR too, as you mention.

I'm not crazy of the politics of packing the court, but I might come along on it.

As for predictions: I believe it is in Trump & McConnel's interest to stage a rallying political battle over the nomination going into the election, but to have the appointment vote after.

Previously, I'd have said the main danger in court-packing is that they'll just do it when/if it's their turn again. But if they're seriously going to ignore the bull they cooked up to justify stealing Garland's seat to ram a nominee through, I'm not sure what the point of worrying about such what-ifs is anymore.

 

[Cardinal]

Well - McConnel had to lock-down his cat-herd from errant messaging or locking themselves into a position. Crass or not, I see why he did it, though I don't see why it wasn't done via private phone call.

Statehood for DC especially is a no-brainer. They've got to do it. Perhaps for PR too, as you mention.

I'm not crazy of the politics of packing the court, but I might come along on it.

As for predictions: I believe it is in Trump & McConnel's interest to stage a rallying political battle over the nomination going into the election, but to have the appointment vote after.

Add DC and PR to my list of things Democrats can do if they take the Senate (the odds of this happening are roughly a toss-up. Cross your fingers).

 

[post]

Remind me again, what are the principles and ethical concerns, members, and those elected by the the former republican party, now and forever the Trump party, "stand" for? This election season, the Trump party took the unusual step of postponing creation of a party platform.

I know they insist on different rules, examples; on deficit spending and on presidential SCOTUS nominees during an election year, depending on whether or not there is a negro inhabiting the White House....

But what principle, even one, do they predictably maintain? "Pro" life? Not with 200,000 dead, on their watch, and counting.
Government transparency and accountability? See the Senate version of a Trump impeachment "trial" and vote to acquit.

The rule of law? http://barrstool.com ...Not a chance!

Defense of the Bill of Rights? Only one amendment is embraced, the 2nd, but not if it is asserted by non-whites.


The Great Gun Control War of the Twentieth Centuryâ•fland its ...
ir.lawnet.fordham.edu › cgi › viewcontent

PDF
Feb 6, 2013 - Century—and its Lessons for Gun Laws Today. David B. Kopel ... See, e.g., STOKELY CARMICHAEL, READY FOR REVOLUTION: THE LIFE AND ... Ronald Reagan signed, a bill to outlaw loaded open carry in most.
by DB Kopel - ‎2016 - ‎Cited by 43 - ‎Related articles

The sanctity of marriage, between a man and a woman, strong commitment to national security, steady, predictable foreign policy?
No, no, and no! What does it say about a major political party that elects and stands by an obvious, deeply mentally and emotionally unhealthy criminal like Donald Trump? Who are the people who would enthusiatically support such an unprecedented, American trragedy?

 

[mike2810]

1. Her last wish regarding the filling of a SCOTUS seat is irrelevant.

2. It is not hypocritical to fill the seat, And the left would be doing the same if they were in such a position.

1. I agree. Her last wish is irrelevant.

2. I agree filling a seat is not hypocritical. What is hypocritical is what McConnell said back in 2016. He and others stated that is was not a good idea to fill a SC vacancy before the election. An election that was 9 months out. So what changed Especially when the election is much closer this time?

Personally. I dislike the politics from both sides regarding the SC nomination process. More critical is getting a budget passed by the end of September. There are fire crews (federal) deployed. The large fires will not be out by Oct. There is the CV pandemic. Congress get your act together.

 

[Excon]

If they do, then the time is nye to stack the courts.

While Nadler certainly called for such, I doubt it will happen.

Only in America can a leader whom the majority of voters did not select submit a high court judge and have them approved by a congress that does not represent the majority of the populace. Tyranny by majority.

Hilarious. It is not an election of a national popular vote. Such has no real relevance to how the president is elected.

The presidential election is done by the States. The majority of which were won by the current President.

 

[Excon]

It is when only four short years ago you argued the exact opposite regarding an Obama pick..

What you think they argued and what they actually argued, are two differnt things.

 

[Chomsky]

Add DC and PR to my list of things Democrats can do if they take the Senate (the odds of this happening are roughly a toss-up. Cross your fingers).

I'm all-in. For political, as well as 'it's the right thing to do' reasons.

 

[Overitall]

The chickens have come home to roost and Obama’s profound observation that elections have consequences is being realized.

 

[post]

While Nadler certainly called for such, I doubt it will happen.


Hilarious. It is not an election of a national popular vote. Such has no real relevance to how the president is elected.

The presidential election is done by the States. The majority of which were won by the current President.

You certainly do not know that for a fact! This "president" openly and aggressively obstructed all investigation into his campaign's collaboration
with foreign governments strong evidence supports he eagerly invited the assistance of to "win" by pathetically tiny margins of votes in three states. Sincere elected officials, or anyone else, reasonably is predictably eager to cooperate in lifting any cloud over their reputation and ability to lead, in the eyes of their non-culted, constituents. To describe the lengths Trump has gone to do the opposite of cooperate would be akin to composing a tragic comedy of immense scope and breadth.

Symmetry: Don't you love it?

Click to read what they were "offering", in chapter 1?
Trump Jr. and Other Aides Met With Gulf Emissary Offering ...
www.nytimes.com › U.S. › Politics


May 19, 2018 - Donald Trump Jr. met in Trump Tower in the summer of 2016 with a representative of two wealthy ... Hiroko Masuike/The New York Times ... Besides his interest in Saudi Arabia and the Emirates, Mr. Mueller has also been asking ... Bahrain Will Normalize Relations With Israel, in Deal Brokered by Trump.

Chapter 2, the same authoritarian, 2016, Trump campaign "aides", including the indicted Netanyahu .... ginning up Nobel Peace Prize, "lipstick".
to apply to their shakey, piglet of a candidate, Donald J. Trump ! All roads lead to Putin.... it was the leader of UAE who set up a Seychelles meeting
between Erik Prince and Putin's "emissary".
Trump Hosts Israel, UAE and Bahrain in Signing Ceremony ...
www.nytimes.com › U.S. › Politics


5 days ago - Israel, U.A.E. and Bahrain Sign Accords, With an Eager Trump Playing Host ... President Trump preparing to deliver remarks with the prime minister of Israel and the foreign ministers of ... Doug Mills/The New York Times.
Missing: jr. ‎tower

 

[Excon]

What is hypocritical is what McConnell said back in 2016. He and others stated that is was not a good idea to fill a SC vacancy before the election. An election that was 9 months out. So what changed Especially when the election is much closer this time?

You might want to do an exact quote (and show it in context) an then try to make the comparison.

More critical is getting a budget passed by the end of September. There are fire crews (federal) deployed. The large fires will not be out by Oct. There is the CV pandemic. Congress get your act together.

One side apparently sees the filling of the seat as a far more critical thing for this nation's survival. The others can be dealt with.

 

[mike2810]

While Nadler certainly called for such, I doubt it will happen.


Hilarious. It is not an election of a national popular vote. Such has no real relevance to how the president is elected.

The presidential election is done by the States. The majority of which were won by the current President.

Obama won the majority of States in 2012. McConnell blocked Obama's SC nomination. Seems to me McConnell is playing games.

 

[Chomsky]

So far, two GOP Sen's are out - Murkowski & Collins. I'm thinking Mittens may come along, but is unlikely due to the Mormon's wanting an anti-abortion Conservative judge. So Trump is likely good, until AZ (hopefully) can put a Dem Sen in for McSally.

While it's common knowledge Pence breaks Senate 'ties', has it been ascertained that applies to SCOTUS nominations? Never know.

 

[Cardinal]

So far, two GOP Sen's are out - Murkowski & Collins. I'm thinking Mittens may come along, but is unlikely due to the Mormon's wanting an anti-abortion Conservative judge. So Trump is likely good, until AZ (hopefully) can put a Dem Sen in for McSally.

While it's common knowledge Pence breaks Senate 'ties', has it been ascertained that applies to SCOTUS nominations? Never know.

Do you believe Collins and Murkowski? Not that it matters anyway -- there will never be enough holdouts to stop a confirmation.

 

[Excon]

You certainly do not know that for a fact!

No what exactly? Something that I said I doubted? iLOL

This "president" openly and aggressively obstructed all investigation into his campaign's collaboration
with foreign governments strong evidence supports he eagerly invited the assistance of to "win" by pathetically tiny margins of votes in three states.

Your reply is dumb and only speaks to what you choose to believe. Not reality.

 

[Excon]

Obama won the majority of States in 2012. McConnell blocked Obama's SC nomination. Seems to me McConnell is playing games.

Irrelevant to anything I said.

 

[Chomsky]

Previously, I'd have said the main danger in court-packing is that they'll just do it when/if it's their turn again. But if they're seriously going to ignore the bull they cooked up to justify stealing Garland's seat to ram a nominee through, I'm not sure what the point of worrying about such what-ifs is anymore.

You know - Biden can place two, while negotiating legislation mandating a null window for appointing judges 'x' days before an election. If they (Repubs) don't go along, keep appointing until they do.

(actually this would simply be one negotiation)

 

[trouble13]

She should of stepped down when she was asked to. She gambled on her health and lost.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk