Supreme Court Justice

I haven't been paying too much attention to the news these last few days, as I've been running around Ford dealerships shopping for a truck for my camper (what a circus that is, BTW) but I'm surprised to see that Biden won't give any names to replace RBG should he end up making the choice.

You would think if he had something solid to place on the table, he would...it would be a counter to Barrett and if it's appealing to his "supporters", it would be a motivating attribute.

Instead he's got nothing? I can't believe that with RBG on her deathbed the Dems wouldn't have gotten a list lined up...perhaps even a forgone solid pick.

Nope...he can't spill the beans because "half" of his "supporters" would shit their pants...the "black chick" he's hinted at either would be too leftist or not leftist enough. I wonder if her name will leak out somehow...it would be interesting to see just where the liberal oligarch power brokers sit.

You know who is NOT nominating a new SCOTUS replacement today?


HRC. [emoji106]

Biden can't name SCOTUS picks because whoever he names will upset half of his base.... the Democrats are a dumpster fire at the moment. The only thing holding them together is their mutual unbridled hatred of Trump.

I'm thinking that Trump, that magnificent bastard, has the dems in a pickle on the SCOTUS nominee.

The last thing democrats would/should want to do is a Bork/Kavanagh on Barrett.

The more they battle her in their usual despicable, baseless fashion, the more the Senate seats and in a bit of a stretch,

or not, the House, becomes a self lynching.

They are now sitting on the horse with a noose around their necks, attacking Barrett in the way they did Kavanaugh, will be kicking and spurring the horse to their demise.

I'm thinking they want to shock the country and process Barrett in an orderly fashion to eliminate rope burn around the neck. as always--YMMV

Ok guys... So Trump has now successfully replaced three Supreme Court judges, and I just have to play devil's advocate here...

Let's assume Hillary was nominated president in 2016 -- who would she have filled those seats with? :ne_nau:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rockgremlin

Ok guys... So Trump has now successfully replaced three Supreme Court judges, and I just have to play devil's advocate here...

Let's assume Hillary was nominated president in 2016 -- who would she have filled those seats with? :ne_nau:

---

God only knows. I think a Clinton presidency would be equivalent to living in a parallel world.

The big question would be...how far left would she have gone? What would be the lay of the land in regards to the race/cop issues? Would the 'rona have been ignored? Would Bernie and his miserable minions have faded away? Would China have invaded Taiwan by now?

Impossible to even speculate...although there is no doubt that a lot of hate, rage, anxiety, madness, violence and deranged mayhem has been created by the side she stands with for the last four years.

Trump has completely reshaped the Judiciary, right down the the once liberal bastian known as the 9th.

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFile...lbum/nod-3.gif

https://i.imgur.com/PBibYLc.gif

https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFile...vslystz4-7.gif

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...ature=emb_logo

joe did get this one right.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IArnlMN3YcM&feature=emb_logo

Dems boycott the hearings? 🤣🤣🤣🤣. No, please don’t. Anything but that. We were so looking forward to Kavanaugh round 2.

That’s almost as good as the NBA threatening to boycott their own games. These people are off their rockers.

Attachment 95431

https://www.dailywire.com/news/democ...-coney-barrett

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BasinCruiser

Dems boycott the hearings? 🤣🤣🤣🤣. No, please don’t. Anything but that. We were so looking forward to Kavanaugh round 2.

That’s almost as good as the NBA threatening to boycott their own games. These people are off their rockers.

Attachment 95431

https://www.dailywire.com/news/democ...-coney-barrett

---

Equal parts immaturity and sour grapes.

That's some junior high school behavior right there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rockgremlin

Equal parts immaturity and sour grapes.

That's some junior high school behavior right there.

---

So basically you're saying their behavior has greatly improved from their usual 4 year old in the grocery store didn't get a candy bar temper tantrum?!?

FYI - Amy Coney Barrett is a 'White Colonizer'.... LMAO

I wondered how the left would attack Barrett and now we know... she is a racist plantation owner because she adopted two black kids. I'm just waiting for Christine Blasey Ford to come forward with the unverifiable details of Master Barrett whipping her black slave children at a high school KKK party.

Trump Supreme Court pick Amy Coney Barrett faces 'White colonizer' attacks

https://www.foxnews.com/media/trump-...-media-attacks

This is why I said the powers that be, cannot let another shitshow of false demonrat accusations, blanket the airwaves.

It will destroy their chances in the senate and not help the house.

This very well may be a very quick confirmation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oldno7

This is why I said the powers that be, cannot let another shitshow of false demonrat accusations, blanket the airwaves.

It will destroy their chances in the senate and not help the house.

This very well may be a very quick confirmation.

---

Indeed, that's why this notion of them boycotting the confirmation doesn't make any sense...to do so would be a complete denial of the system of order we have had...a complete rebuke, actually.

It's hard to believe that they actually think they have enough support behind them to pull this off or even that suggesting such a thing would have widespread appeal. To do so would be virtually a declaration of war. This would be worse than the bullshit impeachment.

Hard to figure...it's certainly understandable these days for the progressive pundits to fantasize about such a thing, but you have to wonder if the string pullers actually use them as chum to gauge reaction?

The socialists/communist may not completely control the Democrat Party right now, but the leaders there are certainly tap dancing on the very edge of it. Dangerous stuff...desperation or all part of a grand plan?

https://i.imgur.com/qhrqJyd.jpg

https://i.ibb.co/xh51H8c/BARRETT-2020.jpg

Watching the left try and figure out how to attack ACB is very entertaining... so far everything they have tossed at the wall has failed to stick.

Attacking her religion failed miserably last time around, but I expect they will try it again if they fail to find another option.

Attacking her for being a good mother of seven failed to work.

I can't wait to see where they go next.

I expect the official line of attack to be on policy. Overturning Roe and Obamacare and probably affirmative action. And those arguments will have traction for undecideds.

We need them to go nuclear and personal instead. Which their minions will do, but gives the leadership a chance to disclaim them while letting them run a bit. The balance between these 2 narratives determines the outcome on the election.

I think she should be confirmed as usual. Goalposts shouldn't be constantly moved.

Why "Supreme"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob L

Why "Supreme"?

---

Why "Royal"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob L

Why "Supreme"?

---

We have 9 Supreme Court Judges, they rule as a group. Their ruling is final and there is no higher court to appeal the verdict to. The Supreme Court is the last stop on a long road.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rockgremlin

Ok guys... So Trump has now successfully replaced three Supreme Court judges, and I just have to play devil's advocate here...

Let's assume Hillary was nominated president in 2016 -- who would she have filled those seats with? :ne_nau:

---

Let's back up here since this question wasn't quite addressed. My question was not "what would America look like if Hillary were elected"?

My question was who specifically would Hillary have elected to the Supreme Court?

Give me some names as to who you believe she would have nominated, and why that would have been detrimental.

I'm thinking Merrick Garland is one of the candidates for sure, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rockgremlin

I'm thinking Merrick Garland is one of the candidates for sure, right?

---

I think Garland probably not. He was/is the chief of the DC circuit. Not left wing enough for their cause. It was a clever move by Obama to name the blandest, safest, but a reliable liberal judge, to counter what at the time seemed a hard 9 months to kill.

Your Q, who. Impossible to know. Who would have guessed Sotomayor? A ridiculous leftist, so devoid of any understanding of America or the Constitution. She's arguably more comfortable waving a Hugo Chavez flag than the US flag given her utterly repugnant views.

Kagan had zero judicial experience, and Sotomayor was a sitting judge. There are fleets of left wing activists (like RBG's history) and college administrators (like Kagan) and judges (like Sotomayor). No telling from where or who. Just a reliable leftist.

First off Trump has only appointed 2 judges to the Supreme Court, his third nomination is still pending.

Hillary could nominate any radical left wing idiot she so desired, but so long as the GOP controls the Senate none of them were getting approved.

Assuming a direct Hillary for Trump swap she would have been forced to pick judges near the center to get them approved.

Being a member of the Senate and a member of the House is the difference between chicken salad and chicken shit. - Lyndon B. Johnson

^^^FWIW - This is also why the GOP has no intention of waiting to confirm a SC Judge until after the election as they could easily lose seats or even control of the Senate this election. At which point Chuck Schumer would become speaker of the Senate and block a Trump nomination ala Mitch McConnell.

https://gab.com/system/media_attachm...dbe10fc37e.jpg

https://image.cagle.com/243683/750/243683.png

https://i.imgur.com/81Gxesj.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/Dzu3bS3.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/aWSHmjf.png

Been thinking about how the Dems will approach the confirmation process. Whether they go all out nuclear, with Kavanugh level accusations and hell, or not.

I'm thinking they actually will not. Let this seat go in order to, 1, not look as scary crazy as they did with Kav in order to not blow some close senate races. 2, knowing they can pack the court they don't care anyway.

If they do go all out bat shit with walk out stunts and attacks on her Christianity, it means they don't have the votes to pack the court.

The thing I haven't quite figured out is, why do they openly discuss packing still? Schumer alluded to it again today in an interview. That's awfully ballsy. Either a total bluff or they have polling showing they're going to storm the senate with +6 or +7 and the issue polls well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dougrz

Been thinking about how the Dems will approach the confirmation process. Whether they go all out nuclear, with Kavanugh level accusations and hell, or not.

I'm thinking they actually will not. Let this seat go in order to, 1, not look as scary crazy as they did with Kav in order to not blow some close senate races. 2, knowing they can pack the court they don't care anyway.

If they do go all out bat shit with walk out stunts and attacks on her Christianity, it means they don't have the votes to pack the court.

The thing I haven't quite figured out is, why do they openly discuss packing still? Schumer alluded to it again today in an interview. That's awfully ballsy. Either a total bluff or they have polling showing they're going to storm the senate with +6 or +7 and the issue polls well.

---

He lives in an echo chamber...they are, and have been appealing to any dick that dangles in their faces to get votes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Byron

He lives in an echo chamber...they are, and have been appealing to any dick that dangles in their faces to get votes.

---

Dems have the radical-left-let's-pack-the-court vote. Why would he say it to appeal to them?

Conversely, the elephant issue is amnesty. Hasn't been discussed once anywhere, anytime this year. They know that doesn't play well overall but you'd think would play well for hispanic votes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dougrz

Dems have the radical-left-let's-pack-the-court vote. Why would he say it to appeal to them?

---

Did you hear what Biden said the other night about the New Green Deal and defund the police? Schumer is just running cover while skirting that boo-boo.

You gotta feed the animals, you know.

https://i.imgur.com/BrRD6Xr.jpg

https://media.thedonald.win/post/83H7eyB3.png

Huge relief that ACB tested negative and last saw Trump on Sat. If her hearings were delayed for a recovery, no guarantee she would have made it. Also would have eliminated the hearing stage for Dems to make fools of themselves.

Bullet dodged.