De-Trumpitize the supreme court

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by Secretariat

Get ready for a new Judiciary Act.

You seem triggered...good.

[fast4522]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

You seem triggered...good.

He is used to nothing, soon he will be back to normal.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by myohmyjustify

I remember in 2015 Democrats kept saying that Trump isn't as rich as he claims to be. I heard that 1,000 times at least. And now they are saying he's rich only because his father gave him all the money -- money hidden from that watchful eyes of the IRS, of course.

Trump lied to me about his wealth to get onto the Forbes 400. Here are the tapes.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlo...4c7_story.html

And the kicker....

Trump Tower is actually 10 floors shorter than Donald Trump says it is
https://www.businessinsider.com/trum...p-says-2016-10

[formula_2002]

Originally Posted by ElKabong

Her 'soon to be replacement'

Your default position is dangerous to us all.

[formula_2002]

Given the choice which way would Trump go.

1. persist with the supreme court nomination process and have the market go down 10%
2. pass on the nomination process and have the market go up 10%.

[tucker6]

I'm taking RBG's position on this issue.

“There’s nothing in the Constitution that says the president stops being the president in his last year,” Ginsburg told the New York Times in 2016 when she urged the Senate to do “their job” and consider President Obama’s court nominee Merrick Garland.



Does anyone other than the gullible leftists on here actually believe she whispered to her granddaughter that she'd like Trump to wait until after the election? I can tell you as someone who has lived through loved ones dying of cancer that in their final days, they aren't thinking about such things. At all. Far from it. If they are coherent at all through the pain and morphine, they are saying their goodbyes to their family. Pancreatic cancer is maybe THE most painful cancer and it's highly likely she was on morphine and resting as peacefully as possible. But it makes for a good story so the msm lapped it up and ran with it.

[formula_2002]

Originally Posted by tucker6

I'm taking RBG's position on this issue.

“There’s nothing in the Constitution that says the president stops being the president in his last year,” Ginsburg told the New York Times in 2016 when she urged the Senate to do “their job” and consider President Obama’s court nominee Merrick Garland.



Does anyone other than the gullible leftists on here actually believe she whispered to her granddaughter that she'd like Trump to wait until after the election? I can tell you as someone who has lived through loved ones dying of cancer that in their final days, they aren't thinking about such things. At all. Far from it. If they are coherent at all through the pain and morphine, they are saying their goodbyes to their family. Pancreatic cancer is maybe THE most painful cancer and it's highly likely she was on morphine and resting as peacefully as possible. But it makes for a good story so the msm lapped it up and ran with it.

did you support her position on the issue 4 years ago?

to clarify, RBG was interpreting the constitution and she was correct.
if a case came before her, this would be her position.

she, like all of us have personal positions on matters.
and given the circumstances I align with her personal position.

I wish, 4 years ago, the senate agreed with the constitutional offerings of you and RBG.

[davew]

Originally Posted by formula_2002

Given the choice which way would Trump go.

1. persist with the supreme court nomination process and have the market go down 10%
2. pass on the nomination process and have the market go up 10%.

He is going to release the name of his pick Friday or Saturday and it will not affect the market.


A new Judiciary Act would surely end up in courts and the SCOTUS could easily vote it down.

[formula_2002]

Originally Posted by davew

He is going to release the name of his pick Friday or Saturday and it will not affect the market.


A new Judiciary Act would surely end up in courts and the SCOTUS could easily vote it down.

LOL.

[Actor]

Originally Posted by formula_2002

De-Trumpitize the supreme court
Democrats take the house, senate and presidency and add three additional seats to the supreme court.
Or
Just let the next president nominate a justice.


6-6 or 5-4 take your pick Trumpiters

The senate refused to even bring up Obama's nominee for a vote. Now they've changed their tune.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by formula_2002

Given the choice which way would Trump go.

1. persist with the supreme court nomination process and have the market go down 10%
2. pass on the nomination process and have the market go up 10%.

Screw the market. Trump has got to play the long game, and he has plenty of precedent behind him. Plenty!

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Actor

The senate refused to even bring up Obama's nominee for a vote. Now they've changed their tune.

Different circumstances, maybe? Were the circumstances with Obama identical to what they are now with Trump? Yes or no.

[boxcar]

Meanwhile Chuckles Schumer is being his usual hypocritical self.

https://noqreport.com/2020/09/20/a-m...ruary-22-2016/

[formula_2002]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Different circumstances, maybe? Were the circumstances with Obama identical to what they are now with Trump? Yes or no.

The constitution has not change in the last 4 years. Circumstances may have changed but not the constitution.

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Different circumstances, maybe? Were the circumstances with Obama identical to what they are now with Trump?

What is your opinion?

Originally Posted by boxcar

Yes or no.

"Many questions can be answered Yes or No only by a moron or a slave." -- Dalton Trumbo