Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
On 4/23/2021 at 9:04 PM, Chewbacca said:
On 4/23/2021 at 8:53 PM, RPM said:
To be fair to RBG, nobody in their right fucking mind thought Trump would win the nomination, much less the election. She expected Hillary to name her replacement.

She was the worst candidate in my lifetime. Literally the only person Trump could have beaten.

What are his chances against someone like Harris?

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Fuck You 3
Posted
On 7/1/2024 at 10:57 PM, troph said:

This decision has me in full support of a pack the court strategy. Take it to 15. Hell appoint moderates that’s fine. This court is rogue, overturning precedent left and right. This isn’t all about Trump, I don’t want a stronger executive. It’s time to reign the judicial branch back in. 

I assume we are still in favor of doing this? Now that Trump has the House and Senate he could get this done for both R and Ds? 
 

Are you still thinking 15?

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 2
Posted
4 minutes ago, Balcones said:

I assume we are still in favor of doing this? Now that Trump has the House and Senate he could get this done for both R and Ds? 
 

Are you still thinking 15?

You won, glad you’re having fun. Go asshole on someone else, I’m not interested. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
Just now, troph said:

You won, glad you’re having fun. Go asshole on someone else, I’m not interested. 

Fair enough. 
 

The treasure trove of pack the court ideas from a few years ago may have me up for a while. 

Posted
5 minutes ago, Balcones said:

Fair enough. 
 

The treasure trove of pack the court ideas from a few years ago may have me up for a while. 

 

Shawshank Redemption GIF by Giphy QA

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
18 hours ago, Balcones said:

What are his chances against someone like Harris?

You're such a pussy coming in to talk shit after the election.  Where were you the past several months?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Chewbacca said:

You're such a pussy coming in to talk shit after the election.  Where were you the past several months?

I read your post below and felt like there was literally no reason chime in....  Seriously, though, could you have been more wrong?

 

Quote

To be fair to RBG, nobody in their right fucking mind thought Trump would win the nomination, much less the election. She expected Hillary to name her replacement.

She was the worst candidate in my lifetime. Literally the only person Trump could have beaten.

 

Posted (edited)
On 11/7/2024 at 2:31 PM, Anastasis said:

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor retires.

Yeah. No way that could backfire. 

Republicans couldn't block her replacement. Democrats could.

But it doesn't matter. 

 

Edited by David Dennison
Posted
1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

Republicans couldn't block her replacement. Democrats could.

But it doesn't matter. 

 

Yes.  Very frustrating.  If the Democrats wanted to come back into session, vow to work throught T-giving, and Biden nominated some very young progressive, they could have it done very quickly.  McConnell has a few roadblocks he could throw up, but they are temporary.  This is just a lack of desire to retire on her part and the Dems being very Democrat: Playing Checkers while the GOP plays Football. 

Posted
On 11/7/2024 at 3:32 PM, Frank Drebin said:

Have we ever had a SCOTUS justice who failed the bar exam on their first try?

Well, I'm going to really blow your mind: 7 Justices didn't go to law school. Although most were from the wayback.  Lots were nothing more than non-practicing attorney's who were appointed according to political connections. The current supreme court of nothing but Yale/Havard judges who graduated at the top of their class and served as lower court judges is actually atypical in US history. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
8 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

Well, I'm going to really blow your mind: 7 Justices didn't go to law school. Although most were from the wayback.  Lots were nothing more than non-practicing attorney's who were appointed according to political connections. The current supreme court of nothing but Yale/Havard judges who graduated at the top of their class and served as lower court judges is actually atypical in US history. 

Technically, do you even have to be a lawyer?

Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Technically, do you even have to be a lawyer?

I don't believe technically, but I do believe everyone has been an attorney of some variety, but many states either didn't have a bar exam, or it was very informal.  So attaching a "lawyer" title to a Supreme Court justice before the 1930s is a pretty damn loose term.  It pretty much meant you either graduated from law school and/or possibly took a relatively simple oral or written test.   

A lot of lawyers in the Colonial/Revelutionary times just read a bunch of books & did some indepth discussions/study with a local judge/attroney, and were declared fellow lawyers. 

Edited by Bateshorn
Posted
1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

Republicans couldn't block her replacement. Democrats could.

But it doesn't matter. 

I'd be careful counting Manchin as a Democrat, especially on a vote to appoint a liberal SC justice, and we all know Sinema is not to be trusted (especially as an "Independent" with a future at Fox News), which is why I referred the Dems senate majority as fragile. 

I suspect that Sotomayor is assuming the Dems wouldn't be able to get any successor "worthy of replacing her" through the Senate, which is why she's not stepping down.  The liberal justices unfortunately don't seem to be good at objectively assessing their own mortality in connection with these sorts of calculations - to the country's unfortunate peril.  I mean, what could go wrong?

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Gap03 said:

I'd be careful counting Manchin as a Democrat, especially on a vote to appoint a liberal SC justice, and we all know Sinema is not to be trusted (especially as an "Independent" with a future at Fox News), which is why I referred the Dems senate majority as fragile. 

I suspect that Sotomayor is assuming the Dems wouldn't be able to get any successor "worthy of replacing her" through the Senate, which is why she's not stepping down.  The liberal justices unfortunately don't seem to be good at objectively assessing their own mortality in connection with these sorts of calculations - to the country's unfortunate peril.  I mean, what could go wrong?

This is probably the best reason, tbh.  If you aren't 100% sure that you have a rock solid 50 are going to be with you, it makes the ability of McConnell to draw everything out much more powerful.  You need that 50+Harris standing around basically ready to take votes. 

Edited by Bateshorn
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

It doesn't fucking matter any longer.  If Trump doesn't get his way, he can easily expand the court to 13 and appoint 4 more judges.  That play is always fair game for anyone willing to do it.  

  • Like 1
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

Which they’d only do if they knew the door was closing behind them, for which I mean Republicans. I think they know how to game the voting system or will.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted
28 minutes ago, C-Man said:

New SCOTUS Leak Reveals Who Didn’t Want Ethics Rules Enforced

It was Clarence, Gorsuch and Alito.

I am Jack's complete lack of surprise: https://www.thedailybeast.com/new-scotus-leak-reveals-who-didnt-want-ethics-rules-enforced/

 

so 3-6 against the rule enforcement. Why isn't that enough to move forward with the recommendations? They have to be unanimous when it comes to rules against themselves? They only need a majority to rule over us.

  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted

He wants to end the 14th to cancel birthright citizenship.  It’s the 22nd that keeps him from running again

Twenty-Second Amendment

 

 

Section 1

 

No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

 

Section 2

 

This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Disco Strangler said:

He wants to end the 14th to cancel birthright citizenship.  It’s the 22nd that keeps him from running again

Twenty-Second Amendment

 

 

Section 1

 

No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

 

Section 2

 

This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.

 

once the SC throw out one amendment, others will follow 

  • Rage+1 1
  • 1 month later...
Posted
2 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

shocked 

 

What’s shocking is reported Federalist Society All-Stars viewing behavior engaged by a private citizen and convicted under state law as under the purview of Federal review.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

shocked 

 


Razor edge of complete authoritarianism.

Just one domino to fall and it’s goodbye to democracy.

Talk about suspense. We’re one diabetic Latina away from throwing away 200+ years of liberal democracy away.

Sleep tight.

  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 3
Posted
3 minutes ago, Dnaguy said:


Razor edge of complete authoritarianism.

Just one domino to fall and it’s goodbye to democracy.

Talk about suspense. We’re one diabetic Latina away from throwing away 200+ years of liberal democracy away.

Sleep tight.

 

thomas dream long game, hopefully he drops first 

Posted
3 minutes ago, Dnaguy said:

Army and Navy coaches hearing that stat about no receivers having a catch:

Shampoo Shredder GIF

Big12 officials and holding:

No Way Beer GIF by Busch

Neat. What does scotus have to say about it?

Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, LCHorn said:

What’s shocking is reported Federalist Society All-Stars viewing behavior engaged by a private citizen and convicted under state law as under the purview of Federal review.  

My favorite is Brett Kavanaugh, the most unhinged member of Starr's team, suddenly believing the (almost) President really is a King. 

Edited by wildcat09
Posted

About percentages, didn't Trump simply flood the zone with cases? He appeals everything, usually with no merit. 42% of a lot of bullshit is still pretty good.

Posted
33 minutes ago, miguelito said:

About percentages, didn't Trump simply flood the zone with cases? He appeals everything, usually with no merit. 42% of a lot of bullshit is still pretty good.

Hitters would kill for that average.

That’s why they call Trump The Greatest Shitter Who Ever Lived

Posted (edited)

this would be a huge setback to health care in the us. domino effect would be many environmental laws would be doa ....

 

 

Edited by tx 3 putt
  • Rage+1 4


×
×
  • Create New...