Utopia Talk - Politics - Predict the Supreme Court Nominee

Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Thu Apr 18 17:53:53 2024

Utopia Talk / Politics / Predict the Supreme Court Nominee

renzo marQuez
Member Sat Sep 19 11:15:32
38 is older than I'd prefer but she seems to be very well qualified.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allison_Jones_Rushing

Allison Jones Rushing
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Allison Jones Rushing (born 1982)[1] is an American attorney and jurist serving as a United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. She was nominated for the position by President Donald Trump in August 2018 and confirmed by the Senate in March 2019.

Early life and career
Born in Hendersonville, North Carolina, Rushing graduated summa cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa from Wake Forest University in 2004 with a Bachelor of Arts in music. She then earned her Juris Doctor, magna cum laude, from the Duke University School of Law in 2007, where she served as executive editor of the Duke Law Journal.[2][3]

In 2005, Rushing was a law student intern at the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), a conservative Christian nonprofit organization.[4][5] Rushing wrote at least three amicus briefs supporting the ADF's positions, co-wrote a legal brief on religious liberties with an ADF attorney, and spoke at ADF events at least once per year from 2012 to 2017.[5]

Career
After graduation, Rushing clerked for then-Judge Neil Gorsuch, of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, from 2007 to 2008, and Judge David B. Sentelle of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit from 2008 to 2009.[6][7]

From 2009 to 2010, Rushing was an associate at Williams & Connolly. Rushing clerked for Associate Justice Clarence Thomas of the Supreme Court of the United States during the 2010–2011 term.[8][9][10]

In 2011, Rushing rejoined Williams & Connolly in the Washington, D.C. office under Kannon Shanmugam, and in January 2017 was named a partner. She left Williams & Connolly after being appointed to the Fourth Circuit.[11][12][13]

Rushing has been a member of the Federalist Society since 2012.[1]

Federal judicial service
On August 27, 2018, President Trump announced his intent to nominate Rushing to serve as a United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.[12][14] Her official nomination was received on the same day by the United States Senate.[15] She was nominated to the seat being vacated by Allyson Kay Duncan, who previously announced her intention to take senior status upon the confirmation of her successor. On October 17, 2018, a hearing on her nomination was held before the Senate Judiciary Committee.[16]

Rushing has argued that there are "moral and practical" reasons to ban same-sex marriage.[17] During Rushing's confirmation proceedings, she was questioned about her ties to the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), a conservative Christian group that she had interned for as a law student. ADF has been criticized for opposing LGBT rights. Rushing was asked if she would recuse herself from ADF-related cases if confirmed. She replied: "I would determine the appropriate action with the input of the parties, consultation of these rules and ethical canons, and consultation with my colleagues."[5] Asked about ADF being labeled a "hate group" by the Southern Poverty Law Center, Rushing said: "Hate is wrong, and it should have no place in our society. In my experience with ADF, I have not witnessed anyone expressing or advocating hate."[5]

On January 3, 2019, her nomination was returned to the President under Rule XXXI, Paragraph 6 of the United States Senate. On January 23, 2019, President Trump announced his intent to renominate Rushing for a federal judgeship.[18] Her nomination was sent to the Senate later that day.[19] On February 7, 2019, her nomination was reported out of committee by a 12–10, party line vote.[20] On March 4, 2019, the Senate invoked cloture on her nomination by a vote of 52–43.[21] On March 5, 2019, the Senate voted to confirm Rushing by a 53–44 vote.[22] She received her judicial commission on March 21, 2019.

On September 9, 2020, President Trump named Rushing as a potential choice to fill a Supreme Court vacancy if one should open. [23]

swordtail
Anarchist Prime Sat Sep 19 11:21:00

Roderick Burrell
@roderickburrell
Replying to

@jvgraz

@realDonaldTrump
should not just nominate a "Merrick Garland clone". He should nominate Merrick Garland. Mitch McConnell said he wanted him anyway BEFORE Obama nominated him. That would really take away one of their biggest scare tactics. Also, makes him look fair.

3:29 AM · Sep 19, 2020·Twitter Web App

renzo marQuez
Member Sat Sep 19 11:29:37
Politically that might make the most sense. I'd be shocked if he did it though.

renzo marQuez
Member Sat Sep 19 11:38:54
The prediction markets seems to favor holes. ACB the heavy favorite at this point. She's probably the one Dems are most prepared to oppose.

Lagoa was recently confirmed to a Circuit Court by an 80-15 vote and is Hispanic.

http://www...9;s-next-Supreme-Court-nominee

Amy Coney Barrett 52
Barbara Lagoa 18
Allison Rushing 11
Amul Thapar 7

tumbleweed
the wanderer Sat Sep 19 12:00:23
Amy Coney Barrett was already a finalist in a prior pick so she's probably the female most ready to go for this rushed bullshit farce

Sam Adams
Member Sat Sep 19 12:47:53
"rushed bullshit farce"

Rgb herself was confirmed in 40 or so days i think.

TJ
Member Sat Sep 19 12:53:36
42 days

Forwyn
Member Sat Sep 19 13:20:12
The new precedent is to spend 12 weeks digging up 40 year old sexual assault allegations

Poor tw

obaminated
Member Sat Sep 19 13:42:24
Tw is definitely heading towards meltdown.

tumbleweed
the wanderer Sat Sep 19 14:26:25
what word was inaccurate?

do you not think it will be rushed? they are flat out saying it will be rushed

is it not a bullshit farce given the rule Mitch made-up just last election?

all the comments were 'it's an election year, the people should decide'

now it's... 'well that was a D prez w/ R senate, this is an R prez w/ R senate (even though R's shellacked in 2018) so now the people don't need to get to decide'...

Forwyn
Member Sat Sep 19 14:33:14
Time until Jan 20: 123 days

tumbleweed
the wanderer Sat Sep 19 15:29:31
fine, just a bullshit farce

that they are moving rapidly on

Habebe
Member Sun Sep 20 08:37:09
Bridget Bade

Barbara Lagoa

Martha Pacold

Sarah Pitlyk

Allison Jones Rushing

Kate Todd

This is who its pretty much down to since he has daid it will be a female.

renzo marQuez
Member Sun Sep 20 09:10:45
Predictit is now close to 50/50 between Barrett and Lagoa.

habebe
Member Sun Sep 20 09:26:13
Barret? Did I miss one?

Habebe
Member Tue Sep 22 10:50:38
Lagoa is a Cuban from Florida...so if election poliyics factor in thats a factor.

Habebe
Member Tue Sep 22 10:59:18
http://www...-latest-mitt-romney/index.html

Romney will vote, so this looks likely to go through quickly.

obaminated
Member Tue Sep 22 10:59:55
Trump has all Republican senators on board, he may lose this election but his presence will be felt long after he is dead and gone.

Habebe
Member Tue Sep 22 13:46:33
Yo, his website is selling " fill that seat" shirts before she is in the ground.... Can't make this shit up.

How boring will politics be if Trump loses?

Rugian
Member Tue Sep 22 14:14:28
Trump is selling "Fill that seat" shirts.

The Democrats are talking about permanently destroying the independence of the judicial branch through court packing.

I know who's more despicable here.

habebe
Member Tue Sep 22 15:14:43
They have a " dying wish association" I seen an ad in YT.

obaminated
Member Tue Sep 22 16:56:02
Apparently a supreme court justice gets to decide what happens to the seat they occupied after they leave it.

Habebe
Member Tue Sep 22 17:07:05
Im leaning towards lagoa. I dont like that its probably because of her identity over merit if that is the case but considering Biden doesnt care about merit at all I guess this is the lesser of two evils so to speak.

renzo marQuez
Member Tue Sep 22 17:10:55
Lagoa arguably has more troll equity. Rushing would be the best on the SC. ACB is the most likely by far - 77% on PredictIt.

tumbleweed
the wanderer Tue Sep 22 17:36:47
"Biden doesnt care about merit"
i'm sure that's based on something?...

ACB has been to meet Trump, as long as she praised him constantly, she's in

her being a religious nutbag is only helpful as Trump loves divisiveness

Nimatzo
iChihuaha Tue Sep 22 17:41:23
I would go for Judge Judy. I love Judge Judy.

kargen
Member Tue Sep 22 18:00:22
alleged dying wish. We know she said "The president is elected for four years not three years, so the power he has in year three continues into year four.

It was rare that she made direct political statements. Makes this all the more impactful knowing she felt it that important to make a political statement.

habebe
Member Tue Sep 22 18:25:38
" Tue Sep 22 17:36:47
"Biden doesnt care about merit"
i'm sure that's based on something?..."

He has already said he would only pick a black female. Meaning that just by population he is ruling out 94% of the US population. if you go by how many have the legal background to realistically bw in the running its even less.

habebe
Member Wed Sep 23 07:19:47
So kamala is supposed tonlead the arguments against the SC pick.

That gets her out there while keeping joe in the basement.

But it leads me to believe more it will be Lagos. Oh you jave a colores woman judge? we we have a mixed colored woman VP/DA..... maybe we could wheelchair bound a trisexual hermaphrodite thats an ethnic gain a 57.... top that.

patom
Member Wed Sep 23 07:23:26
habebe, it seems that Trump is discounting 96% of the population by picking a anti Roe v Wade candidate.

Nimatzo
iChihuaha Wed Sep 23 08:01:41
An opinion on a legal matter, presumably with reasoned arguments would be the basis for "merit", gender and skin color would not.

Habebe
Member Wed Sep 23 08:36:22
Nimatzo, Exactly. However that said I dont think Trump is giving much more credit to merit either.

Patom, While I think overturning Roe V Wade is a horrible choice, a few things.

1. In the rare instance that it would be overturned, abortion. Law merely cedes to the state, so most people who want an abortion wouldnt notice any change.

2.96% of people do not support RvW. A majority probably, myself included, im not pro choice but full on pro abortion.

Now on a legal constitutional basis I think RvW is wrong, but for practicality I support it.

tumbleweed
the wanderer Fri Sep 25 16:53:42
ACB appears to be the pick (& also the only candidate known to have visited White House)

...so that expanded list was just more bullshit

hood
Member Fri Sep 25 17:06:58
"The Democrats are talking about permanently destroying the independence of the judicial branch through court packing."

Oh noes, the democrats talk about things that republicans are currently doing? HOW DARE THEY!

kargen
Member Fri Sep 25 17:27:02
You don't know what court packing is hood. Court packing is not replacing a member of the court after they have retired or died. Packing is increasing the number of justices so you can name a whole bevy of new judges that share your views.

hood
Member Fri Sep 25 17:29:41
Or, alternatively, refusing to vote on a whole slew of vacancies and then filling them once you're the one nominating them.

Habebe
Member Fri Sep 25 17:33:54
We find out tomorrow.

renzo marQuez
Member Fri Sep 25 17:37:34
hood
Member Fri Sep 25 17:29:41
"Or, alternatively, refusing to vote on a whole slew of vacancies and then filling them once you're the one nominating them."

Miguel Estrada.

patom
Member Fri Sep 25 17:59:46
Trump made his pick. It's the Mother of 7 who is a rabid anti abortionist. She'll be sitting on the bench before the election.

renzo marQuez
Member Fri Sep 25 18:03:23
Good. No delays. She is qualified and should be confirmed next week.

Habebe
Member Fri Sep 25 18:04:03
Do we know anything about her other than abortion?

swordtail
Anarchist Prime Fri Sep 25 18:07:19
she posed for hustler when it was uncool.

kargen
Member Fri Sep 25 19:40:52
The stupid thing is the abortion issue is really a non-issue. Kavanaugh has said it is settled law as have others. Even if Roe v Wade were overturned states still get to decide on their own about abortion.
Ruth Ginsburg was confirmed I think in 42 days and only three people voted against her? So there is plenty of time. All this they are rushing things is just another bullshit tactic by the Democrats hoping we the people are to stupid to know the truth.

Habebe
Member Fri Sep 25 20:55:04
Yeah, every source I seen said 42 or 43 days for RBG except CNN who claimed 50...

Even still.

tumbleweed
the wanderer Fri Sep 25 21:32:48
& that's days from nomination which hasn't happened yet & it's 39 days til election

(doing after election on a loss would be extremely disgusting, not that they wouldn't... i actually prefer they do it beforehand to hopefully get some of those fools who accept this unfit fraud just to get SC judges)

but time isn't the issue, it's the bullshit McConnell pulled in 2016, with R after R saying 'no SC confirmation in election year' with NO caveat for 'divided gov't'

Rubio & Graham are easily found on video saying it

even Trump said it (but he's a hypocrite on every possible thing)

tumbleweed
the wanderer Fri Sep 25 21:33:50
...*to get some of those fools to lose their sole reason of voting for him)

kargen
Member Fri Sep 25 21:44:59
What you call bullshit was logistics. President Obama didn't have the votes. McConnell has been fairly consistent in not bringing things up he knows will not pass. I would prefer he allow them for a vote anyway on most things. The ones where the Democrats attach some unrelated nonsense though could be tabled until the amendments are retracted.

Democrats got to set some precedents and now it is the Republicans turn. I haven't counted yet but I am hoping there are enough states to get the ball rolling to change the constitution through and amendment to set the Supreme Court number at not more than nine.
O'Conner was 33 days and his was I believe unanimous. As I said earlier with Ruth Ginsburg only three voted nay. There were judges appointed that took 21 and 19 days.

tumbleweed
the wanderer Fri Sep 25 21:49:45
"McConnell has been fairly consistent in not bringing things up he knows will not pass"

do you see this as a positive?

him protecting R's from having No votes on things people want (& preventing D's from getting Yes votes)
+ he doesn't allow votes on even things that WOULD pass if he doesn't like them

however, he managed to have a vote on the green new deal... what a corrupt fucking disgrace he is

& how are you determining Garland wouldn't have passed? they didn't even give him a hearing

tumbleweed
the wanderer Sat Sep 26 12:11:34
i predict conservative christian Amy will be seduced by drunken bad boy Brett... & Gorsuch will be watching from the corner

Forwyn
Member Sat Sep 26 13:37:00
Well, that's an upgrade from "Rape Monster". I guess time really does heal all wounds

tumbleweed
the wanderer Sat Sep 26 13:58:42
those thread titles were humor

...and not like he was proven innocent, still could've happened, she answered all questions (unlike him) & definitely was in his circle of friends/accomplices

but yes i know he doesn't have to be proven innocent

he proved himself unfit by temperament (& yelling about a hit-job by Hillary & Dems)
http://med...ce1cac5a67596a11a3d3f96d6c.jpg

& lying, like on "Renata Alumnus" meaning

Hrothgar
Member Sat Sep 26 16:45:36
Of all the shills out there, Trump could have done worse. I still think the honorable thing to do is wait until after the election when we are this close to one. But, if she gets nominated it won't be an ugly US damaging mistake like Trump's admin has been abundant with.

kargen
Member Sat Sep 26 18:47:05
"do you see this as a positive?"

Your reading comprehension skills just plain suck. No wonder you get so much shit wrong.

tumbleweed
the wanderer Sat Sep 26 19:01:35
you're right, your mentioning McConnell's behavior enraged me & i missed the next part :p

although since they didn't even give a hearing, your already bad argument is even worse

the McConnell precedent is shamelessly do whatever is in your favor at the moment (which granted is not unique to him, although no one has abused it more than him)

tumbleweed
the wanderer Sat Sep 26 19:11:34
(well Trump does it more... lives in a continual state of doing it really)

Habebe
Member Sat Sep 26 19:25:19
So, I was wrong about the pick.

Also, she doesn't seem too controversial. I mean the dems will hate her but, unless Noam Chomsky or Obama was the pick they would bitch.

tumbleweed
the wanderer Sat Sep 26 20:40:18
the GOP already hawking 'Notorious ACB" shirts to be as disgusting as possible
http://twitter.com/nrsc/status/1309962935356325891?s=21
complete with a WinRed page being prechecked to make you give a double donation plus additional monthly ones (like Trumps pages)

renzo marQuez
Member Sat Sep 26 22:20:28
Copped.

show deleted posts

renzo marQuez Member	Sat Sep 19 11:15:32 38 is older than I'd prefer but she seems to be very well qualified. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allison_Jones_Rushing Allison Jones Rushing From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Allison Jones Rushing (born 1982)[1] is an American attorney and jurist serving as a United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. She was nominated for the position by President Donald Trump in August 2018 and confirmed by the Senate in March 2019. Early life and career Born in Hendersonville, North Carolina, Rushing graduated summa cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa from Wake Forest University in 2004 with a Bachelor of Arts in music. She then earned her Juris Doctor, magna cum laude, from the Duke University School of Law in 2007, where she served as executive editor of the Duke Law Journal.[2][3] In 2005, Rushing was a law student intern at the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), a conservative Christian nonprofit organization.[4][5] Rushing wrote at least three amicus briefs supporting the ADF's positions, co-wrote a legal brief on religious liberties with an ADF attorney, and spoke at ADF events at least once per year from 2012 to 2017.[5] Career After graduation, Rushing clerked for then-Judge Neil Gorsuch, of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, from 2007 to 2008, and Judge David B. Sentelle of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit from 2008 to 2009.[6][7] From 2009 to 2010, Rushing was an associate at Williams & Connolly. Rushing clerked for Associate Justice Clarence Thomas of the Supreme Court of the United States during the 2010–2011 term.[8][9][10] In 2011, Rushing rejoined Williams & Connolly in the Washington, D.C. office under Kannon Shanmugam, and in January 2017 was named a partner. She left Williams & Connolly after being appointed to the Fourth Circuit.[11][12][13] Rushing has been a member of the Federalist Society since 2012.[1] Federal judicial service On August 27, 2018, President Trump announced his intent to nominate Rushing to serve as a United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.[12][14] Her official nomination was received on the same day by the United States Senate.[15] She was nominated to the seat being vacated by Allyson Kay Duncan, who previously announced her intention to take senior status upon the confirmation of her successor. On October 17, 2018, a hearing on her nomination was held before the Senate Judiciary Committee.[16] Rushing has argued that there are "moral and practical" reasons to ban same-sex marriage.[17] During Rushing's confirmation proceedings, she was questioned about her ties to the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), a conservative Christian group that she had interned for as a law student. ADF has been criticized for opposing LGBT rights. Rushing was asked if she would recuse herself from ADF-related cases if confirmed. She replied: "I would determine the appropriate action with the input of the parties, consultation of these rules and ethical canons, and consultation with my colleagues."[5] Asked about ADF being labeled a "hate group" by the Southern Poverty Law Center, Rushing said: "Hate is wrong, and it should have no place in our society. In my experience with ADF, I have not witnessed anyone expressing or advocating hate."[5] On January 3, 2019, her nomination was returned to the President under Rule XXXI, Paragraph 6 of the United States Senate. On January 23, 2019, President Trump announced his intent to renominate Rushing for a federal judgeship.[18] Her nomination was sent to the Senate later that day.[19] On February 7, 2019, her nomination was reported out of committee by a 12–10, party line vote.[20] On March 4, 2019, the Senate invoked cloture on her nomination by a vote of 52–43.[21] On March 5, 2019, the Senate voted to confirm Rushing by a 53–44 vote.[22] She received her judicial commission on March 21, 2019. On September 9, 2020, President Trump named Rushing as a potential choice to fill a Supreme Court vacancy if one should open. [23]
swordtail Anarchist Prime	Sat Sep 19 11:21:00 Roderick Burrell @roderickburrell Replying to @jvgraz @realDonaldTrump should not just nominate a "Merrick Garland clone". He should nominate Merrick Garland. Mitch McConnell said he wanted him anyway BEFORE Obama nominated him. That would really take away one of their biggest scare tactics. Also, makes him look fair. 3:29 AM · Sep 19, 2020·Twitter Web App
renzo marQuez Member	Sat Sep 19 11:29:37 Politically that might make the most sense. I'd be shocked if he did it though.
renzo marQuez Member	Sat Sep 19 11:38:54 The prediction markets seems to favor holes. ACB the heavy favorite at this point. She's probably the one Dems are most prepared to oppose. Lagoa was recently confirmed to a Circuit Court by an 80-15 vote and is Hispanic. http://www...9;s-next-Supreme-Court-nominee Amy Coney Barrett 52 Barbara Lagoa 18 Allison Rushing 11 Amul Thapar 7
tumbleweed the wanderer	Sat Sep 19 12:00:23 Amy Coney Barrett was already a finalist in a prior pick so she's probably the female most ready to go for this rushed bullshit farce
Sam Adams Member	Sat Sep 19 12:47:53 "rushed bullshit farce" Rgb herself was confirmed in 40 or so days i think.
TJ Member	Sat Sep 19 12:53:36 42 days
Forwyn Member	Sat Sep 19 13:20:12 The new precedent is to spend 12 weeks digging up 40 year old sexual assault allegations Poor tw
obaminated Member	Sat Sep 19 13:42:24 Tw is definitely heading towards meltdown.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Sat Sep 19 14:26:25 what word was inaccurate? do you not think it will be rushed? they are flat out saying it will be rushed is it not a bullshit farce given the rule Mitch made-up just last election? all the comments were 'it's an election year, the people should decide' now it's... 'well that was a D prez w/ R senate, this is an R prez w/ R senate (even though R's shellacked in 2018) so now the people don't need to get to decide'...
Forwyn Member	Sat Sep 19 14:33:14 Time until Jan 20: 123 days
tumbleweed the wanderer	Sat Sep 19 15:29:31 fine, just a bullshit farce that they are moving rapidly on
Habebe Member	Sun Sep 20 08:37:09 Bridget Bade Barbara Lagoa Martha Pacold Sarah Pitlyk Allison Jones Rushing Kate Todd This is who its pretty much down to since he has daid it will be a female.
renzo marQuez Member	Sun Sep 20 09:10:45 Predictit is now close to 50/50 between Barrett and Lagoa.
habebe Member	Sun Sep 20 09:26:13 Barret? Did I miss one?
Habebe Member	Tue Sep 22 10:50:38 Lagoa is a Cuban from Florida...so if election poliyics factor in thats a factor.
Habebe Member	Tue Sep 22 10:59:18 http://www...-latest-mitt-romney/index.html Romney will vote, so this looks likely to go through quickly.
obaminated Member	Tue Sep 22 10:59:55 Trump has all Republican senators on board, he may lose this election but his presence will be felt long after he is dead and gone.
Habebe Member	Tue Sep 22 13:46:33 Yo, his website is selling " fill that seat" shirts before she is in the ground.... Can't make this shit up. How boring will politics be if Trump loses?
Rugian Member	Tue Sep 22 14:14:28 Trump is selling "Fill that seat" shirts. The Democrats are talking about permanently destroying the independence of the judicial branch through court packing. I know who's more despicable here.
habebe Member	Tue Sep 22 15:14:43 They have a " dying wish association" I seen an ad in YT.
obaminated Member	Tue Sep 22 16:56:02 Apparently a supreme court justice gets to decide what happens to the seat they occupied after they leave it.
Habebe Member	Tue Sep 22 17:07:05 Im leaning towards lagoa. I dont like that its probably because of her identity over merit if that is the case but considering Biden doesnt care about merit at all I guess this is the lesser of two evils so to speak.
renzo marQuez Member	Tue Sep 22 17:10:55 Lagoa arguably has more troll equity. Rushing would be the best on the SC. ACB is the most likely by far - 77% on PredictIt.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Tue Sep 22 17:36:47 "Biden doesnt care about merit" i'm sure that's based on something?... ACB has been to meet Trump, as long as she praised him constantly, she's in her being a religious nutbag is only helpful as Trump loves divisiveness
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Tue Sep 22 17:41:23 I would go for Judge Judy. I love Judge Judy.
kargen Member	Tue Sep 22 18:00:22 alleged dying wish. We know she said "The president is elected for four years not three years, so the power he has in year three continues into year four. It was rare that she made direct political statements. Makes this all the more impactful knowing she felt it that important to make a political statement.
habebe Member	Tue Sep 22 18:25:38 " Tue Sep 22 17:36:47 "Biden doesnt care about merit" i'm sure that's based on something?..." He has already said he would only pick a black female. Meaning that just by population he is ruling out 94% of the US population. if you go by how many have the legal background to realistically bw in the running its even less.
habebe Member	Wed Sep 23 07:19:47 So kamala is supposed tonlead the arguments against the SC pick. That gets her out there while keeping joe in the basement. But it leads me to believe more it will be Lagos. Oh you jave a colores woman judge? we we have a mixed colored woman VP/DA..... maybe we could wheelchair bound a trisexual hermaphrodite thats an ethnic gain a 57.... top that.
patom Member	Wed Sep 23 07:23:26 habebe, it seems that Trump is discounting 96% of the population by picking a anti Roe v Wade candidate.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Wed Sep 23 08:01:41 An opinion on a legal matter, presumably with reasoned arguments would be the basis for "merit", gender and skin color would not.
Habebe Member	Wed Sep 23 08:36:22 Nimatzo, Exactly. However that said I dont think Trump is giving much more credit to merit either. Patom, While I think overturning Roe V Wade is a horrible choice, a few things. 1. In the rare instance that it would be overturned, abortion. Law merely cedes to the state, so most people who want an abortion wouldnt notice any change. 2.96% of people do not support RvW. A majority probably, myself included, im not pro choice but full on pro abortion. Now on a legal constitutional basis I think RvW is wrong, but for practicality I support it.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Fri Sep 25 16:53:42 ACB appears to be the pick (& also the only candidate known to have visited White House) ...so that expanded list was just more bullshit
hood Member	Fri Sep 25 17:06:58 "The Democrats are talking about permanently destroying the independence of the judicial branch through court packing." Oh noes, the democrats talk about things that republicans are currently doing? HOW DARE THEY!
kargen Member	Fri Sep 25 17:27:02 You don't know what court packing is hood. Court packing is not replacing a member of the court after they have retired or died. Packing is increasing the number of justices so you can name a whole bevy of new judges that share your views.
hood Member	Fri Sep 25 17:29:41 Or, alternatively, refusing to vote on a whole slew of vacancies and then filling them once you're the one nominating them.
Habebe Member	Fri Sep 25 17:33:54 We find out tomorrow.
renzo marQuez Member	Fri Sep 25 17:37:34 hood Member Fri Sep 25 17:29:41 "Or, alternatively, refusing to vote on a whole slew of vacancies and then filling them once you're the one nominating them." Miguel Estrada.
patom Member	Fri Sep 25 17:59:46 Trump made his pick. It's the Mother of 7 who is a rabid anti abortionist. She'll be sitting on the bench before the election.
renzo marQuez Member	Fri Sep 25 18:03:23 Good. No delays. She is qualified and should be confirmed next week.
Habebe Member	Fri Sep 25 18:04:03 Do we know anything about her other than abortion?
swordtail Anarchist Prime	Fri Sep 25 18:07:19 she posed for hustler when it was uncool.
kargen Member	Fri Sep 25 19:40:52 The stupid thing is the abortion issue is really a non-issue. Kavanaugh has said it is settled law as have others. Even if Roe v Wade were overturned states still get to decide on their own about abortion. Ruth Ginsburg was confirmed I think in 42 days and only three people voted against her? So there is plenty of time. All this they are rushing things is just another bullshit tactic by the Democrats hoping we the people are to stupid to know the truth.
Habebe Member	Fri Sep 25 20:55:04 Yeah, every source I seen said 42 or 43 days for RBG except CNN who claimed 50... Even still.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Fri Sep 25 21:32:48 & that's days from nomination which hasn't happened yet & it's 39 days til election (doing after election on a loss would be extremely disgusting, not that they wouldn't... i actually prefer they do it beforehand to hopefully get some of those fools who accept this unfit fraud just to get SC judges) but time isn't the issue, it's the bullshit McConnell pulled in 2016, with R after R saying 'no SC confirmation in election year' with NO caveat for 'divided gov't' Rubio & Graham are easily found on video saying it even Trump said it (but he's a hypocrite on every possible thing)
tumbleweed the wanderer	Fri Sep 25 21:33:50 *...to get some of those fools to lose their sole reason of voting for him)**
kargen Member	Fri Sep 25 21:44:59 What you call bullshit was logistics. President Obama didn't have the votes. McConnell has been fairly consistent in not bringing things up he knows will not pass. I would prefer he allow them for a vote anyway on most things. The ones where the Democrats attach some unrelated nonsense though could be tabled until the amendments are retracted. Democrats got to set some precedents and now it is the Republicans turn. I haven't counted yet but I am hoping there are enough states to get the ball rolling to change the constitution through and amendment to set the Supreme Court number at not more than nine. O'Conner was 33 days and his was I believe unanimous. As I said earlier with Ruth Ginsburg only three voted nay. There were judges appointed that took 21 and 19 days.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Fri Sep 25 21:49:45 "McConnell has been fairly consistent in not bringing things up he knows will not pass" do you see this as a positive? him protecting R's from having No votes on things people want (& preventing D's from getting Yes votes) + he doesn't allow votes on even things that WOULD pass if he doesn't like them however, he managed to have a vote on the green new deal... what a corrupt fucking disgrace he is & how are you determining Garland wouldn't have passed? they didn't even give him a hearing
tumbleweed the wanderer	Sat Sep 26 12:11:34 i predict conservative christian Amy will be seduced by drunken bad boy Brett... & Gorsuch will be watching from the corner
Forwyn Member	Sat Sep 26 13:37:00 Well, that's an upgrade from "Rape Monster". I guess time really does heal all wounds
tumbleweed the wanderer	Sat Sep 26 13:58:42 those thread titles were humor ...and not like he was proven innocent, still could've happened, she answered all questions (unlike him) & definitely was in his circle of friends/accomplices but yes i know he doesn't have to be proven innocent he proved himself unfit by temperament (& yelling about a hit-job by Hillary & Dems) http://med...ce1cac5a67596a11a3d3f96d6c.jpg & lying, like on "Renata Alumnus" meaning
Hrothgar Member	Sat Sep 26 16:45:36 Of all the shills out there, Trump could have done worse. I still think the honorable thing to do is wait until after the election when we are this close to one. But, if she gets nominated it won't be an ugly US damaging mistake like Trump's admin has been abundant with.
kargen Member	Sat Sep 26 18:47:05 "do you see this as a positive?" Your reading comprehension skills just plain suck. No wonder you get so much shit wrong.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Sat Sep 26 19:01:35 you're right, your mentioning McConnell's behavior enraged me & i missed the next part :p although since they didn't even give a hearing, your already bad argument is even worse the McConnell precedent is shamelessly do whatever is in your favor at the moment (which granted is not unique to him, although no one has abused it more than him)
tumbleweed the wanderer	Sat Sep 26 19:11:34 (well Trump does it more... lives in a continual state of doing it really)
Habebe Member	Sat Sep 26 19:25:19 So, I was wrong about the pick. Also, she doesn't seem too controversial. I mean the dems will hate her but, unless Noam Chomsky or Obama was the pick they would bitch.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Sat Sep 26 20:40:18 the GOP already hawking 'Notorious ACB" shirts to be as disgusting as possible http://twitter.com/nrsc/status/1309962935356325891?s=21 complete with a WinRed page being prechecked to make you give a double donation plus additional monthly ones (like Trumps pages)
renzo marQuez Member	Sat Sep 26 22:20:28 Copped.
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: