-
Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy announced today that he is retiring from the Supreme Court, a move that gives President Trump the chance to replace the court’s pivotal justice and dramatically shift the institution to the right, setting up a bitter partisan showdown on Kennedy’s successor.
What a couple-a days huh?
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
I believe the President can nominate any US citizen to sit as a justice on the Supreme Court. It may be the time for the President to shake things up and nominate his son Eric, who can be schooled in the law by Clarence Thomas, giving the latter something to do, and anyway Eric will vote as his dad tells him to.
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Quote:
Originally Posted by
buttslinger
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy announced today that he is retiring from the Supreme Court, a move that gives President Trump the chance to replace the court’s pivotal justice and dramatically shift the institution to the right, setting up a bitter partisan showdown on Kennedy’s successor.
What a couple-a days huh?
yeah, but one thing i like about trump is he screws everyone- including his own party so who knows; maybe they'll pick this time to 'mccain' his decision considering they still have to confirm whoever is picked. and in all honesty, with the feather duster schumer treats republicans with and even more recently pelosi downplaying cortez's win the primary, i wouldn't count on them unless-
cortez is the smoke that finally catches on. but right now i see it as the republican's game to shake up
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Five out of five might as well be nine out of nine, they'll rubber-stamp anything the Republicans send over.
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Quote:
Originally Posted by
buttslinger
Five out of five might as well be nine out of nine, they'll rubber-stamp anything the Republicans send over.
The key point, because if the Court is just going to pass judgements that are always in favour of the Republican Party and a small group of Christian fanatics, it will not be making decisions relevant to the USA as a whole. It has already passed on the blatant practice of gerrymandering congressional districts, undermining labour unions ability to organize, purging voters from the roll in Ohio -it is not beyond reason to believe if it were to become even more conservative, gains on abortion and same-sex marriage would be reversed. The days when a Justice was appointed who ruled on the law rather than partisan politics may be over. I doubt I will visit the USA again, indeed, doubt they will let me in because of my family name and the stamps in my passport, but it does on one level look increasingly like a nasty country, not unlike parts of the UK that have fallen victim to Brexit madness. One could hope the mid-terms and 2020 will put an end to it, but the divisions look deep and beyond repair.
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Remember all those people who said there was no difference between Hillary and Trump and that's why they were not voting. Or the Sanders supporters who were still butthurt because their guy didn't get the nomination and didn't vote for Hillary. Well guess what folks, you played a part in re-shaping the Supreme Court for the next 30 years. Thanks for nothing.
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
^^^ nah i wouldn't blame those people anymore than anyone who voted for trump. the DNC was a mess and was pushing for hillary. the fact that they had enough hubris to ignore bernie's popularity made a lot of people turn against the party (either by not voting or just voting for candidates that didn't have a chance)- in other words, they didn't listen to the very people they should have been serving and instead focused on their donors- politics 101.
and this was (and still is) the very thing trump has used against them. of course it's all still a kangaroo court with all the pointing of fingers at who's wrong and who's not and who's losing and who's winning- coincidentally both sides being pitted against one another by both the president and establishment (read as: democrats). they point fingers: we fight.
and the really beautiful part is: nothing is getting done. policies are just being put into hibernation and the people's minds slowly back to sleep.
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
This Supreme Court pick is the reason Evangelicals voted for a no-tax-paying pussy-grabber. For the Republicans this is Gold on the Sidewalk.
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
The moral and political argument that is emerging argues that as long as the President is under investigation for possible breaches of the law, he should not have the authority to nominate justices to sit on the Supreme Court of the United States,and that therefore the Senate should automatically refuse to consider the nominee until the Special Investigator has reported and the status of the President has been confirmed either way.
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Time to name a new Judge. Let the bullshit begin.
Beware the Federalist Society.
They can see the Future. The one without you-
the porn addicted mis-raised misfit.
Let's see if Democrats can get their spine up, Mueller can't save them on this one...….
UNLESS...…..
Time to Rock.
https://preview.ibb.co/gFo8hT/1.jpg
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
I think Trump will pick Kavanaugh although I prefer Tom Hardiman, who seems more moderate.
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
he picked kavanaugh. so glad it wasn't mike lee
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
I'd prefer stan lee.
Hillary Clinton gets to sit home and watch not only the choice that could have been hers, Kavanaugh is the Republican Hitman who trashed her husband with all the lurid sex details during the Monica Lewinski Affair.
If the Republicans hold the line, boom goes the dynamite. It's over.
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
not sure why you keep bringing hillary up- yes she could have. lots of things could have happened, but we should deal with what did happen rather that what could have.
imo the most dangerous part of kavanaugh's choice is that he can decide whether muller's investigation can go on, and whether the president can be indicted. roe vs wade will be overturned for sure. that's almost a lost cause at this point. gay marriage will probably be revoked. again- lost cause.
at this point, getting trump out of power is, imo, the only way to stop the damage being done. anything else is just temporary
p.s. trump just pardoned the two orgeon ranchers who started the arson fires that spreed to federal land. now, if this were a democrat who pardoned the native american water protectors in standing rock, i'm sure the senate would've thrown a fit- so whether pocahontas and chuck can must enough courage to even sound a peep against this one
http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...0-day-standoff
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Stavros
The moral and political argument that is emerging argues that as long as the President is under investigation for possible breaches of the law, he should not have the authority to nominate justices to sit on the Supreme Court of the United States,and that therefore the Senate should automatically refuse to consider the nominee until the Special Investigator has reported and the status of the President has been confirmed either way.
a ludicrous argument from Democrats powerless to stop the confirmation process.
I’m sorta pleased with Kavanaugh. no doubt a conservative judge, but one who seems reasonable and extremely well qualified to serve
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
You can't like Kavanaugh and not like Trump.
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bluesoul
at this point, getting trump out of power is, imo, the only way to stop the damage being done. anything else is just temporary
The mid-terms are effectively a referendum on whether the US continues to have democracy and the rule of law in any meaningful way, just like the recent elections in Hungary and Turkey. Unless the Dems get at least a blocking majority in one house it is hard to see what will stop the US from going the way of those countries. Unfortunately, it's a referendum in which one side starts with a huge advantage due to gerrymandering and voter suppression, which is a sign of how far we've already moved from true democracy.
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Quote:
Originally Posted by
flabbybody
a ludicrous argument from Democrats powerless to stop the confirmation process.
I’m sorta pleased with Kavanaugh. no doubt a conservative judge, but one who seems reasonable and extremely well qualified to serve
Every member of the Court and most presumptive candidates are going to be qualified in the sense that they attended Harvard or Yale Law and likely clerked for federal appellate judges. That makes them extremely intelligent, capable of interpreting statutes and with the exception of Alito, of writing eloquently. Even Scalia could seem reasonable at times. However, in an unreasonable moment he argued that Colorado was permitted to amend its constitution to make passing civil rights laws to protect lgbt members illegal. I urge you to read his dissenting opinion in Romer v. Evans if you want an idea of the sort of sophistry that characterizes conservative jurisprudence. According to Scalia the types of laws banned by Colorado were intended to keep lgbt individuals from seeking preferential treatment under the law. Scalia characterized lgbt members seeking anti-discrimination protection as a powerful lobby seeking systematic advantage. Not reasonable or even close to it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romer_v._Evans
My understanding is that Kavanaugh believes that banning automatic weapons violates a fundamental right and is akin to banning speech. How is that reasonable? https://www.thedailybeast.com/brett-...banning-speech
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Quote:
Originally Posted by
broncofan
I urge you to read his dissenting opinion in Romer v. Evans if you want an idea of the sort of sophistry that characterizes conservative jurisprudence. [/URL]
What exactly does conservatism mean these days? Weren't conservatives supposed to be opposed to judicial activism?
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Quote:
Originally Posted by
filghy2
What exactly does conservatism mean these days?,,,
It means you can steal a liberal President's Supreme Court Pick.
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
If West Virginia can impeach the justices on the State Supreme Court, albeit for financial and other misdemeanors, can Congress impeach justices on the Supreme Court of the USA? If so, I am surprised the Republicans have not already looked at how they can remove Justices Ginsberg and Sotomayor from the Court, and would surely not care at all what the public think of it.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/...novations.html
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Well, well, well, it seems like Ken Starr picked the right guy to cast aspersions on Bill Clinton (in the most graphic terms) of sleazoid hormones run amok after a couple beers. Enough to creep out a couple of female Republican Senators? I guess we'll find out. I knew there was something creepy about that guy. Will he prevail while Mitch McConnell whistles and become a skid mark on the fabric of the Supreme Court? It must really roil Mitch that he could have Christine Ford killed, but then it would be like HE'S the bad guy! (Mr Burns quote)
She passed a lie detector, Kellyanne says she could talk, Me too.
https://image.ibb.co/kEAZ7K/4.jpg
poems about hair
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
With a sex pest in the White House, and an established sex pest on the Supreme Court, maybe this is the way to assess the qualities required by a new Supreme Court Justice, and suggests there is room for one more.
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Let's admit it, the theatre is more important than the facts here, Kavanaugh is no sex fiend, the moral lapse here is that he will be a rubber stamp on all the Republican's lofty ambitions, like fucking over poor people. More God, Guts, and Guns. If Kavanaugh had admitted years ago that "something happened" involving a chick at some party, he'd be better off in this case, but he wouldn't be up for the Supreme Court. Rape is not about sex, it's about power, and that's what this is all about.
Every Homicide Cop in the US knew O. J. did it, I hope the FBI gets to the bottom of this before Monday. No Judge wants a case of He said She said.
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Quote:
Originally Posted by
buttslinger
Let's admit it, the theatre is more important than the facts here, Kavanaugh is no sex fiend, the moral lapse here is that he will be a rubber stamp on all the Republican's lofty ambitions, like fucking over poor people. More God, Guts, and Guns. If Kavanaugh had admitted years ago that "something happened" involving a chick at some party, he'd be better off in this case, but he wouldn't be up for the Supreme Court. Rape is not about sex, it's about power, and that's what this is all about.
A pathetic shrug of the shoulders regarding 'a chick at some party' as if it were just another form of 'locker room' behaviour begging the question: what rights did a female student have then, or the woman that she is now?
It is not theatre but most definitely the facts.
Has the next Supreme Court Justice, of all people, lied under oath?
The Republcan majority has deliberately prevented over 90% of Kavanaugh's record from being made public so you won't know in detail what his legal history looks like including the advice he gave to the Presidency of George W. Bush with all its implications with regard to regime change in Iraq, rendition and torture,and the start of a permanent war in Afghanistan that has cost you over $2.4 trillion which in theory you could have spent educating your children for a 21st century the US under its current President seems determined to leave behind in its insane rush backwards to 1861 and the resurrection of Andrew Jackson as 'one of the good guys', a man whose portrait is often visible behind the President when he makes some public statement.
To Michael Pence and many of the phoney Christians this President was not just selected by the Electoral College, but by Almighty God. You have to pause at least once in your life to wonder at the near mystical reverance these people have for a con-man, a liar, and surely, as someone who publicly called on the Russians to help him attack an American at the same time they were attacking the country, a traitor. That a traitor and a liar should even be allowed to nominate Kavanaugh is the measure of how low your politicians have sunk in their determination to line their pockets at your expense and traduce the very purpose of Congress.
As for the idol of the idol of the President, Jackson was considered by John Quincy Adams to be so unfit for office he was I believe the one and only President not to attend his successor's inauguration, and his worst fears came true:
In office, Jackson was an aggressive wielder of the president’s hitherto unused veto power. He stopped Congress from spending money on new roads or canals, and he prevented the re-charter of the Bank of the United States, which had attempted to regulate the money supply and served as a lender of last resort. And whatever political challenge he faced, his language was hyperbolic. “You are a den of vipers and thieves,” he wrote to the directors of the Bank of the US, “I intend to rout you out, and by the eternal God, I will rout you out”. When he left office, the country was plunged into the deepest recession anyone could remember.
https://www.historyextra.com/period/...in-us-history/
But hey, shrug your shoulders, dismiss the complaints of 'chicks' and watch your country take another step away from the future. People outside it are now beginning to dismiss the USA altogether. A close friend from Asia who was educated in the US said quite bluntly that if the USA wants to destroy itself, he is past caring. Do you care?
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Stavros
….But hey, shrug your shoulders, dismiss the complaints of 'chicks' and watch your country take another step away from the future. People outside it are now beginning to dismiss the USA altogether. A close friend from Asia who was educated in the US said quite bluntly that if the USA wants to destroy itself, he is past caring. Do you care?
Let me take my tongue out of my cheek for a minute and tell you to some extent I believe what Trump says, the illegal immigration problem has gotten way out of hand, and THE WORLD has hated us for decades. This is the feeling that got him elected, even though everything else he says is 87% pure bullshit. In seven weeks we will have a course correction toward the future, if you have a magic Crystal Ball, Stavros, please enlighten us what the future will bring. Nobody even reads this crap posted down here, not because they're out polling from door to door to get rid of Trump, because they're all jerking off to porn above. Are they fools too? Or did they get sick of listening to you and me?
Bad Blood in the Senate.
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Quote:
Originally Posted by
buttslinger
Let me take my tongue out of my cheek for a minute and tell you to some extent I believe what Trump says, the illegal immigration problem has gotten way out of hand, and THE WORLD has hated us for decades.
As Mark Twain is supposed to have said, it's not the things you don't know that get you into trouble - it's the things you know for sure that just ain't so. The illegal immigration problem in the US has actually been declining for some time.
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/artic...-being-swamped
To state the obvious, Trump is only making the second problem much worse. The US is only just over 20% of the world economy, and that share is almost certain to decline further in future. Do you really think that acting like swaggering bully that thinks it can always get it's own way without needing anyone else's agreement or help is going to be sustainable in future?
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Well, filghy, where I live there are Hispanics everywhere, and it's been like this for 30 years. You're probably so young you can't remember a time without them. But I do. I'm glad I don't have kids.
On the Kavanaugh front, Republicans will be Republicans, and Democrats will be Democrats.
THE THIRD MAN needs to be interviewed under oath. He and Bart O'Kavanaugh were good time buddies, soon to be MADE MEN in the Good Ole Boys Club. The GOP. Right Mrs Murkowski?
Why should this be less insane than anything else in the Trump Era? Like I said, I'm glad I don't have kids.
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Quote:
Originally Posted by
buttslinger
Let me take my tongue out of my cheek for a minute and tell you to some extent I believe what Trump says, the illegal immigration problem has gotten way out of hand, and THE WORLD has hated us for decades. This is the feeling that got him elected, even though everything else he says is 87% pure bullshit. In seven weeks we will have a course correction toward the future, if you have a magic Crystal Ball, Stavros, please enlighten us what the future will bring. Nobody even reads this crap posted down here, not because they're out polling from door to door to get rid of Trump, because they're all jerking off to porn above. Are they fools too? Or did they get sick of listening to you and me?
Bad Blood in the Senate.
I understand that there are times when politics can be taken too seriously, though on this occasion allegations of sexual assault and the fact that the woman in question has received death threats, her family in hiding and an attempt being made to smear her reputation suggest this is indeed serious.
The President now says 'I don't have an Attorney General' as if the Attorney General of the United States was there for his rather than the country's benefit, and if you accept that a pubilcy available description of the President's penis marks the extent to which the Office of the Presidency has been degraded, you might concede something is going badly wrong in your Executive.
I don't know what the mid-terms will produce any more than I can predict there will be a hard or a soft Brexit. I suspect that the elections will confirm how deeply divided the USA is, and that some states have successfully guaranteed a Republican majority just by making it impossible for Black people to vote, though we have yet to find out how far if at all Republicans have deserted their own party.
What I do know is that the next time I am asked if I want extra topping on my pizza, it won't be mushroom.
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
The problem for Republicans is that having decided to give Trump a free pass for everything they can't really apply any standards to any other government appointee. Ditching Kananaugh over the rape allegation would simply highlight the multiple allegations against Trump. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...sexual-assault
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
In a Medium that is already high on theatre, the Russian Collusion angle puts American Politics right up there with some Shakespearean Play, the Kavanaugh vote will probably center around four Republican Senators, Collins, Murkowski, Corker and Flake. If Ford shows up, she'll be talking to them and the American voters. But yeah, the rest of the Republicans don't care what happened at some High School party. Whatever they can get away with. The American Constitution wasn't written until after a bloody Revolutionary War.
-
1 Attachment(s)
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Personally, I think if Christine Blasey Ford didn't exist, the Democrats would be very tempted to invent her. The perfect foil for a pussy grabbing President and two crusty old farts AKA Grassley and Hatch. They will appear as the sweat on Nixon's upper lip, they will remind us how far women have come since Anita Hill.
Meanwhile, Kavanaugh needs some 'splaining to do about being a member of "The Devil's Triangle Club"...that's when two men have sex with one woman. He's a good reason to vote for abortions.
Ford is talking to the FBI today, not about the alleged attempted rape, the subject is the death threats against her.
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Quote:
Originally Posted by
buttslinger
In a Medium that is already high on theatre, the Russian Collusion angle puts American Politics right up there with some Shakespearean Play.
But which one? Hopefully, it's Julius Caesar, but who will be the honourable Brutus?
Or maybe Richard III. I can picture a desperate Trump offering his kingdom for a horse (or a bit of election meddling).
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Quote:
Originally Posted by
filghy2
But which one? Hopefully, it's Julius Caesar, but who will be the honourable Brutus?
Sean Hannity?????
Can you imagine what is going on in Trump's head at 3 o'clock in the morning? On the one hand, he's the most powerful man in the World. The other hand is Bob Mueller tapping on his shoulder. I can hear the wheels spinning.
Julius Caesar? Is he Mexican?
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Quote:
Originally Posted by
buttslinger
Sean Hannity?????
Can you imagine what is going on in Trump's head at 3 o'clock in the morning? On the one hand, he's the most powerful man in the World. The other hand is Bob Mueller tapping on his shoulder. I can hear the wheels spinning.
Julius Caesar? Is he Mexican?
I wonder, who is the 'most powerful man in the world'? Is it the President of the USA, is it Vladimir Putin? Which of the two can order the murder of anyone in any country other than their own and shrug it off as 'fake news'? It begs the question what is that makes a man powerful? You might argue that for a brief period, Nelson Mandela was the most powerful man in the world because people admired him, and believed what he had to say was right and true. By contrastGeneral Abdul-Fatah al-Sisi -supported by Democracies in 'the free world', is presiding over a regime of terror in Egypt that has resulted in thousands of people being imprisoned merely for opposing military rule, followed by torture, summary execution and denial by the government.
It asks, is sympathy a stronger component of effective power than hostility? Does power produce fear in people, or love?
I would suggest that if the current President were to order a nuclear strike on a target, the chain of command would in fact prevent it unless there were prima facie evidence of a proportionate attack on the USA in accordance with international law. The Generals are not stupid, as history suggests. In addition, the power of the Presidency in the USA can be mitigated by Congress, whereas Putin can do what he likes, as appears to be the case with al-Sisi and Erdogan. The current President of the USA appears to claim that he is 'stronger' and 'tougher' than Obama, but we have yet to see his aggressive stance lead to any positive outcomes. Maybe he is not the most powerful man in the world, and we should be glad that he isn't.
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Maybe it is time to reform the Supreme Court?
Amy Chua, the Yale law professor and best-selling author who endorsed supreme court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, has denied allegations that she instructed female law students to exude a “model-like” femininity when interviewing for clerkships with the judge.
But another former law student who was advised by Chua and approached the Guardian after its original story was published on Thursday said his experience was consistent with the allegations presented in the article.
The male student, who asked not to be identified, said that when he approached Chua about his interest in clerking for Kavanaugh, the professor said it was “great”, but then added that Kavanaugh “tends to hire women who are generally attractive and then likes to send them to [supreme court Chief Justice John] Roberts”.
It was a reference to Kavanaugh’s role as a so-called “feeder” judge, whose clerks often go on to win highly coveted clerkships at the US supreme court.
The student alleged that Chua then added: “I don’t think it is a sexual thing, but [Kavanaugh] likes to have pretty clerks.”
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...rett-kavanaugh
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Man, if a man is only as good as his word, Mitch McConnell is no good at all.
Only 37% on American Voters are in favor of Kavanaugh. This Supreme Court Justice pick isn't for the American People, he's for the Trump voters. The American people need a couple of Republican Senators to see through the bullshit and vote down Bart O'Kavanaugh. Senator Collins, Senator Murkowski, if you're reading this-
could you please post a few nude pics?
-
1 Attachment(s)
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
I think if a woman accused me of rape and the police got involved you would hear me screaming LIE DETECTOR TEST in about 2 seconds. Unless I was guilty, then I would go on Fox News with my wife and claim the woman is a threat to US.
They found Mark Judge, he was hiding out at Dewey Beach. His car was full of clothes and Superman comics.
Attachment 1096151
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
McConnell will get on the phone to Murkowski and Collins tomorrow night, if they give thumbs up, we will have a vote Friday. If they give a thumbs down, they will announce they were very stirred by the woman's testimony and want to delay for a while. You know both sides must have a few tricks up their sleeves tomorrow. Love the Soaps...
-
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
After today's hearing I would say Kavanaugh will get a seat in the new branch of the Republican Party: The Supreme Court.