One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
The Beginning Of SCOTUS Illegitimacy Was Not Kavanaugh...
Page 1 of 3 next> last>>
Jul 1, 2022 12:51:12   #
woodguru
 
It was Gorsuch...that was as illegitimate a pile of dog crap as we've seen...

Gorsuch should have been the Obama nominee, Garland, who is and was a right leaning centrist...the reason McConnell gave for not considering Garland is the reason Barrett is illegitimate, having been bulldozed through a one month confirmation a month before the election. Garland was denied a year before on those grounds.

Kananaugh, never mind the stupidity of the frat house escapades, was a piss poor choice for a supreme court justice because of his history of disregard for the laws and precedent. He had not only been immediately overturned in an abortion case that he failed to uphold the constitution, he was under formal judicial scrutiny for violations of failing to adhere to the law that he may have lost his seat on the court for. In any real world that makes sense it would have been ruled that he had to undergo the court review to decide his worthiness before being considered for the supreme court. In what sane world would a judge under charges of being unfit for a lower court be given a free pass on that for the supreme court?

Barrett...the reasons that the election should have taken place before her confirmation stands, not to mention she has some serious religious conflicts.

https://www.rawstory.com/the-supreme-courts-illegitimacy-is-accelerating/?cx_testId=4&cx_testVariant=cx_undefined&cx_artPos=0&cx_experienceId=EXC93HV4HK4I#cxrecs_s

Reply
Jul 1, 2022 13:04:15   #
Liberty Tree
 
woodguru wrote:
It was Gorsuch...that was as illegitimate a pile of dog crap as we've seen...

Gorsuch should have been the Obama nominee, Garland, who is and was a right leaning centrist...the reason McConnell gave for not considering Garland is the reason Barrett is illegitimate, having been bulldozed through a one month confirmation a month before the election. Garland was denied a year before on those grounds.

Kananaugh, never mind the stupidity of the frat house escapades, was a piss poor choice for a supreme court justice because of his history of disregard for the laws and precedent. He had not only been immediately overturned in an abortion case that he failed to uphold the constitution, he was under formal judicial scrutiny for violations of failing to adhere to the law that he may have lost his seat on the court for. In any real world that makes sense it would have been ruled that he had to undergo the court review to decide his worthiness before being considered for the supreme court. In what sane world would a judge under charges of being unfit for a lower court be given a free pass on that for the supreme court?

Barrett...the reasons that the election should have taken place before her confirmation stands, not to mention she has some serious religious conflicts.

https://www.rawstory.com/the-supreme-courts-illegitimacy-is-accelerating/?cx_testId=4&cx_testVariant=cx_undefined&cx_artPos=0&cx_experienceId=EXC93HV4HK4I#cxrecs_s
It was Gorsuch...that was as illegitimate a pile o... (show quote)


Garland was a wolf in sheep's clothing and the GOP knew it. Obama would never nominate anyone else. He is as liberal as any of the liberal judges currently on the SCOTUS. He has proven to only believe in selective prosecution. America was saved from great harm with him not a justice.

Reply
Jul 1, 2022 13:04:55   #
pegw
 
The Trump Supremes are out if step with mainstream Americans. I think we are in for a long, tough reign by these far right justices.

Reply
 
 
Jul 1, 2022 13:14:05   #
WinkyTink
 
pegw wrote:
The Trump Supremes are out if step with mainstream Americans. I think we are in for a long, tough reign by these far right justices.


Yes, you are in for a long, painful reign. Suck on that one for a while, while we sit back and chuckle. Trump's second term is working out nearly as well as his first!

Reply
Jul 1, 2022 13:21:26   #
Liberty Tree
 
pegw wrote:
The Trump Supremes are out if step with mainstream Americans. I think we are in for a long, tough reign by these far right justices.


The SCOTUS is not to make decisions based on any whims of the American people but to follow the Constitution.

Reply
Jul 1, 2022 14:01:36   #
Gatsby
 
woodguru wrote:
It was Gorsuch...that was as illegitimate a pile of dog crap as we've seen...

Gorsuch should have been the Obama nominee, Garland, who is and was a right leaning centrist...the reason McConnell gave for not considering Garland is the reason Barrett is illegitimate, having been bulldozed through a one month confirmation a month before the election. Garland was denied a year before on those grounds.

Kananaugh, never mind the stupidity of the frat house escapades, was a piss poor choice for a supreme court justice because of his history of disregard for the laws and precedent. He had not only been immediately overturned in an abortion case that he failed to uphold the constitution, he was under formal judicial scrutiny for violations of failing to adhere to the law that he may have lost his seat on the court for. In any real world that makes sense it would have been ruled that he had to undergo the court review to decide his worthiness before being considered for the supreme court. In what sane world would a judge under charges of being unfit for a lower court be given a free pass on that for the supreme court?

Barrett...the reasons that the election should have taken place before her confirmation stands, not to mention she has some serious religious conflicts.

https://www.rawstory.com/the-supreme-courts-illegitimacy-is-accelerating/?cx_testId=4&cx_testVariant=cx_undefined&cx_artPos=0&cx_experienceId=EXC93HV4HK4I#cxrecs_s
It was Gorsuch...that was as illegitimate a pile o... (show quote)


Whining, screaming and stamping your foot won't work here on OPP, we're not your parents, little boy.

Reply
Jul 1, 2022 14:19:39   #
WEBCO
 
The regressive democrats are an illegitimate party. They despise the constitution and our country. Your side started the culture war in hiding, because you are cowards and can't defend the stupid ass policies you push. The Supreme Court is finally fighting back for all Americans, if you want to live in the new liberal world go somewhere else. Americans don't want or need the stupid, childish, and evil progressive rot that was washing across our great country.

Reply
 
 
Jul 1, 2022 15:05:14   #
JR-57 Loc: South Carolina
 
pegw wrote:
The Trump Supremes are out if step with mainstream Americans. I think we are in for a long, tough reign by these far right justices.

They’re not supposed to be in step with “mainstream” Americans. They’re supposed to make decisions based on Constitutionality, as written and intended by our Founders.

Reply
Jul 1, 2022 15:37:05   #
Gatsby
 
pegw wrote:
The Trump Supremes are out if step with mainstream Americans. I think we are in for a long, tough reign by these far right justices.


It you who are out of step with our Constitution, perhaps that comes from trampling on it for 49 years.

Reply
Jul 1, 2022 15:37:25   #
Milosia2 Loc: Cleveland Ohio
 
Liberty Tree wrote:
Garland was a wolf in sheep's clothing and the GOP knew it. Obama would never nominate anyone else. He is as liberal as any of the liberal judges currently on the SCOTUS. He has proven to only believe in selective prosecution. America was saved from great harm with him not a justice.


Garland was picked by republicans.
Trent Lotts’ choice whom all agreed with.
Obama agreed with the Republicans Choice.
You accuse me of making chit up ?
He was picked for the number of mob bosses that were prosecuted.

Reply
Jul 1, 2022 15:42:56   #
Milosia2 Loc: Cleveland Ohio
 
JR-57 wrote:
They’re not supposed to be in step with “mainstream” Americans. They’re supposed to make decisions based on Constitutionality, as written and intended by our Founders.


All while reflecting the will of the people.
Stop talking like a Nazi.

Reply
 
 
Jul 1, 2022 15:48:44   #
Milosia2 Loc: Cleveland Ohio
 
JR-57 wrote:
They’re not supposed to be in step with “mainstream” Americans. They’re supposed to make decisions based on Constitutionality, as written and intended by our Founders.


They’re not supposed to be bought and paid for by rich people to protect the rich from citizen reprisals. Nor should they be representing any religious sect.

Reply
Jul 1, 2022 16:01:32   #
JR-57 Loc: South Carolina
 
Milosia2 wrote:
All while reflecting the will of the people.
Stop talking like a Nazi.

Wrong. Again. SCOTUS has nothing to do with the will of the people. A convicted murderer could go free if it’s the “will of the people”?

Reply
Jul 1, 2022 16:52:29   #
Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON
 
woodguru wrote:
It was Gorsuch...that was as illegitimate a pile of dog crap as we've seen...

Gorsuch should have been the Obama nominee, Garland, who is and was a right leaning centrist...the reason McConnell gave for not considering Garland is the reason Barrett is illegitimate, having been bulldozed through a one month confirmation a month before the election. Garland was denied a year before on those grounds.

Kananaugh, never mind the stupidity of the frat house escapades, was a piss poor choice for a supreme court justice because of his history of disregard for the laws and precedent. He had not only been immediately overturned in an abortion case that he failed to uphold the constitution, he was under formal judicial scrutiny for violations of failing to adhere to the law that he may have lost his seat on the court for. In any real world that makes sense it would have been ruled that he had to undergo the court review to decide his worthiness before being considered for the supreme court. In what sane world would a judge under charges of being unfit for a lower court be given a free pass on that for the supreme court?

Barrett...the reasons that the election should have taken place before her confirmation stands, not to mention she has some serious religious conflicts.
It was Gorsuch...that was as illegitimate a pile o... (show quote)
SMF!
The criteria you laid out in your vacuous attempt to delegitimize a SCOTUS nomination must be equally applied to Obama's nomination of Sotomayor and Kagan. Both of these women have serious conflicts of interest, and Obama's nomination of Garland was merely a political gambit meant to test the senate during an election year.
He never expected the senate to confirm Garland.

Before she passed away, Ruth Bader Ginsburg said, “my most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.”

Having said that, the only law that applies to and legitimizes a SCOTUS nomination and confirmation is set forth in Article II, Section 2, paragraph 2, US Constitution, not in the politically prejudiced opinions of a leftist freak who alludes to prejudiced political hacks to beef up his meaningless rant.

IOW, when a president nominates a candidate for SCOTUS and the senate confirms him or her, the new Justice is legitimate.

Now do us a big favor, explain why you think a person's religious beliefs must be abandoned in order to qualify for public office.

Reply
Jul 1, 2022 18:14:17   #
Milosia2 Loc: Cleveland Ohio
 
JR-57 wrote:
Wrong. Again. SCOTUS has nothing to do with the will of the people. A convicted murderer could go free if it’s the “will of the people”?


If he shoots the right people , is there a crime?

Reply
Page 1 of 3 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2022 IDF International Technologies, Inc.