All Things SCOTUS

[irishog77]

She said "Ukraine wasn't a thing until 1989" last week.

One of her more recent gems.

Did you see her follow up where a NYT writer asked her where she gets these supposed anti-Ukraine, pro-russia takes? Her answer was from the NYT themselves. And other bastions of credibility like the hill, the guardian, and the daily beast. I don't listen to her, so I don't know exactly what she said about Ukraine. What was the full context of her statement?

If you want to criticize a "public' figure, go right ahead. It's fair game. Besides, most have takes, opinions, articles, tweets, or speeches that are wrong/misinformed/shallow. KBJ herself couldn't even say what a woman was in her own hearing a day or two ago. Do you think that gem really speaks well to her intelligence? Does the fact that KBJ seems completely unaware of what is taught at a school she sits on the board of strike you as a sign of intelligence or capability?

Senators questioning a potential lifetime appointee for a seat on the SC is also fair game. It is their job to do so and they would be derelict in their duty not to do so. And from the jump on the announcement, all indications are that KBJ will be approved. Easily. I don't think anybody on here is even arguing against her being approved. She's qualified. Were democrats justified in their own votes against black nominees to the federal court? Or are only republicans "racist" and fearful of black people if they don't want her as a Justice?

The only reason race is relevant and mentioned in this nomination is because joe "you ain't black" biden made it an issue. Specifically.

Maybe I'm crazy, but I tend to think the content of one's character seems to matter more than the color of one's skin.

Our now sitting president's statement claiming "you ain't black" for the mere thought of a black person not supporting and voting for him is quite telling. Maybe, perhaps, there are racists in both the democratic and republican parties? Maybe some people tend to put a higher value on the color of one's skin rather than the value of their character? Maybe some people assume the color of your skin should indicate what candidate to vote for or against?

 

[ab2cmiller]

This is symptomatic of the current political environment for almost all politicians. This is not unique to Ted Cruz. Maybe he's the only one stupid enough to check for immediate twitter reaction to his questioning. So little sincerity, too much theater.

 

[Rogue219]

Did you see her follow up where a NYT writer asked her where she gets these supposed anti-Ukraine, pro-russia takes? Her answer was from the NYT themselves. And other bastions of credibility like the hill, the guardian, and the daily beast. I don't listen to her, so I don't know exactly what she said about Ukraine. What was the full context of her statement?

If you want to criticize a "public' figure, go right ahead. It's fair game. Besides, most have takes, opinions, articles, tweets, or speeches that are wrong/misinformed/shallow. KBJ herself couldn't even say what a woman was in her own hearing a day or two ago. Do you think that gem really speaks well to her intelligence? Does the fact that KBJ seems completely unaware of what is taught at a school she sits on the board of strike you as a sign of intelligence or capability?

Senators questioning a potential lifetime appointee for a seat on the SC is also fair game. It is their job to do so and they would be derelict in their duty not to do so. And from the jump on the announcement, all indications are that KBJ will be approved. Easily. I don't think anybody on here is even arguing against her being approved. She's qualified. Were democrats justified in their own votes against black nominees to the federal court? Or are only republicans "racist" and fearful of black people if they don't want her as a Justice?

The only reason race is relevant and mentioned in this nomination is because joe "you ain't black" biden made it an issue. Specifically.

Maybe I'm crazy, but I tend to think the content of one's character seems to matter more than the color of one's skin.

Our now sitting president's statement claiming "you ain't black" for the mere thought of a black person not supporting and voting for him is quite telling. Maybe, perhaps, there are racists in both the democratic and republican parties? Maybe some people tend to put a higher value on the color of one's skin rather than the value of their character? Maybe some people assume the color of your skin should indicate what candidate to vote for or against?

Thank you for your permission.

Candace Owens is not an elected official and writes no legislation. For that I am thankful. I hope she continues to enrich the lives of her faithful fans and make money while doing so. I choose to look and listen the other way. Far away.

Can I do Ginny Thomas next?

 

[drayer54]

Thank you for your permission.

Candace Owens is not an elected official and writes no legislation. For that I am thankful. I hope she continues to enrich the lives of her faithful fans and make money while doing so. I choose to look and listen the other way. Far away.

Can I do Ginny Thomas next?

Janice Rogers Brown

 

[irishog77]

Thank you for your permission.

Candace Owens is not an elected official and writes no legislation. For that I am thankful. I hope she continues to enrich the lives of her faithful fans and make money while doing so. I choose to look and listen the other way. Far away.

Can I do Ginny Thomas next?

Tell me you drive a Dodge without telling me you drive a Dodge.

 

[ulukinatme]

Tell me you drive a Dodge without telling me you drive a Dodge.

Couldn't read that without thinking of this.

 

[Rogue219]

Clarence Thomas was the lone dissent in the Supreme Court's January order rejecting Trump's bid to withhold documents from the January 6 panel

Thomas' vote came under scrutiny Thursday following reports that his wife, Ginni Thomas, texted Mark Meadows about overturning the 2020 election.

www.businessinsider.com

Brandon gonna get a twofer?

 

[ab2cmiller]

Clarence Thomas was the lone dissent in the Supreme Court's January order rejecting Trump's bid to withhold documents from the January 6 panel

Thomas' vote came under scrutiny Thursday following reports that his wife, Ginni Thomas, texted Mark Meadows about overturning the 2020 election.

www.businessinsider.com

Brandon gonna get a twofer?

Just a really bad look for Ginni to be involved in partisan politics even if what Ginni says is true

"Clarence doesn't discuss his work with me, and I don't involve him in my work,"

I get it that she has a right to do whatever the heck she wants, but her involvement in this stuff certainly undermines faith in the Supreme Court.

 

[drayer54]

Just a really bad look for Ginni to be involved in partisan politics even if what Ginni says is true



I get it that she has a right to do whatever the heck she wants, but her involvement in this stuff certainly undermines faith in the Supreme Court.

To quote everyone who dismissed Hunter Biden-

"She wasn't appointed and she doesn't vote on cases"

Now is it a bad look? Yeah. I think the people who want to willy nilly pack the court and destroy it like they have every other institution they've been able to control have already lost faith. Clarence Thomas is the most principled judge that the court has. He's one of the millions of men to marry a crazy woman. It happens to the best of us.

 

[Rogue219]

Just a really bad look for Ginni to be involved in partisan politics even if what Ginni says is true



I get it that she has a right to do whatever the heck she wants, but her involvement in this stuff certainly undermines faith in the Supreme Court.

Bad look sorta puts it in very polite words. From the get go, anyone had to see this had the potential to present conflict down the line. Here we are. Oh my, here we are.

At this point, if Clarence hasn't had a long chat with his wife at the kitchen table to set some shit straight, I'm guessing he will soon or it never happens at all. Might not be this week, though.

 

[Irish#1]

I'm not sure why they even bother to have these hearings. It doesn't matter who the nominee is, they're going to get approved. You have to go back to 1987 to find where one wasn't approved.

 

[Irish#1]

Bad look sorta puts it in very polite words. From the get go, anyone had to see this had the potential to present conflict down the line. Here we are. Oh my, here we are.

At this point, if Clarence hasn't had a long chat with his wife at the kitchen table to set some shit straight, I'm guessing he will soon or it never happens at all. Might not be this week, though.

Don't wait on him to tell you he did.

 

[Rogue219]

I'm not sure why they even bother to have these hearings. It doesn't matter who the nominee is, they're going to get approved. You have to go back to 1987 to find where one wasn't approved.

Traditionally, they've been business as usual type affairs. No longer. Gender, race are just the back drop. Who nominated him or her, (D) or (R)? That's what this now boils down to.

The last four have followed Cocaine Mitch stonewalling Black Barry on Merrick Garland and all four have been shit shows. That and the fact that the Senate is just a giant can of trash pandas now.

 

[irishog77]

Any lawyers on here care to recap the SC's recent summary reversal in Wisconsin for us non ascot-wearers?

I've read 3 articles about it and am fully convinced lawyers must have written the pieces, as I'm now MORE confused.

 

[ulukinatme]

I'm not sure why they even bother to have these hearings. It doesn't matter who the nominee is, they're going to get approved. You have to go back to 1987 to find where one wasn't approved.

They may all get approved, but some don't even get to the table:

Remembering the Black Woman Biden Blocked from the Supreme Court

President Biden wants credit for nominating the first Black woman to the Supreme Court. But here is the shameful irony: As a senator, Biden warned President George W. Bush that if he nominated the first Black woman to serve on the Supreme Court, he would filibuster and kill her nomination. The...

www.aei.org

When Democrats derailed her nomination, Bush renominated her in 2005. Brown was eventually confirmed by a vote of 56 to 43 — after Democrats released her and several other Bush nominees in exchange for Republican agreement not to eliminate the filibuster for judicial nominations. Biden voted a second time against her nomination. He never explained why, if Brown was so radical, Democrats let her through but killed 10 other Bush nominees.

The following month, when Justice Sandra Day O’Connor announced her retirement, Brown was on Bush’s shortlist to replace her. She would have been the first Black woman ever nominated to serve as an associate justice of the Supreme Court. But Biden appeared on CBS’s “Face the Nation” to warn that if Bush nominated Brown, she would face a filibuster. “I can assure you that would be a very, very, very difficult fight and she probably would be filibustered,” Biden said. Asked by moderator John Roberts “Wasn’t she just confirmed?,” Biden replied that the Supreme Court is a “totally different ballgame” because “a circuit court judge is bound by stare decisis. They don’t get to make new law.”

What Biden threatened was unprecedented. There has never been a successful filibuster of a nominee for associate justice in the history of the republic. Biden wanted to make a Black woman the first in history to have her nomination killed by filibuster. Bush eventually nominated Samuel A. Alito Jr.

Today, Biden calls the filibuster a “relic of the Jim Crow era.” But he threatened to use that relic as a tool to keep a Black woman who actually lived under Jim Crow off the highest court in the land. The irony is that now he wants to get rid of the filibuster, and claim credit for putting the first Black woman on the court.

 

[Irish#1]

Traditionally, they've been business as usual type affairs. No longer. Gender, race are just the back drop. Who nominated him or her, (D) or (R)? That's what this now boils down to.

The last four have followed Cocaine Mitch stonewalling Black Barry on Merrick Garland and all four have been shit shows. That and the fact that the Senate is just a giant can of trash pandas now.

Let’s not forget how the Dems tried to derail Kavanaugh by bringing in a lady that lied about him assaulting her in college.

 

[Irish#1]

They may all get approved, but some don't even get to the table:

Remembering the Black Woman Biden Blocked from the Supreme Court

President Biden wants credit for nominating the first Black woman to the Supreme Court. But here is the shameful irony: As a senator, Biden warned President George W. Bush that if he nominated the first Black woman to serve on the Supreme Court, he would filibuster and kill her nomination. The...

www.aei.org

Nice find. Joe is a piece of work.

 

[IRISHDODGER]

They may all get approved, but some don't even get to the table:

Remembering the Black Woman Biden Blocked from the Supreme Court

President Biden wants credit for nominating the first Black woman to the Supreme Court. But here is the shameful irony: As a senator, Biden warned President George W. Bush that if he nominated the first Black woman to serve on the Supreme Court, he would filibuster and kill her nomination. The...

www.aei.org

Let’s not forget how the Dems tried to derail Kavanaugh by bringing in a lady that lied about him assaulting her in college.

Right. Merrick Garland still walked away with his reputation in tact whereas Kavanaugh (like Thomas) will always have a large segment view him as a rapist &/or sexual harasser. But Rogue is correct, both sides are going to filibuster their opponents’ nominee whether it’s Mother Theresa or Jesus Christ.

 

[Blazers46]

 

[Rogue219]

Let’s not forget how the Dems tried to derail Kavanaugh by bringing in a lady that lied about him assaulting her in college.

Wonder what she gains by lying. Hopefully some nice door prizes?

SCOTUS is no longer a democratic institution. It stopped being that a while ago. Ginni Thomas is just a symptom of the disease at this point, for as much as this all stinks to high heaven, and it goes beyond her.

 

[ulukinatme]

Wonder what she gains by lying. Hopefully some nice door prizes?

SCOTUS is no longer a democratic institution. It stopped being that a while ago. Ginni Thomas is just a symptom of the disease at this point, for as much as this all stinks to high heaven, and it goes beyond her.

You gotta ask yourself why these cases always seem to come up when someone is being appointed to a high office. Doesn't matter which side it is, somebody is behind the scenes trying to dig up dirt and probably offer cash under the table for testimony. Someone waits 20-30 years to accuse someone of something for the first time? Money is certainly involved.

 

[Rogue219]

You gotta ask yourself why these cases always seem to come up when someone is being appointed to a high office. Doesn't matter which side it is, somebody is behind the scenes trying to dig up dirt and probably offer cash under the table for testimony. Someone waits 20-30 years to accuse someone of something for the first time? Money is certainly involved.

Nobody seemed to have anything on the nominee last week and it was still a complete shit show. Here's the part that frustrates me the most: the next one is just going to be full of even more nonsense. What we've accepted as normal now is incredibly alarming.

Not a fan of the lifetime appointments either.

 

[drayer54]

Right. Merrick Garland still walked away with his reputation in tact whereas Kavanaugh (like Thomas) will always have a large segment view him as a rapist &/or sexual harasser. But Rogue is correct, both sides are going to filibuster their opponents’ nominee whether it’s Mother Theresa or Jesus Christ.

When did the GOP try to break someone's image in a Jerry Springer episode? R's voted for Kagan and Sotomayor.

Wonder what she gains by lying. Hopefully some nice door prizes?

SCOTUS is no longer a democratic institution. It stopped being that a while ago. Ginni Thomas is just a symptom of the disease at this point, for as much as this all stinks to high heaven, and it goes beyond her.

Ask Avenatti and his lying woman accuser? It's all about power and whatever was in the bag from Sheila Jackson Lee. Ginni wasn't confirmed. Ginni doesn't decide cases.

Nobody seemed to have anything on the nominee last week and it was still a complete shit show. Here's the part that frustrates me the most: the next one is just going to be full of even more nonsense. What we've accepted as normal now is incredibly alarming.

Not a fan of the lifetime appointments either.

Was asking her basic questions about her judicial philosophy and empathy for pedophiles a shit show? This was tame compared to the last two.

 

[IRISHDODGER]

When did the GOP try to break someone's image in a Jerry Springer episode? R's voted for Kagan and Sotomayor.

Ask Avenatti and his lying woman accuser? It's all about power and whatever was in the bag from Sheila Jackson Lee. Ginni wasn't confirmed. Ginni doesn't decide cases.

Was asking her basic questions about her judicial philosophy and empathy for pedophiles a shit show? This was tame compared to the last two.

Yeah, that’s what I stated: “Merrick Garland still walked away w/ his reputation intact whereas Kavanaugh (like Thomas) will always have a large segment view him as a rapist &/or sexual harasser”

Not sure where we disagree on that?

 

[RDU Irish]

Nobody seemed to have anything on the nominee last week and it was still a complete shit show. Here's the part that frustrates me the most: the next one is just going to be full of even more nonsense. What we've accepted as normal now is incredibly alarming.

Not a fan of the lifetime appointments either.

LOL at your equating of this hearing to the last couple we have experienced. Or are the media squashing footage of people damn near rioting or dressing up in Handsmaiden outfits? I agree 150% that the theatre surrounding SCOTUS appointments has gotten out of hand, I couldn't agree less on implying one side isn't damn close to 100% of the problem.

After Kavanaugh confirmation, protesters chant, pound on Supreme Court door
https://www.politico.com/gallery/2018/10/04/brett-kavanaugh-protests-march-photos-003010?slide=0

 

[Rogue219]

These replies. LOL.

"What is a woman?"

What is a horeshoe? What do horseshoes do? What are horse socks?

Susan Collins says she's a "yes" for Judge Jackson, BTW. Hold your breath at your own risk. I ain't.

 

[drayer54]

These replies. LOL.

"What is a woman?"

What is a horeshoe? What do horseshoes do? What are horse socks?

Susan Collins says she's a "yes" for Judge Jackson, BTW. Hold your breath at your own risk. I ain't.

I don't think anyone thought she wouldn't be confirmed. We swapped an old partisan activist judge for a younger one who met the skin and biology requirements. Well, supposedly met the biology requirements. After all, she is a judge, not a biologist. The pedophile lobby is one step closer to having a majority and Dem dark $$ has a reason to celebrate.

 

[Rogue219]

I don't think anyone thought she wouldn't be confirmed. We swapped an old partisan activist judge for a younger one who met the skin and biology requirements. Well, supposedly met the biology requirements. After all, she is a judge, not a biologist. The pedophile lobby is one step closer to having a majority and Dem dark $$ has a reason to celebrate.

 

[RDU Irish]

Pretty sure the pedo lobby has a strong majority - one of the last bastions of bipartisanship. I found it interesting how Trump somewhat quietly ramped up enforcement on human trafficking and drew the ire of both sides. Odd b/c he did the whole Miss Universe thing and loves to swap out for younger, hotter wives so would seem to fit the bill of an Epstein loyalist when the reality was the opposite. Thus part of the hatred of both sides against Trump. My loose theory anyway.

 

[NorthDakota]

Thank you for your permission.

Candace Owens is not an elected official and writes no legislation. For that I am thankful. I hope she continues to enrich the lives of her faithful fans and make money while doing so. I choose to look and listen the other way. Far away.

Can I do Ginny Thomas next?

Do whatever you want with Ginny Thomas. She seems like a goofball.

Clarence is under no duty to answer for his wife. The ethics rules don't direct him to.

Now if his wife was charged with a crime or something, and that appeal reached SCOTUS, then sure. But that ain't happening. So... please... accept it and move on.

Clarence Thomas probably won't be going anywhere anytime soon.