Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Off Topic > Off Topic - General


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 09-20-2020, 03:50 PM   #46
zico20
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: st louis
Posts: 2,381
Quote:
Originally Posted by Secretariat View Post
Yeah, it appears that's where it is headed. Quite a few are talking about exactly this scenario.

But why settle on 6-6, why not 8-6? The Constitution does not establish how many judges should be on the supreme court which is something the founders should have established, but didn't.

If McConell and many of the Republicans who decried that Garland should not be permitted to even get a hearing because he was nominated 10 months before the election, they will sure look like hypocrites demanding a vote 45 days before an election in 2020 in this case. I expect it to happen and will most likely hurt those senators with independents in the coming election.

This is a slippery slope where the party in control can modify the court to the quantity of judges that give it a majority with far left or far right judges, but it's unfortunate because since McConell refused to allow Garland to have a hearing and lets remember Garland is a moderate.

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/...o-is-he-220865

My guess is they'll be contentious wrangling on the far right nominee, and Susan Collins will be concerned, but vote party over conscious, and the nominee will be confirmed.

I then think if Biden wins, and the Dems win the Senate you will see the end of the filibuster, and more importantly you'll see the quantity of judges increased significantly who will sail through Congress. My guess is Biden could then add as many as 10 new Supreme Court judges giving Dems the majority until the numbers swing the other way - if they do.
Just one huge problem with that. The law (statute) enacted will be challenged in court. It will make its way to the SCOTUS. Do you really think the six conservative justices are going to allow these radical judges a spot on the court? NO WAY! They will rule whatever law is being questioned unconstitutional and keep the nine member limit in tack. If you think these six are going to sit in the minority for the rest of their time on the bench and have zero say on any case you are gravely mistaken. Remember, SCOTUS has the final say, the only way around their ruling will be a constitutional amendment which will go nowhere. Sorry, it will stay at nine. YOU LOSE!
__________________
You will never achieve 100% if 99% is okay!

Last edited by zico20; 09-20-2020 at 03:53 PM.
zico20 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-20-2020, 04:00 PM   #47
PaceAdvantage
PA Steward
 
PaceAdvantage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Del Boca Vista
Posts: 66,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by xtb View Post
I know but it still amazes me how these people spout off about how horrible the United States is but then keep coming back or won't leave in the first place. "The grass is always greener on the other side."
It's the same with PaceAdvantage.com

People who threaten or say they are leaving...never really leave...they can't.

It's just too damn awesome in both places. They can't stay away.
__________________
@paceadvantage | Support the site and become a today!
PaceAdvantage is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-20-2020, 04:36 PM   #48
hcap
Registered User
 
hcap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location:
Posts: 29,471
Quote:
Originally Posted by MargieRose View Post
You're confused and off on tangents.

BTW, Trump didn't receive "$400 million" from his "old money" father at birth (where do you get this stuff?). His father (why say "old man"?) loaned him money starting in about 1975. And, there weren't "dozens" (24, 36, 48...how many?) of indictments under Trump.

BBTW: You seem to lack the self awareness that you exaggerate quite often.
Sorry not all at once. Not a self made baby, not at all self made.
His wealth is what you complained about,..... "old money"
He just pretended he was self made

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth...rom_his_father

According to an investigation by The New York Times, Donald Trump received at least $413 million (2018 prices) from his father's business empire.[2] The Times drew upon more than 100,000 pages of tax returns and financial records from Fred Trump's businesses and interviews with former advisers and employees, finding 295 distinct streams of revenue that Fred Trump created over five decades in order to channel his wealth to his son.[
__________________
The inmates have taken over the asylum.
hcap is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-20-2020, 05:29 PM   #49
PaceAdvantage
PA Steward
 
PaceAdvantage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Del Boca Vista
Posts: 66,657
Liberals are so upset....not about Ruth dying of course...but when she died...

Such a compassionate bunch of folks....

Quote:
“F*** You Ruth Bader Ginsburg – F*** You for Not Retiring Under Obama!” – Leftists React to RBG’s Death
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...sharingbuttons
__________________
@paceadvantage | Support the site and become a today!
PaceAdvantage is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-20-2020, 05:35 PM   #50
ElKabong
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,522
here it comes

Attached Images
File Type: jpg nutjob.jpg (43.6 KB, 11 views)
__________________
October 12, 2020

Joe Biden: "I'm running as a proud Democrat for the Senate"
ElKabong is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-20-2020, 06:22 PM   #51
formula_2002
what an easy game.
 
formula_2002's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 38,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by xtb View Post
I know but it still amazes me how these people spout off about how horrible the United States is but then keep coming back or won't leave in the first place. "The grass is always greener on the other side."
Any grass will do as long as you view it from above!!🙂🙂
formula_2002 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-20-2020, 07:19 PM   #52
Marshall Bennett
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Houston , Tx.
Posts: 8,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by MargieRose View Post
You're confused and off on tangents.
Democrats have a patent on that. Hcap just vents his frustration on-line because in the real world outside he'd get slapped silly.
Marshall Bennett is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-20-2020, 07:25 PM   #53
Marshall Bennett
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Houston , Tx.
Posts: 8,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage View Post
Liberals are so upset....not about Ruth dying of course...but when she died...

Such a compassionate bunch of folks....



https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...sharingbuttons
Her legacy will be defined in the coming months. What democrats did with SCOTUS over the years is despicable. The decisions account for where we are now.

Last edited by Marshall Bennett; 09-20-2020 at 07:27 PM.
Marshall Bennett is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-20-2020, 08:19 PM   #54
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 39,771
Quote:
Originally Posted by formula_2002 View Post
Any grass will do as long as you view it from above!!🙂🙂
Exactly! That's why I let my grass grow long.
__________________
Consistent profits can only be made on the basis of analysis that is far from obvious to the majority. - anonymous guru
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-20-2020, 08:52 PM   #55
formula_2002
what an easy game.
 
formula_2002's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 38,422
How I define a proper liberal? RBG
How would define a proper conservative?
formula_2002 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-20-2020, 09:20 PM   #56
ElKabong
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,522
Quote:
Originally Posted by formula_2002 View Post
How I define a proper liberal? RBG
How would define a proper conservative?
Her 'soon to be replacement'
__________________
October 12, 2020

Joe Biden: "I'm running as a proud Democrat for the Senate"
ElKabong is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-20-2020, 09:56 PM   #57
myohmyjustify
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2020
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by 46zilzal View Post
STRONGLY reconsidering it as we speak.

A lot more sanity there.
This means you support Justin Trudeau and his numerous appearances in black face?
myohmyjustify is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-20-2020, 09:57 PM   #58
myohmyjustify
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2020
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshall Bennett View Post
Democrats have a patent on that. Hcap just vents his frustration on-line because in the real world outside he'd get slapped silly.
It's more like, in the real world, he will get laughed at, then ignored.
myohmyjustify is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-20-2020, 10:04 PM   #59
myohmyjustify
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2020
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by hcap View Post
Sorry not all at once. Not a self made baby, not at all self made.
His wealth is what you complained about,..... "old money"
He just pretended he was self made

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth...rom_his_father

According to an investigation by The New York Times, Donald Trump received at least $413 million (2018 prices) from his father's business empire.[2] The Times drew upon more than 100,000 pages of tax returns and financial records from Fred Trump's businesses and interviews with former advisers and employees, finding 295 distinct streams of revenue that Fred Trump created over five decades in order to channel his wealth to his son.[
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.
myohmyjustify is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-21-2020, 12:08 AM   #60
Secretariat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: America
Posts: 6,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by zico20 View Post
Just one huge problem with that. The law (statute) enacted will be challenged in court. It will make its way to the SCOTUS. Do you really think the six conservative justices are going to allow these radical judges a spot on the court? NO WAY! They will rule whatever law is being questioned unconstitutional and keep the nine member limit in tack. If you think these six are going to sit in the minority for the rest of their time on the bench and have zero say on any case you are gravely mistaken. Remember, SCOTUS has the final say, the only way around their ruling will be a constitutional amendment which will go nowhere. Sorry, it will stay at nine. YOU LOSE!
I'm not into trying to win. I'm just telling you that the number on the court has been changed previously by Congress. There is precedent for this on the Court, and I expect this to occur if the Republicans in the Senate confirm a SCOTUS member under one party 45 days before an election, while previously declaring no SCOTUS member should be confirmed in an election year, in fact declaring that the will of the people in the upcoming vote should be honored, or don't you trust the will of the people voting?

With the amount of hypocritical declarations by Republican Congressmen in 2016 about NOT bringing a nominee during an election year, it's set an additional precedent by McConnell, and his cohorts. It was fun to watch the laughable attempts of these hypocrites like Graham, Cotton, Rubio, and McConnell try to spin their way out of their own 2016 comments. They looked like idiots on the talk shows today.

"The Judiciary Act of 1789 established the first Supreme Court, with six Justices.

Since 1789, Congress changed the maximum number of Justices on the Court several times.

In 1801, President John Adams and a lame-duck Federalist Congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1801, which reduced the Court to five Justices. Jefferson and his Republicans soon repealed that act, putting the Court back to six Justices. And in 1807, Jefferson and Congress added a seventh Justice when it added a seventh federal court circuit.

In early 1837, President Andrew Jackson (Trump's favorite President) was able to add two additional Justices after Congress again expanded the number of federal circuit court districts.

Under different circumstances, Congress created a 10th circuit in 1863 during the Civil War, and it briefly had a 10th Supreme Court Justice.

However, Congress after the war passed legislation in 1866 to reduce the Court to seven Justices.

That only lasted until 1869, when a new Judiciary Act sponsored by Senator Lyman Trumbull set the number back to nine Justices, with six Justices required at a sitting to form a quorum.
President Ulysses S. Grant eventually signed that legislation and nominated William Strong and Joseph Bradley to the newly restored seats."

Get ready for a new Judiciary Act.

Last edited by Secretariat; 09-21-2020 at 12:19 AM.
Secretariat is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
» Current Polls
How do you prefer your Coffee !?
Cream and Sugar - 28.57%
30 Votes
Cream only - 20.00%
21 Votes
Black - 41.90%
44 Votes
Decaf - 9.52%
10 Votes
Espresso - 12.38%
13 Votes
Starbucks etc... - 9.52%
10 Votes
Other - 23.81%
25 Votes
Total Votes: 105
This poll is closed.
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2020 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved -- Best Viewed in a modern browser @ 1280x720 Resolution Or Higher
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.