He loves doing things right after market close - 4-5pm Friday.C-Mag wrote: ↑Mon Sep 21, 2020 10:33 amA few lefties have admitted RBG fucked up because of selfishness.
RBG wanted to be in the pic of her swearing in the first woman POTUS. A pic that would be seen by after school kid for a century. That got them in this mess. So Fuck Em.
Trump said he will nominate Friday or Saturday. I'm betting on Friday.
Trump's SCOTUS
-
- Posts: 25287
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 6:50 am
- Location: Ohio
Re: Trump's SCOTUS
-
- Posts: 1566
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:33 am
Re: Trump's SCOTUS
my good friend married an AWFL. he is a goon
she came to him my friend, near tears, to lament the passing St. RGB
he did not know who ginsberg was, and his wife caused an enormous fight and stormed out
the moral of this story is that RGB kinda looked like a scrotum
she came to him my friend, near tears, to lament the passing St. RGB
he did not know who ginsberg was, and his wife caused an enormous fight and stormed out
the moral of this story is that RGB kinda looked like a scrotum
-
- Posts: 1881
- Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:10 pm
Re: Trump's SCOTUS
The No Nominating a SCOTUS during an election year is largely a made up scandal.
Wouldn't have happened had Hillary and RBG not had so much hubris and divine coronation to want to the first ever female president to replace a female scotus with another female.
As to court packing... theoretically as long as you have simple majority in both houses and the presidency.... you could add as many justices as you want. 9 not being a constitutional decree.
To that end, I do think it would not be prudent for trump to add a scotus in dec after losing an election. I think that would offer the Blue Team too much cover. Court packing is civil war.
But prior, its a made up scandal.
Wouldn't have happened had Hillary and RBG not had so much hubris and divine coronation to want to the first ever female president to replace a female scotus with another female.
As to court packing... theoretically as long as you have simple majority in both houses and the presidency.... you could add as many justices as you want. 9 not being a constitutional decree.
To that end, I do think it would not be prudent for trump to add a scotus in dec after losing an election. I think that would offer the Blue Team too much cover. Court packing is civil war.
But prior, its a made up scandal.
-
- Posts: 28305
- Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 10:48 pm
Re: Trump's SCOTUS
But Nick, it was her dying wish.nmoore63 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 21, 2020 4:49 pmThe No Nominating a SCOTUS during an election year is largely a made up scandal.
Wouldn't have happened had Hillary and RBG not had so much hubris and divine coronation to want to the first ever female president to replace a female scotus with another female.
As to court packing... theoretically as long as you have simple majority in both houses and the presidency.... you could add as many justices as you want. 9 not being a constitutional decree.
To that end, I do think it would not be prudent for trump to add a scotus in dec after losing an election. I think that would offer the Blue Team too much cover. Court packing is civil war.
But prior, its a made up scandal.
Her last words.
The humanity
PLATA O PLOMO
Don't fear authority, Fear Obedience
Don't fear authority, Fear Obedience
-
- Posts: 1292
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:16 pm
Re: Trump's SCOTUS
Yeah, I would support a constitutional amendment to limit the size of the Supreme Court. I feel like being able to make it any arbitrary number depending on the whims of the people currently in power is not the best idea.nmoore63 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 21, 2020 4:49 pmThe No Nominating a SCOTUS during an election year is largely a made up scandal.
Wouldn't have happened had Hillary and RBG not had so much hubris and divine coronation to want to the first ever female president to replace a female scotus with another female.
As to court packing... theoretically as long as you have simple majority in both houses and the presidency.... you could add as many justices as you want. 9 not being a constitutional decree.
To that end, I do think it would not be prudent for trump to add a scotus in dec after losing an election. I think that would offer the Blue Team too much cover. Court packing is civil war.
But prior, its a made up scandal.
-
- Posts: 4650
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:34 pm
Re: Trump's SCOTUS
a neo-prudent compromise would be to hold off on the nomination in exchange for a 9-justice cap legislation
doesnt instill much confidence in the incumbent to fastpass a nominee in 6 weeks before an election, but this is war, i get it
doesnt instill much confidence in the incumbent to fastpass a nominee in 6 weeks before an election, but this is war, i get it
-
- Posts: 1881
- Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:10 pm
Re: Trump's SCOTUS
obama and Ginsberg thought it ok.pineapplemike wrote: ↑Mon Sep 21, 2020 7:28 pma neo-prudent compromise would be to hold off on the nomination in exchange for a 9-justice cap legislation
doesnt instill much confidence in the incumbent to fastpass a nominee in 6 weeks before an election, but this is war, i get it
-
- Posts: 1881
- Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:10 pm
Re: Trump's SCOTUS
No compromises are possible.pineapplemike wrote: ↑Mon Sep 21, 2020 7:28 pma neo-prudent compromise would be to hold off on the nomination in exchange for a 9-justice cap legislation
-
- Posts: 1881
- Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:10 pm
Re: Trump's SCOTUS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiNEUsP1gOETheOneX wrote: ↑Mon Sep 21, 2020 7:16 pmYeah, I would support a constitutional amendment to limit the size of the Supreme Court. I feel like being able to make it any arbitrary number depending on the whims of the people currently in power is not the best idea.nmoore63 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 21, 2020 4:49 pmThe No Nominating a SCOTUS during an election year is largely a made up scandal.
Wouldn't have happened had Hillary and RBG not had so much hubris and divine coronation to want to the first ever female president to replace a female scotus with another female.
As to court packing... theoretically as long as you have simple majority in both houses and the presidency.... you could add as many justices as you want. 9 not being a constitutional decree.
To that end, I do think it would not be prudent for trump to add a scotus in dec after losing an election. I think that would offer the Blue Team too much cover. Court packing is civil war.
But prior, its a made up scandal.
Yeah being able to appoint the an arbitrary number of arbiters at any time could theoretically make anything constitutional.
-
- Posts: 28305
- Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 10:48 pm
Re: Trump's SCOTUS
Trump should fire first on court packing.
Say he's considering taking the Democrats advice and Nominating 7 new justices. Just to see their reaction and show the absurdity of it.
Say he's considering taking the Democrats advice and Nominating 7 new justices. Just to see their reaction and show the absurdity of it.
PLATA O PLOMO
Don't fear authority, Fear Obedience
Don't fear authority, Fear Obedience