Trash's SCOTUS nominee

[boutons_deux]

Sean Spicer: Merrick Garland’s Supreme Court snub is different because it was Obama’s ‘fourth term’
http://www.rawstory.com/2017/01/sean-spicer-merrick-garlands-supreme-court-snub-is-different-because-it-was-obamas-fourth-term/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29

[Th'Pusher]

Judge Neil Gorsuch

[boutons_deux]

It's Gorsuch, extreme right wing nut who's made plenty of anti-women rulings, so this is Trash keeping his promise to reverse Roe v Wade.

[SpursforSix]

It's Gorsuch, extreme right wing nut who's made plenty of anti-women rulings, so this is Trash keeping his promise to reverse Roe v Wade.

Who's your nomination? Crinkle Piggywick?

[CosmicCowboy]

Blah blah blah blah boo foaming at the mouth as usual.

[Clipper Nation]

As expected, he picked someone very similar to Scalia:

826597716700626945

[baseline bum]

I wonder how long the democrats will manage to filibuster. Hopefully four years.

[boutons_deux]

I wonder how long the democrats will manage to filibuster. Hopefully four years.

Repugs will kill the filibuster rule way before then, or some spineless Dems will vote with the Repugs, like 11 did to block importation of drugs from Canada.

[Pelicans78]

Hillary won't be able to ever live this down :lol

[ducks]

Harry ried did republicans a favor in 2013

[boutons_deux]

Hillary won't be able to ever live this down :lol

she won by 2.8M votes, and lost EC by only 80K votes

Trash is illegit, elected by Comey, Assange, Kobach

[Spurminator]

Hillary won't be able to ever live this down :lol

Neither will we.

[ducks]

1 more vote in electrol college makes him legit

[ducks]

she won by 2.8M votes, and lost EC by only 80K votes

Trash is illegit, elected by Comey, Assange, Kobach

Democracts voted for Clinton wanted her against trump
Not sanders

[ducks]

Quit blaming fbi democracts knew Clinton past

[ducks]

A judge that thinks he is not to make laws congress is
USA USA USA USA USA USA USA

[ducks]

JUDICIARY
Conservative group launches $10M campaign to support Trump's Supreme Court pick

[SnakeBoy]

Heard the protesters on the radio

Supreme Court!
Is under attack!
What do we do?
Stand Up and Fight Back!

cause replacing a conservative justice with a conservative justice is the end of America.

[boutons_deux]

fuck gorsuch like repugs fucked garland

[vy65]

I just hope Kennedy and Ginsburg can make it to 2020

[ducks]

She is failing asleep in oral agruments she needs to go

[baseline bum]

I just hope Kennedy and Ginsburg can make it to 2020

They gotta make it to 2021 man

[ducks]

Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., a frequent critic of Trump, tweeted his approval of the nomination, calling Gorsuch "a tremendous pick."

[boutons_deux]

I can see 6-3 by 2020

[Mitch]

fuck gorsuch like repugs fucked garland

Botox, you stupid fuck, recognize this?

http://i.imgur.com/fb4N2s5.jpg

[boutons_deux]

fuck gorsuch like repugs fucked garland

Never Give An Inch

[Mitch]

Fucking retarded Salon reader

[boutons_deux]

Fucking retarded Salon reader

weaK shit G F Y

[ducks]

Salon is weak yes
Salon is lies

[Trainwreck2100]

On the plus side lol women they've had their fun now it's our turn
on the minus side poor (i.e. not super rich)people are probably fucked

[Mitch]

weaK shit G F Y

You should support our new SCOTUS appointment, tbh. He got dem support!

[UNT Eagles 2016]

They gotta make it to 2021 man

Probably have to make it to 2024. But if they make it to anytime in 2024 they can use the Scalia/Garland card and probably get their way, assuming a Democrat is elected in 2024.

[UNT Eagles 2016]

I can see 6-3 by 2020

7-2 by 2024 if Ginsburg and Breyer are both retired or dead. Kennedy departing just sweetens the pot for Trump because he'd appoint a far righty in lieu of a replacement moderate swing voter. Then you have Clarence Thomas who might retire just so Trump can appoint another 50 year old far righty to cement the SCOTUS for the GOP for likely the next century.

[Aztecfan03]

Surprisingly good choice.

[mavsfan1000]

A judge that thinks he is not to make laws congress is
USA USA USA USA USA USA USA
+1

[rmt]

7-2 by 2024 if Ginsburg and Breyer are both retired or dead. Kennedy departing just sweetens the pot for Trump because he'd appoint a far righty in lieu of a replacement moderate swing voter. Then you have Clarence Thomas who might retire just so Trump can appoint another 50 year old far righty to cement the SCOTUS for the GOP for likely the next century.

Laura Ingraham hinted last night that there'd be another appointment in June - don't know who/what she's heard from. My guess would be Kennedy's retirement although she did clerk under Clarence Thomas - so maybe him?

[boutons_deux]

Gorsuch is VRWC/oligarchy/corporatocracy dream candidate, being extremely pro-corruption-politics, pro-unlimited-money-in-politics, very pro-business and anti-citizen

Judge Gorsuch’s Money-in-Politics Record

* In his only opinion directly addressing money in politics, Judge Gorsuch expressed openness to providing a higher level of constitutional protection to a donor’s right to make political contributions than the Court currently affords the right to vote.1 Judge Gorsuch’s openness to applying rigid “strict scrutiny” review to contribution limits—one of the few remaining checks on big money we have left, thanks to the Supreme Court—puts him among the ranks of justices extremely hostile to this issue, such as Thomas and Scalia, and is cause for serious concern.2



* In Riddle v. Hickenlooper, Judge Gorsuch joined a Tenth Circuit panel in striking down an ill-advised Colorado statute that imposed lower campaign contribution limits on minor party candidates than the limits applying to major party candidates.3Because the statute was discriminatory, the outcome of the case is not cause for concern in and of itself.


* What is troubling, however, is that Judge Gorsuch went out of his way to write a concurring opinion suggesting that making a political contribution is a “fundamental” right that ought to be afforded the highest form of constitutional protection, which is known as “strict scrutiny review.”4

* As the highest form of constitutional protection, strict scrutiny review is reserved for our most precious rights, like the right to be free from discrimination on the basis of race or religion, or the right to express an unpopular viewpoint. Sometimes the Court doesn’t even apply this level of scrutiny to restrictions on the right to vote itself.5


* In recent years, the Supreme Court’s 5-4 majority has applied strict scrutiny review to strike down laws governing money spent independently of candidates. If the court were to follow Judge Gorsuch’s reasoning and apply strict scrutiny to laws governing direct contributions to candidates, many remaining protections against big money in politics would similarly fall.


* It is precisely this approach that has created a system in which single individuals and corporations can spend tens of millions of dollars to influence elections, and in which candidates and elected officials are significantly more responsive to the priorities of an elite donor class that is richer, whiter, and more male than Americans on the whole.


Broader Democracy Law

* Judge Gorsuch is hostile to regulations on the corporate sector and has a record of ruling against consumers and working Americans.6


* In the Hobby Lobby case, Judge Gorsuch joined a troubling extension of the Supreme Court’s holding in Citizens United v. FEC,7 in favor of corporate personhood. Specifically, the Tenth Circuit ruled that privately held, for-profit secular corporations are “persons” under the meaning of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), and could qualify for religious exemptions from the Affordable Care Act’s mandate to provide reproductive health services.8


Other Causes for Concern on Money in Politics

* Like others on Trump’s short list, Judge Gorsuch has ties to the Chamber of Commerce—the single-largest lobby in the country comprised of corporate giants from the pharmaceutical, oil, and other industries, and which has spent tens of millions of dollars in elections while keeping its donors secret.9 Before becoming a judge on the Tenth Circuit, Gorsuch represented the National Chamber of Commerce, arguing in favor of rules that would make it more difficult to hold companies accountable for securities fraud.10


* Judge Gorsuch has described his own jurisprudence as backward-looking.11 On numerous occasions he has ruled against plaintiffs claiming to have been discriminated against on the basis of race, and his ruling in favor of law enforcement in an excessive use of force case raises concerns that his jurisprudence would continue to entrench systemic “colorblind” racism in the United States.12


http://www.demos.org/publication/judge-gorsuch%E2%80%99s-extreme-views-could-undermine-urgently-needed-money-politics-reforms

Both parties poll as wanting to get money out of politics, so this Gorsuch asshole is perfect allowing the 1% to screw the 99% with 100% corrupt politics.

[boutons_deux]

Gorsuch is dream for Christian Taliban and Christian Sharia

Gorsuch is how Christian Sharia gets imposed on women, giving Taliban 5-4 to overturn Wade v Roe, a huge victory on the Repug/Christian War on Women.

But with RvW dead, even women who can afford abortion today will have to go to a country where abortion is legal

Neil Gorsuch’s crusade against Planned Parenthood


Planned Parenthood Association of Utah v. Herbert was not an important case. It turned primarily on a factual dispute over whether Utah Gov. Gary Herbert (R) had an unconstitutional motive when he cut off funding to Utah’s Planned Parenthood affiliate, as well as another dispute over whether a three-judge panel that temporarily restored that funding misread a trial judge’s opinion.

It was a case that turned upon, in the language that lawyers use, a “question of fact,” rather than on a question of law that could have major implications for future cases. In other words, if the judges hearing this case were wrong about the facts (or about what a specific trial opinion said), while that would obviously have very serious implications for Planned Parenthood, it wouldn’t have any implications for future cases.

And yet Judge Neil Gorsuch, President Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court, went to war over this legally insignificant, fact-bound decision.


En banc hearings are typically not used to correct alleged errors of fact that have no implications beyond the one case.
And yet Gorsuch didn’t simply try to get his court to convene an en banc hearing in the Planned Parenthood case. The public record shows that a member of his court ordered a poll of the court’s members to determine if such a hearing should take place, despite the fact that no party asked for such a poll. That’s an extraordinarily unusual action for a judge to take. Typically, courts only hear cases en banc if the losing party asks them to.

As the conservative legal writer Ed Whelan notes, since Gorsuch eventually wrote the decision dissenting from his court’s decision not to en banc this case, “it’s not climbing out on a limb to surmise that it was Gorsuch” who sought an en banc hearing in the first place.


Gorsuch’s actions make perfect sense if he is an anti-abortion hardliner who wanted to cut off funds to a leading abortion provider and was willing to bend the rules to do so.


https://thinkprogress.org/neil-gorsuchs-crusade-against-planned-parenthood-78af3a29f0f3#.4rctdw6ov

Of course, Repug/Christian-Taliban War on (poor black, brown) women doesn't need Gorsuch to defund PP.

[UNT Eagles 2016]

Laura Ingraham hinted last night that there'd be another appointment in June - don't know who/what she's heard from. My guess would be Kennedy's retirement although she did clerk under Clarence Thomas - so maybe him?

Kennedy retiring would make it solid 5-4 conservative with next to no chance of any liberal ruling for the foreseeable future. Unless Roberts pulls a rabbit out of his ass like in 2012 with Obamacare.

[boutons_deux]

Trash brought two SCOTUS candidates to DC, knowing which one would get "fired" and insulted by Trash's childish bullshit. Trash is a fucking asshole

[boutons_deux]

Judge Neil M. Gorsuch was resting midway down a Colorado ski slope last year when his cellphone rang with the news that Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia had died.

“I immediately lost what breath I had left,” Gorsuch recalled in an April speech, “and I am not embarrassed to admit that I couldn’t see the rest of the way down the mountain for the tears.” :lol

Gorsuch is seen by many on the right as a fitting replacement for the iconic jurist that Gorsuch considered a “lion of the law.”

Lawmakers may “appeal to their own moral convictions” and to claims of “social utility” to reshape laws for the future, he said. “Judges should do none of these things in a democratic society." ( :lol but he supports Christian Taliban imposition of Sharia)

“His opinions show a commitment to the history and text of the Constitution, regardless of where the results lead.”

(iow, the Constitution is a worshiped, anachronistic DEAD DOCUMENT while a living society has evolved over 200+ years.)

in his book, “The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia,” which argued against laws permitting people to have help in ending their lives.

He is an Episcopalian and would be the only Protestant on the current court. Five of the justices are Catholic and three are Jewish.

he has also written strong opinions on religious liberty (aka, the Christian Sharia uber alles)

“contraceptive mandate” under the Affordable Care Act, Gorsuch sided with the employers, concluding they had a religious-liberty right exempting them from the mandate.

In 2013, the 10th Circuit, including Gorsuch, ruled in favor of the Green family, owners of the Hobby Lobby chain of craft stores, who sought a religious exemption from paying for drugs or devices that they believed could destroy a fertilized human egg.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-gorsuch-supreme-court-20170131-story.html?utm_source=Today%27s+Headlines&utm_campaign=f598d81244-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2016_12_12&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b04355194f-f598d81244-80027601

So, Gorsuch is a wetdream for the Christian Taliban to impose Christian Sharia even more widely

[rmt]

Trash brought two SCOTUS candidates to DC, knowing which one would get "fired" and insulted by Trash's childish bullshit. Trash is a fucking asshole

If I were the other one, I'd see it as I'm probably next in line should there be another appointment.

[CosmicCowboy]

Trash brought two SCOTUS candidates to DC, knowing which one would get "fired" and insulted by Trash's childish bullshit. Trash is a fucking asshole

Boo spreading fake news from his RSS feeds as usual. He is so predictably stupid and gullible.

[SnakeBoy]

Anyone remember what boutons nickname for Bush was? Was it any better than Trash?

[baseline bum]

Laura Ingraham hinted last night that there'd be another appointment in June - don't know who/what she's heard from. My guess would be Kennedy's retirement although she did clerk under Clarence Thomas - so maybe him?

Hasn't Uncle Thomas previously said he has no desire to be a lifer? This would undoubtedly be the best time for him to step down without changing the ideology of the court by doing so.

[baseline bum]

Anyone remember what boutons nickname for Bush was? Was it any better than Trash?

I think it was Shrub. His best nickname was Magic Negro.

[boutons_deux]

I think it was Shrub. His best nickname was Magic Negro.

shrub was Molly Ivins' nickname.

[boutons_deux]

the IDEAL VRWC activist judge, pro-business, anti-worker, anti-environment, Warrior on Women

Neil Gorsuch, Trump's Supreme Court Pick, Has History of Ruling Against Workers, Women & Regulation

As a judge on the Tenth Circuit, Neil Gorsuch ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby in the case deciding whether the company could refuse to provide birth control coverage to employees as required by Obamacare.

Judge Gorsuch also has a long history of ruling against employees in cases involving federal race, sex, age, disability and political discrimination and retaliation claims.

https://www.democracynow.org/2017/2/1/neil_gorsuch_trumps_pick_for_scotus

[boutons_deux]

Trump’s Supreme Court pick founded prep school club called ‘Fascism Forever’

http://usuncut.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/gorsch.png


Neal Gorsuch, whom Donald Trump appointed to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court, is the founder and president of ‘Fascism Forever.’

Gorsuch started the club at the prestigious $30,000-per-year Georgetown Preparatory school during his freshman year, according to the Daily Mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4182852/Trump-s-SCOTUS-pick-founded-club-called-Fascism-Forever.html).

The Mail obtained photos from Gorsuch’s yearbook that show not only his club affiliations, but a photo of him wearing a shirt and tie, reading Up from Liberalism by William F. Buckley (an avowed racist who blamed the sagging economy on the black community (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFeoS41xe7w&feature=youtu.be) in a debate with African American writer James Baldwin).

Gorsuch’s founding of the ‘Fascism Forever’ club was a tongue-in-cheek reference (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4182852/Trump-s-SCOTUS-pick-founded-club-called-Fascism-Forever.html) to his liberal professors, showing that even as a teenager, Gorsuch had already begun gravitating to the far right.

By the time Gorsuch was in college, he was already an experienced right-wing troll.

The future Supreme Court nominee criticized anti-apartheid protesters (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/neil-gorsuch-apartheid-protests-donald-trump-supreme-court-nominee-scotus-a7556706.html) while he was at Columbia, saying they had “dubious logic,” arguing in several columns for the student newspaper that ongoing U.S. investment in apartheid South Africa was for the good of both countries.

He also quoted former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger — whose bombing campaigns in Southeast Asia left hundreds of thousands dead (http://usuncut.com/politics/ny-times-confronts-war-criminal-henry-kissinger-and-pulls-off-the-worst-interview-ever/) — for his yearbook photo (http://www.snopes.com/neil-gorsuch-yearbook/):

http://usuncut.com/politics/trumps-supreme-court-pick-started-club-called-fascism-forever-high-school/

Yep, fascist, racist, lifelong asshole, the PERFECT Repug nominee.

[tlongII]

Goddam Boutons is an idiot.

[baseline bum]

Holy fuck, Gorsuch started a crew when he was 14? This is going to make even Republicans shy away in his confirmation hearing, I bet Trump pulls the nomination after hearing this shocking news.

[CosmicCowboy]

Goddam Boutons is an idiot.

X1000

[Clipper Nation]

:lol Even the fake-news peddlers who wrote that trash were forced to begrudgingly admit that it was a joke directed at his liberal professors, not an actual fascist club. Boutards doesn't even read the articles he spams beyond the headlines.

It's hilarious how libtards have to reach for shit like this to "prove" that conservatives are fascists. Meanwhile, when a conservative comes to their city to give a speech, they start beating people up, vandalizing businesses and lighting shit on fire until the event gets cancelled. Who's the real fascists again?

[boutons_deux]

Elizabeth Warren Torches Trump's SCOTUS Pick on the Senate Floor


The Massachusetts senator says Neil Gorsuch is a gift to corporate America.


if Elizabeth Warren is any indication, Trump's SCOTUS pick may be in for a protracted fight.

Warren began her address on the Senate floor Thursday by explaining how a "rigged" justice system has devastated working people and "made it harder for people who have been injured or cheated" to get a fair hearing.

"The best example was the unprecedented blockade of Judge Merrick Garland's nomination to the Supreme Court," argued Warren.

"Judge Garland was an obvious consensus nominee and a straight shooter who followed the law, so why block it?

The problem was that Judge Garland's career didn't reflect a sufficient willingness to bend the law to suit the needs of the rich and powerful and for that sin, far-right groups financed by big business interests spent millions of dollars attacking him to torpedo his nomination and keep that seat open."

Judge Gorsuch has shown a truly remarkable insensitivity to the struggles of working Americans and an eagerness to side with businesses that break the rules over workers who are seeking justice,"

Warren continued.

"Even before he became a judge, Judge Gorsuch argued in favor of limiting the ability of investors and shareholders to bring lawsuits when companies commit fraud, whining about how annoying it is for billionaire corporations to have to face their investors when they cheat them."
Warren is convinced that Trump's pick will not be a "neutral arbiter" of the law should he be confirmed, and that he represents the president's "hostility" to an independent judiciary.

"This is exactly the type of Supreme Court justice that giant corporations want, but they have never been quite so brazen about it—spending millions to slime a consensus, straight-shooter nominee like Merrick Garland, steal a Supreme Court seat, then drawing up a public list of acceptable alternatives and handing it over to a billionaire president so he can do his buddies a favor. That's bold," she argued. "And that is not how America is supposed to work."

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/elizabeth-warren-slams-gorsuch-scotus-pick-sin-working-americans

Apparently, the propaganda campaign trying to get Gorsuch through has $10M, peanuts compared to decades of Gorsuch and his pro-business rulings. ROI in the 1000s of %.

[boutons_deux]

Senate Democrats tweet out video calling out Mitch McConnell's hypocrisy in no uncertain terms (http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/2/1/1628713/-Senate-Democrats-tweet-out-video-calling-out-Mitch-McConnell-s-hypocrisy-in-no-uncertain-terms)

https://twitter.com/SenateDems/status/826488412505042944?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

Listen, there are 1,449 days left in this administration, and Trump has already filed for reelection in 202 (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2017/1/29/1626846/-Trump-Filed-For-Reelection-In-2020-On-Jan-20-2017-Why-It-Matters)0, so

we shouldn’t elect a Supreme Court justice until the election is over. Let the American people decide

—let’s say, whichever candidate can get the majority of Americans to vote for them?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VI5mqxohTWo

http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/2/1/1628713/-Senate-Democrats-tweet-out-video-calling-out-Mitch-McConnell-s-hypocrisy-in-no-uncertain-terms?detail=email&link_id=10&can_id=4217e8eb109c68bd0c2e4143dd2d8c15&source=email-unapologetic-kansas-air-patrol-officer-to-legislator-this-b-needs-to-swing-from-a-tree&email_referrer=unapologetic-kansas-air-patrol-officer-to-legislator-this-b-needs-to-swing-from-a-tree&email_subject=unapologetic-kansas-air-patrol-officer-to-legislator-this-b-needs-to-swing-from-a-tree

[boutons_deux]

Anne of green fables: Neil Gorsuch’s mother tried to dismantle the EPA

Anne Gorsuch was administrator of the EPA from 1981 to 1983 and wanted to rip the agency apart

Anne Gorsuch slashed (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3418-2004Jul21.html) EPA’s budget by 22 percent and

aggressively rolled back clean air and clean water rules and other protections.

A lawyer herself, she apparently did not like to see the legal system used to protect the environment.

“In the first year of the Reagan administration, there was a

79 percent decline in the number of enforcement cases filed from regional offices to EPA headquarters, and

a 69 percent decline in the number of cases filed from the EPA to the Department of Justice,”

a House staffer told Grist in 2004 (http://grist.org/article/griscom-reagan/).

Anne Gorsuch resigned less than two years into the job over a scandal involving mismanagement of the Superfund program.

http://www.salon.com/2017/02/03/neil-gorsuchs-mother-tried-to-dismantle-the-epa_partner/

The Repugs' attempts, and successes, in degrading America go back 40 years.

[boutons_deux]

Questions arise about Neil Gorsuch’s volunteer claims while at Harvard Law School

“While in law school, he demonstrated a commitment to helping the less fortunate,” President Trump declared when announcing Gorsuch’s nomination on Tuesday (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/01/31/trump_nominates_gorsuch_to_supreme_court_i_promise d_to_select_a_representative_of_our_constitution.h tml). “He worked in both Harvard Prison Legal Assistance Projects and Harvard Defenders Program.”

Yet for “roughly three dozen students who participated in the two programs while Mr. Gorsuch was at Harvard Law School from 1988 to 1991,” they have no memory of Gorsuch ever being involved

two individuals who oversaw the students in these programs did not remember Gorsuch ever being there,

while a third declined to say and a fourth is now deceased. They were joined by more than thirty other students who were involved in these programs and said they did not remember ever seeing Gorsuch present.

“If he was active in PLAP I am sure I would remember him,”

the Harvard Prison Legal Assistance Project as her “most meaningful experience” at Harvard, told the Journal.

http://www.salon.com/2017/02/06/questions-arise-about-neil-gorsuchs-volunteer-claims-while-at-harvard-law-school/

So PVL Trash was LYING and Gorsuch let him lie.

[Thread]

Questions arise about Neil Gorsuch’s volunteer claims while at Harvard Law School

“While in law school, he demonstrated a commitment to helping the less fortunate,” President Trump declared when announcing Gorsuch’s nomination on Tuesday (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/01/31/trump_nominates_gorsuch_to_supreme_court_i_promise d_to_select_a_representative_of_our_constitution.h tml). “He worked in both Harvard Prison Legal Assistance Projects and Harvard Defenders Program.”

Yet for “roughly three dozen students who participated in the two programs while Mr. Gorsuch was at Harvard Law School from 1988 to 1991,” they have no memory of Gorsuch ever being involved

two individuals who oversaw the students in these programs did not remember Gorsuch ever being there,

while a third declined to say and a fourth is now deceased. They were joined by more than thirty other students who were involved in these programs and said they did not remember ever seeing Gorsuch present.

“If he was active in PLAP I am sure I would remember him,”

the Harvard Prison Legal Assistance Project as her “most meaningful experience” at Harvard, told the Journal.

http://www.salon.com/2017/02/06/questions-arise-about-neil-gorsuchs-volunteer-claims-while-at-harvard-law-school/

So PVL Trash was LYING and Gorsuch let him lie.




& we ain't lettin' ya's off by going nuclear until AFTER you've placed your votes. That way come next November you'll be the record.

[boutons_deux]

Supreme Court Nominee Neil Gorsuch Is a Donald Trump-Style Authoritarian (https://theintercept.com/2017/02/01/supreme-court-nominee-neil-gorsuch-is-a-donald-trump-style-authoritarian/)

Wilson tried to flee, but an officer tased him in the back of the head and he died of cardiac arrhythmia.

“Mr. Wilson was resisting arrest by fleeing from officers after they identified themselves — even if the crime of which he was suspected was not itself a violent one,” Gorsuch wrote for the majority.

Fellow Judge Mary Beck Briscoe disagreed, saying “A reasonable officer would know that aiming or recklessly tasing Ryan Wilson in the head under the circumstances presented was unconstitutional.”

Gorsuch’s rulings have also chipped away at Constitutional protections from warrantless searches. He has repeatedly ruled in favor of police searching vehicles without a warrant after routine traffic stops

Gorsuch also ruled in a case (https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/15/15-3006.pdf) last year that if police track your car with a GPS device for weeks — without going to a judge — the evidence is still admissible at trial, as long as the police have an “objectively reasonable good-faith belief” that what they are doing is legal.

https://theintercept.com/2017/02/01/supreme-court-nominee-neil-gorsuch-is-a-donald-trump-style-authoritarian/

[boutons_deux]

Trump's Choice of Gorsuch Endangers Civil, Human and Environmental Rights

"Even More Radical Than Scalia"

He deferred to Christian organizations about whether the mandate of the ACA to provide contraception to their employees "burdens" their free exercise of religion.

He wrote a book against assisted suicide and voted to uphold a public display of the Ten Commandments.

According to the Sierra Club, Gorsuch "has a record of denigrating the power of agencies like the [Environmental Protection Agency] to make rules to carry out their functions."

Nan Aron, president of Alliance for Justice, said Gorsuch's position on federal regulation was "extremely problematic" and "even more radical than Scalia," adding, "Not requiring courts to defer to agency expertise when an act of Congress is ambiguous, will make it much harder for federal agencies to effectively address a wide variety of critical matters, including labor rights, consumer and financial protections, and environmental law."

Before even joining the bench, [Gorsuch] advocated to make it easier for public companies to defraud investors.

As a judge, he has twisted himself into a pretzel to make sure the rules favor giant companies over workers and individual Americans.

He has sided with employers who deny wages, improperly fire workers, or retaliate against whistleblowers for misconduct.

He has ruled against workers in all manner of discrimination cases.

And he has demonstrated hostility toward women's access to basic health care.

For years, powerful interests have executed a full-scale assault on the integrity of our federal judiciary, trying to turn the Supreme Court into one more rigged game that works only for the rich and the powerful.

They spent millions to keep this seat open, and Judge Gorsuch is their reward.

Every day, our new President finds more ways to demonstrate his hostility for our independent judiciary, our civil society, and the rule of law.

Now more than ever, America needs Supreme Court justices with a proven record of standing up for the rights of all Americans -- civil rights, women's rights, LGBT rights, and all other protections guaranteed by our laws.

We don't need another justice who spends his time looking out for those with money and influence.

"Judge Gorsuch has repeatedly sided with corporations over working people,

demonstrated a hostility toward women's rights, and

most troubling, hewed to an ideological approach to jurisprudence that makes me skeptical that he can be a strong, independent justice on the Court."

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/39310-trump-s-choice-of-gorsuch-endangers-civil-human-and-environmental-rights

[CosmicCowboy]

Hey Boo...

Gorsuch is gonna be on SCOTUS for the next 40 years.

Suck it ...:lmao

[CosmicCowboy]

http://nationalinterest.org/files/styles/main_image_on_posts/public/main_images/Picture_14_3.jpg?itok=drw7jpkg

[boutons_deux]

Scarborough Calls Trump’s Judicial Attacks ‘Deeply Disturbing,’ Calls For GOP to ‘Start Pushing Back’

Joe Scarborough, once seen as a one of Donald Trump‘s closest allies in the media, continued to harangue the President this morning over his continued criticism of our nation’s judges (http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-dimisses-arguments-against-travel-ban-disgraceful-during-sheriffs-conference-n718316).

President Trump yesterday said, “I don’t want to call a court biased, but courts seem to be so political.”

He promptly continued, “I listened to a bunch of stuff last night that was disgraceful. It was disgraceful.” His firm commentary was also joined by a Tweet that was equally critical of the three judges, who are expected to announce their ruling sometime Thursday. Trump wrote (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/829299566344359936?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw), “If the U.S. does not win this case as it so obviously should, we can never have the security and safety to which we are entitled. Politics!”

It’s a maneuver that Scarborough slammed Thursday on Morning Joe, saying, “This crosses a bright, bright line that conservatives in my party need to start talking about, and need to start pushing back on.”

deeply disturbing because he keeps talking about how they’re political and he is trying to set them up for blame if there is a terror attack, which there is absolutely positively no evidence that we are facing an eminent threat right now.

Scarborough’s commentary comes just a day after Judge Neil Gorsuch, the President’s choice to replace the late Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court, called Trump’s attack on the judiciary “demoralizing” and “disheartening” in a closed door meeting.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/scarborough-calls-trumps-judicial-attacks-deeply-disturbing-calls-for-gop-to-start-pushing-back/

[boutons_deux]

Trash denies it but ...

Gorsuch's WH-Appointed Sherpa Confirms Remarks As Prez Sows Doubt

Neil Gorsuch's White House-appointed sherpa confirmed that the nominee did indeed find Trump's comments about judges "disheartening and demoralizing."

former Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), who is aiding Gorsuch in his confirmation process, said in a statement Thursday morning.

"He has also emphasized the importance of an independent judiciary, and while he made clear that he was not referring to any specific case, he said that

he finds any criticism of a judge's integrity and independence disheartening and demoralizing,"

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/kelly-ayotte-confirms-gorsuch-remarks-on-trump-judge-attacks?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+tpm-news+%28TPMNews%29

So will Trash tweet back Gorsuch didn't say it?

[boutons_deux]

Charles Schumer: Judge Gorsuch, We Won’t Be Fooled Again

I asked him whether an unambiguous Muslim ban would be constitutional. He refused to answer.

I asked him if he agreed with conservative lawyers who say the president has abused executive power. He refused to answer.

I asked him whether he thought the president’s comments on voter fraud would undermine our democracy. He refused to answer.

I asked him about landmark cases like Citizens United and Bush v. Gore. He refused to answer.

Since he claims to be an originalist, I asked him about his view of what the framers intended with the Emoluments Clause in our Constitution.

He refused to answer any of these questions.

He told me he couldn’t give me his view of any case, past or present, or any constitutional principle, because it might bias him.

This blanket excuse frustrates any examination of what kind of judge the nominee will be.

the only way that Judge Gorsuch was able to demonstrate his independence as a jurist was by asserting it himself.

He could give no evidence of it in his record, and therefore I could have no assurance of it in the future.

a disconcerting feeling came over me that I had been through this before — and I soon realized I had, with Judge John G. Roberts Jr.

He was similarly charming, polished and erudite.

Like Neil Gorsuch, he played the part of a model jurist. And just like Neil Gorsuch, he asserted his independence, claiming to be a judge who simply called “balls and strikes,” unbiased by both ideology and politics.

When Judge Roberts became Justice Roberts, we learned that we had been duped by an activist judge.

The Roberts court systematically and almost immediately shifted to the right, violating longstanding precedent with its rulings in Citizens United and in Shelby v. Holder, which gutted the Voting Rights Act.

Before Justice Scalia died, the court was on the precipice of violating precedent again with Friedrichs (https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/30/us/politics/friedrichs-v-california-teachers-association-union-fees-supreme-court-ruling.html)v. California Teachers Association (https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/30/us/politics/friedrichs-v-california-teachers-association-union-fees-supreme-court-ruling.html), which would have eviscerated unions.

In each instance, there was an attempt to tilt the scales of justice in favor of big business or right-leaning interests.

Rather than calling balls and strikes, Chief Justice Roberts was a 10th player, shifting the power structure toward the privileged and away from the average American.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/10/opinion/sunday/charles-schumer-judge-gorsuch-we-wont-be-fooled-again.html?_r=0

[Thread]

And Trump should pull him. Christ, 48 hours and he was already disheartened & demoralized because Trump criticized his fellows.

[boutons_deux]

Trump and McConnell inadvertently make the rock solid case for NOT confirming Supreme Court nominee (http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/2/16/1634417/-Trump-and-McConnell-inadvertently-make-the-rock-solid-case-for-NOT-confirming-Supreme-Court-nominee)


Let’s flashback to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s comments on the floor of the United States Senate on March 2, 2016: (http://www.mcconnell.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2016/3/mcconnell-reiterates-to-president-the-american-people-will-be-heard-senate-will-observe-biden-rule)

“The current Senate Democratic Leader once stated that ‘nowhere in [the Constitution] does it say the Senate has a duty to give presidential nominees a vote.’ The incoming Senate Democratic Leader did not even wait until the final year of the last President’s term to declare that the Senate should ‘not confirm a Supreme Court nominee except in extraordinary circumstances.’

“And we all know what Vice President Biden said when he chaired the Judiciary Committee.

‘It would be our pragmatic conclusion that once the political season is under way, and it is, action on a Supreme Court nomination must be put off until after the election campaign is over.’


Spicer repeatedly called it a "campaign event." (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/president-trump-holding-campaign-event-florida-saturday/story?id=45521140)

That means Donald Trump’s 2020 re-election campaign will officially be underway tomorrow at the Orlando-Melbourne International Airport.

And per Mitch McConnell and Republican leadership, “once the political season is under way, and it is, action on a Supreme Court nomination must be put off until after the election campaign is over.”

http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/2/16/1634417/-Trump-and-McConnell-inadvertently-make-the-rock-solid-case-for-NOT-confirming-Supreme-Court-nominee?detail=email&link_id=1&can_id=4217e8eb109c68bd0c2e4143dd2d8c15&source=email-trump-and-mcconnell-inadvertently-make-the-rock-solid-case-for-not-confirming-supreme-court-nominee&email_referrer=trump-and-mcconnell-inadvertently-make-the-rock-solid-case-for-not-confirming-supreme-court-nominee&email_subject=trump-and-mcconnell-inadvertently-make-the-rock-solid-case-for-not-confirming-supreme-court-nominee

IIRC, Trash has already his papers for the 2020 election. :lol

[UNT Eagles 2016]

Roberts got Obamacare though, moron.

[boutons_deux]

Roberts got Obamacare though, moron.

he didn't want to go down as guy who stopped health care for Ms, was strictly chickenshit vanity vote, then gutted ACA by making medicare expansion optional, killing 1000s in red/slave states

[UNT Eagles 2016]

he didn't want go down as guy who stopped health care for Ms, was strictly chickenshit vanity vote, then gutted ACA by by making medicare expansion optional, killing 1000s in red/slave states

The despicable part of ACA was never Medicare expansion, it was the individual mandate bull-fucking-shit that de-elasticized the market thus making the supply/demand curve a vertical fucking line so the insurance companies had carte blanche to jack up the prices through the roof as they pleased. So of course they did. Plus, fining regular people for not paying for health insurance is anti-freedom and conscriptionist, and you know it. If Trump does nothing else but gets rid of the individual mandate, he did a good job.

[Thread]

The despicable part of ACA was never Medicare expansion, it was the individual mandate bull-fucking-shit that de-elasticized the market thus making the supply/demand curve a vertical fucking line so the insurance companies had carte blanche to jack up the prices through the roof as they pleased. So of course they did. Plus, fining regular people for not paying for health insurance is anti-freedom and conscriptionist, and you know it. If Trump does nothing else but gets rid of the individual mandate, he did a good job.

The UNT

[Splits]

The UNT

lol approvingly quoting one of the dumbest people on this site

[Thread]

lol approvingly quoting one of the dumbest people on this site

I don't always agree with The UNT. I find some of his shit maddening, but, I am not throwing the baby out with the bath water.

[UNT Eagles 2016]

lol approvingly quoting one of the dumbest people on this site

Dale & I see eye to eye on quite a lot actually, surprisingly enough.

Hold your 12, Shits

[Splits]

Dale & I see eye to eye on quite a lot actually, surprisingly enough.

Hold your 12, Shits

Yes, you're both blind partisan hacks who would say, "mmmm, more please that tastes like the worlds finest chocolate" if you were fed dogshit by the right person.

[Thread]

Yes, you're both blind partisan hacks who would say, "mmmm, more please that tastes like the worlds finest chocolate" if you were fed dogshit by the right person.

Watch it, Splits. I ain't in the fuckin' mood.

[Splits]

Watch it, Splits. I ain't in the fuckin' mood.

just swish that chocolate between your teeth before you kiss your retard boyfriend UNT and you'll be fine

[UNT Eagles 2016]

just swish that chocolate between your teeth before you kiss your retard boyfriend UNT and you'll be fine

You have daydreams of that type of scene, don't you, liberal faggot?

[Spurminator]

After listening to much of the confirmation hearing today, I think we could've done a lot worse than Gorsuch.

Seems reasonable and fair. Made me wish more judges would run for Congress or Executive Office.

[boutons_deux]

Emails show Neil Gorsuch was a fan of a leading anti-voting rights activist

President Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee could pose a threat to the voting rights of racial minorities

appears to have ties with an anti-voting rights crusader who popularized misinformation about widespread voter fraud.


Emails released to the Senate Judiciary Committee indicate that Gorsuch is not only familiar with Hans von Spakovsky (https://mediamatters.org/people/hans-von-spakovsky), a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation known for hyping the voter fraud narrative (https://mediamatters.org/research/2011/06/14/von-spakovsky-spreads-falsehoods-to-push-for-vo/180573), but perhaps even a fan of his.

Back in July 2005, von Spakovsky sent out an email to a list of people announcing a speech he was giving at the Ballot Access and Voting Integrity Conference, as Ari Berman reported for The Nation (https://www.thenation.com/article/in-emails-neil-gorsuch-praised-a-leading-republican-activist-behind-voter-suppression-efforts/). Gorsuch replied to the email, “Sounds interesting. Glad to see you’re doing this. I may tray [sic] to attend some of it.”

A December 2005 email that Gorsuch received from another contact indicated that von Spakovsky was being considered for the Federal Election Commission. The message’s sender conceded “there will be stories” and that it will be “a little bit of a fight in the press.” Gorsuch responded, writing, “Good for Hans!”

Gorsuch’s tenure in the Justice Department overlapped with von Spakovsky in 2005, when Gorsuch was the principal deputy to the associate attorney general and von Spakovsky was special counsel to Brad Schlozman, the assistant attorney general for civil rights, The Nation reported. Schlozman and

von Spakovsky took control of the Civil Rights Division in the Justice Department and reversed its traditional role of protecting the voting rights of minorities.

http://www.salon.com/2017/03/21/emails-show-neil-gorsuch-was-a-fan-of-a-leading-anti-voting-rights-activist/

Trash's racist DoJ will certainly destroy the civil rights division, just like dubya's did 2001-2008.

[baseline bum]

After listening to much of the confirmation hearing today, I think we could've done a lot worse than Gorsuch.

Seems reasonable and fair. Made me wish more judges would run for Congress or Executive Office.

The nomination was still stolen from Obama. It should have been Garland.

[boutons_deux]

Such judicial Gore

Neil Gorsuch and the “Frozen Trucker”

The judge’s infamous dissent reveals he may not have the temperament to serve on the Supreme Court.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/03/neil_gorsuch_s_arrogant_frozen_trucker_opinion_sho ws_he_wants_to_be_like.html

Gorsuch's "textualist" defense is that the law, as he sees it with no context, forces the trucker freeze to death to obey employer's rules, rather than try to save his limbs, and life.

[boutons_deux]

Sheldon Whitehouse’s Shockingly Awesome Gorsuch Statement


Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, in his opening statement at the Gorsuch nominating hearings, isn’t having it. Gorsuch, he said, will fight for big corporations versus actual ‘humans’ in every arena possible.

Whitehouse eviscerated Gorsuch as a payoff to a big conservative political machine.

The special interests who financed the campaign to put Gorsuch on the court, he said, “obviously think that you will be worth their money”.

Beyond that, he points out, John Roberts sat before the Senate Judiciary Committee and

lied that he would just be an unbiased umpire calling balls and strikes.

Roberts then went on the court and ruled for big business in every case that came before the court which involved big business.

“Once burned, twice shy,” said Whitehouse. Gorsuch will join a court that ruled for big business in everything from class actions to labor to jury systems to voting rights.

Whitehouse listed a litany of cases and their impacts, with this one as a particular kicker, “Help insulate investment bankers against fraud claims? Why not?”

The special interests that financed

this big business takeover of the court is not principled, said Whitehouse, it isn’t intellectual, it is simply a “delivery service” for big business.

Gorsuch is highly qualified, Whitehouse noted. But fundamentally Gorsuch is a payoff to the special interest groups that will profit from his rulings.

It’s important to note here that Whitehouse is making a broader claim about the court. His point isn’t just that Gorsuch should be rejected, but that

Democrats should have no respect for the legitimacy of the court so long as the court serves a role as a cog in a corrupt big business machine.

https://medium.com/@matthewstoller/sheldon-whitehouses-shockingly-awesome-gorsuch-statement-3e4c52791ee8#.hdbw2xg75

iow, Gorsuch is nothing but another VRWC/BigCorp/BigMoney stooge.

[boutons_deux]

executive summary: GORSUCH IS A LIAR

The Judge Gorsuch who spoke in the Senate today is nothing like the man who wrote his opinions

Will the real Neil Gorsuch please stand up?

Nominee Neil Gorsuch spoke for only a little over 15 minutes, and his prepared remarks spent nearly as much time on his pet goat and his black polyester robe (http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/here-s-judge-gorsuch-s-full-opening-statement-n735961) as it did on his record as a judge.

Gorsuch did speak long enough to paint of picture of the kind of judge he wanted people watching his hearing to think that he is.

Echoing Chief Justice John Roberts at Roberts’ own confirmation hearing, Gorsuch said that judges should occupy a “modest station.”

He warned that “if judges were just secret legislators, declaring not what the law is but what they would like it to be, the very idea of a government by the people and for the people would be at risk.”

The opinions that define Gorsuch’s tenure as a judge are primarily cases where he pushed for the courts to do more (https://thinkprogress.org/who-is-neil-gorsuch-17c49a21a17f#.62gieamuu) to intervene in policy disputes.

In , Gorsuch urged the courts to grant new rights to religious objectors who did not wish to provide birth control coverage to their employees.

In Gutierrez-Brizuela v. Lynch (https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/14/14-9585.pdf), Gorsuch complained that a longstanding doctrine requiring courts to defer to federal agencies “seems more than a little difficult to square with the Constitution of the framers’ design.”

In United States v. Nichols (http://ca10.washburnlaw.edu/cases/2015/04/14-3041.pdf), Gorsuch hinted that he might impose aggressive new limits on agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency if given to opportunity to do so.

So why is Gorsuch selling himself as Mr. Modesty when he has not behaved that way on the bench? One possibility is that he is simply being a cynic.

https://thinkprogress.org/the-judge-gorsuch-who-spoke-in-the-senate-today-is-nothing-like-the-man-who-wrote-his-opinions-b6b713059d81#.xf3sbbyir

iow, the Gorsuch before the Senate is NOT the Gorsuch of his trail of rulings, dissents. HE'S LYING

[boutons_deux]

Neil Gorsuch Is Not Another Scalia. He’s the Next John Roberts.

Gorsuch puts a handsome face on an ugly ideology.

 Neil Gorsuch has been compared (including by me) to Antonin Scalia (https://www.thenation.com/article/republicans-stole-a-supreme-court-seat-from-obama-and-are-putting-another-scalia-in-it/), who he called “a lion of the law,” but after two-days of hearings it’s clear he’s closer to John Roberts—another handsome face with an ugly ideology.

When asked about his legal philosophy, Gorsuch invoked the mantra of Justice Byron White, saying “I decide cases.”

He refused to weigh in when asked about controversial cases like Citizens United, saying “I can’t get into politics.”

His personal views, he frequently maintained, were irrelevant to his rulings as a judge.

Yet we know enough about Gorsuch to surmise that he was nominated by Donald Trump to be a smooth-talking advocate on the bench for a far right ideology.

He was hand-picked by the Federalist Society (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/18/us/politics/neil-gorsuch-supreme-court-conservatives.html) and the Heritage Foundation (http://www.heritage.org/courts/commentary/closer-look-neil-gorsuch-excellent-choice-the-supreme-court).

He has close ties to a conservative billionaire (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/14/us/politics/neil-gorsuch-supreme-court.html) and

has praised one of the GOP’s most notorious voter suppression advocates (https://www.thenation.com/article/in-emails-neil-gorsuch-praised-a-leading-republican-activist-behind-voter-suppression-efforts/).

He’s criticized liberals for challenging gay marriage bans (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/213590/liberalsnlawsuits-joseph-6) in the courts.

In the Bush Administration, he praised the Guantanamo prison (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/15/us/politics/neil-gorsuch-torture-guantanamo-bay.html) and defended harsh anti-terror policies.

As a judge, he joined the Hobby Lobby (https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/03/gorsuchs-selective-view-of-religious-freedom/520104/) decision restricting a woman’s right to choose and

ruled against a truck driver (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/03/neil_gorsuch_s_arrogant_frozen_trucker_opinion_sho ws_he_wants_to_be_like.html) who abandoned his trailer in subzero temperatures after it broke down.

He’s consistently favored corporate power (https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/02/21/neil-gorsuch-always-sides-with-big-business-big-donors-and-big-bosses/?utm_term=.b3808f49fa7f) and corporate influence in the political process.

In fact, a review of his opinions suggests he will be more conservative (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/31/us/politics/trump-supreme-court-nominee.html) than Roberts and Alito, second only to Justice Thomas.

https://www.thenation.com/article/neil-gorsuch-is-not-another-scalia-hes-the-next-john-roberts/

[Spurminator]

The nomination was still stolen from Obama. It should have been Garland.

No disagreement. Still, considering... Could have been a lot worse.

[rmt]

Maybe liberals should see it as no matter who replaced Scalia, chances are the SC has shifted (a bit) leftward.

[Splits]

Maybe liberals should see it as no matter who replaced Scalia, chances are the SC has shifted (a bit) leftward.

Or maybe you should shut your cunthole

[pgardn]

After listening to much of the confirmation hearing today, I think we could've done a lot worse than Gorsuch.

Seems reasonable and fair. Made me wish more judges would run for Congress or Executive Office.


Agreed.

[boutons_deux]

Maybe liberals should see it as no matter who replaced Scalia, chances are the SC has shifted (a bit) leftward.

not at all, Gorsuch will vote 100% of the time with the other 4 VRWC stooges.

[Th'Pusher]

No disagreement. Still, considering... Could have been a lot worse.

I actually like Schumer's latest approach - hold off on confirmation until the FBI investigation into the Trump campaign's potential collusion with Russian interference in the US election is complete. Republicans logic for opposing Garland was that Obama was only going to be president for a year...following that same logic, we need to know the outcome of this investigation before proceeding with a lifetime appointment to the SCOTUS .

[CosmicCowboy]

Lol schumer is an impotent broke dick. The confirmation will happen.

[mavsfan1000]

I actually like Schumer's latest approach - hold off on confirmation until the FBI investigation into the Trump campaign's potential collusion with Russian interference in the US election is complete. Republicans logic for opposing Garland was that Obama was only going to be president for a year...following that same logic, we need to know the outcome of this investigation before proceeding with a lifetime appointment to the SCOTUS .
:lol He will be bitterly disappointed. No collusion.

[IceColdBrewski]

The nomination was still stolen from Obama. It should have been Garland.

It was refreshing to see so many on the left crying about it today. Stay salty. Time for Dems to bend over and take it for a while.

[Th'Pusher]

Lol schumer is an impotent broke dick. The confirmation will happen.

Without invoking the nuclear option?

[Th'Pusher]

It was refreshing to see so many on the left crying about it today. Stay salty. Time for Dems to bend over and take it for a while.

Take what?

[baseline bum]

It was refreshing to see so many on the left crying about it today. Stay salty. Time for Dems to bend over and take it for a while.

You're getting the dick too faggot

[Th'Pusher]

:lol He will be bitterly disappointed. No collusion.

Ok. But just to be safe, let's hold off on confirming his SCOTUS nominee untill we see the result of the investigation.

You wouldn't have a problem with simply collecting all the fact before making such an impactful decision, would you mavsfan1000?

[baseline bum]

Ok. But just to be safe, let's hold off on confirming his SCOTUS nominee untill we see the result of the investigation.

You wouldn't have a problem with simply collecting all the fact before making such an impactful decision, would you mavsfan1000?

It sounds like the investigation will take years. I would just filibuster since the GOP stole the nomination.

[rmt]

not at all, Gorsuch will vote 100% of the time with the other 4 VRWC stooges.

You know they don't vote lockstep - look at Roberts TWICE with Obamacare.

[mavsfan1000]

It sounds like the investigation will take years. I would just filibuster since the GOP stole the nomination.
WE didn't steal anything. Just following the rules that one of the Democrats created.

[Spurminator]

It was refreshing to see so many on the left crying about it today. Stay salty. Time for Dems to bend over and take it for a while.

Junior Varsity Cheerleader weighing in. :cheer :cheer

[baseline bum]

WE didn't steal anything. Just following the rules that one of the Democrats created.

The Democrats not only allowed hearings to proceed in Reagan's lame duck year, they confirmed his nomination. The GOP stole that appointment.

[mavsfan1000]

The Democrats not only allowed hearings to proceed in Reagan's lame duck year, they confirmed his nomination. The GOP stole that appointment.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/feb/22/joe-bidens-1992-opposition-to-lame-duck-supreme-co/

[Splits]

lol washingtontimes.com fake news

[spurraider21]

After listening to much of the confirmation hearing today, I think we could've done a lot worse than Gorsuch.

Seems reasonable and fair. Made me wish more judges would run for Congress or Executive Office.every justice sounds exactly the same... it's a bunch of canned phrases

- i just apply the law to the facts
- i only apply the law, i dont make law, i respect the separation of powers
- i treat every party in every case equally
- i never in my dreams thought i'd be sitting here today
- i never bring political beliefs into my decision making on the bench

but yeah at least he's composed and not totally unhinged, though i dont really remember the last time we've had a justice nominee that was

he's certainly qualified, though

[spurraider21]

WE didn't steal anything. Just following the rules that one of the Democrats created.


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/feb/22/joe-bidens-1992-opposition-to-lame-duck-supreme-co/it's a situation that never even arose, as there were no vacancies during bush's last year

[spurraider21]

The Democrats not only allowed hearings to proceed in Reagan's lame duck year, they confirmed his nomination. The GOP stole that appointment.kinda. he made the nomination in november '87, was confirmed in february '88. election was that following november

[mavsfan1000]

it's a situation that never even arose, as there were no vacancies during bush's last year
Regardless, Biden didn't consider future harm to his party with that decision. But I actually agree with his decision on that.

[Th'Pusher]

Regardless, Biden didn't consider future harm to his party with that decision. But I actually agree with his decision on that.

Yeah. When Donald is in the last year of his presidency and RBG croaks, I'm sure you'll be the first in line saying "calm down everyone. We have to be consistent. let's wait for the next president to nominate her replacement."

:lol

[boutons_deux]

His HUGE LIE was that judges are neither Dem or Repug.

qualified? yes, to be another VRWC/BigCorp/oligarchy stooge, screwing the 99% in every vote.

[mavsfan1000]

His HUGE LIE was that judges are neither Dem or Repug.

qualified? yes, to be another VRWC/BigCorp/oligarchy stooge, screwing the 99% in every vote.
Yep they are either crooked or not. And his face is a face of a fair judge. Al Frankton is a face of crooked.

[boutons_deux]

extreme rightwing sociopath Gorsuch screwed by ... extreme rightwing sociopath John Roberts! :lol

Gorsuch Hearing Turns To New SCOTUS Decision Undercutting His Reasoning

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/gorsuch-supreme-court-case?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+tpm-news+%28TPMNews%29

[boutons_deux]

Al Franken’s grilling of Gorsuch exposes the heartless cruelty behind conservative legal philosophy

Comic turned senator rips apart Gorsuch's infamous "frozen trucker" opinion. If only other Democrats would follow

In a few short minutes of questioning Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch on Tuesday, Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn.,

exposed the utter absurdity of an elaborate legal fiction that conservatives have spent decades constructing.

That fiction is meant to place them unreachably beyond any possible question, no matter how ludicrous, cruel or unjust their rulings might be.

Franken’s questioning concerned the notorious “frozen trucker” case, TransAm Trucking v. Dept. of Labor.

A black-robed judge in the warm comfort of his chambers decides that a trucker should have meekly accepted freezing to death (alone in his truck, in midwinter, in the middle of the night), and there’s nothing anyone can do about it. That is conservative jurisprudence in a nutshell. It’s reason enough to not merely reject Neil Gorsuch but also spurn any judge who would justify himself and his rulings with similar rhetoric — like John Roberts before him — of simply, heartlessly interpreting the law the only way he could, by “calling balls and strikes.”

Throughout the proceedings, Gorsuch was the only judge at any level who thought Maddin should have risked death or been fired. That’s what Franken honed in on, dramatizing Maddin’s plight, going through it step by step. After Maddin made a stop at about 11 p.m. on the night in question, he noticed his brakes had frozen. He called for repairs. Franken took it from there.

The dispatcher says wait, hang on there. OK, couple hours goes by, the heater is not working in his cab, it’s 14 below zero, . . . 14 below zero. He calls in and says, ‘My feet, I can’t feel my feet. I can’t feel my feet, my torso, I’m beginning not to be able to feel my torso,’ and they say, ‘Hang on, hang on, wait for us.’ OK, now he actually falls asleep, and at 1:18 a.m., his cousin I think calls . . . and wakes him up, and his cousin says that he is slurring his speech. . . . Now, the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota says that is hypothermia, and if you fall asleep in 14-below-zero weather you can freeze to death. You can die.


He calls them back, he calls them back and his supervisor says, ‘Wait. You gotta wait.’

So he has a couple choices here, wait or take the trailer out, with frozen brakes, onto the interstate.


Doing that, Franken observed, would have put others’ lives at risk as well as Maddin’s own, since without reliable brakes he could only drive 10 to 15 miles per hour. “So what’s that like on an interstate?” Franken asked Gorsuch. “Someone’s going 75 miles an hour, they come over a hill, and slam into that trailer.”

Then there was Maddin’s hypothermia to consider.

“He’s a little woozy. . . . I don’t think you’d want to be on the road with him, would you, Judge?” Franken asked.

Gorsuch stuttered but did not reply.

“You would? Or not?” Franken pressed. “It’s really easy: Yes or no, would you like to be on the road with him?”

After a bit more back and forth, Gorsuch finally admitted the obvious: “I don’t think I would.”

Franken then wound up his recounting of the case. “He gets fired. And the rest of the judges all go, ‘That’s ridiculous; you can’t fire a guy for doing that.’ There were two safety issues here, . . . the possibility of freezing to death or driving with that rig in a very dangerous way.”

Then Franken asked Gorsuch another simple question: “Which would you have chosen? Which would you have done?

Gorsuch replied, in his best law-school patronizing manner, “Oh, Senator, I don’t know what I would’ve done if I were in his shoes, and I don’t blame him at all for a moment for doing what he did do. I empathize with him entirely.” Which clearly is no answer.

So Franken pressed him again: “OK, we [have] been talking about this case [and] you haven’t decided what you would have done?

Haven’t thought for a second what you would have done in his case?”

“You don’t know what you would’ve done,” Franken summed up for him.

“OK, I’ll tell you what I would’ve done. I would’ve done exactly what he did. And I think everybody here would’ve done exactly what he did.

And I think that’s an easy answer.

Frankly, I don’t know why you had difficulty answering that.”

http://www.salon.com/2017/03/22/al-frankens-grilling-of-gorsuch-exposes-the-heartless-cruelty-behind-conservative-legal-philosophy/

OUCH.

I'm sure the Kock Bros/VRWC will spend many $Ms trying defeat Franken.

===================

Here's great destruction of "textualism", and "strict constructionism".

Gorsuch said he would have helped the frozen driver if the law text, had been written that way.

But he was forced BY THE TEXT (and no CONtext) to dissent that the trucker should freeze to death and/or get on the highway with his big rig's frozen brakes.

Why Scalia's "strict constructionist” label is about politics, not the Constitution


http://www.vox.com/conversations/2017/3/21/14990732/neil-gorsuch-scalia-supreme-court-nomination-strict-constructionism

To repeat, Gorsuch's first day BIG LIE was that judges are not Dem or Repug, just apolitical judges. :lol

That's why Repugs refused for nearly a year to even talk to a Dem knitter's nominee. :lol

[SnakeBoy]

The Democrats not only allowed hearings to proceed in Reagan's lame duck year, they confirmed his nomination. The GOP stole that appointment.

Elections have consequences. Maybe Democrats will do better lead by Pelosi/Schumer than they did under Pelosi/Reid leadership.

[spurraider21]

Elections have consequences. Maybe Democrats will do better lead by Pelosi/Schumer than they did under Pelosi/Reid leadership.
that has nothing to do with his point

[baseline bum]

that has nothing to do with his point

SnakeBoy has become such a Trumper after he hated him until November 9th. It's obvious the animosity was only because he thought Dear Leader couldn't beat Clinton.

[boutons_deux]

No disagreement. Still, considering... Could have been a lot worse.

is, or will be a lot worse. Dems don't have the spines to out-crazy the Repugs.

America will be screwed by 5-4 or 6-3 VRWC votes for decades.

[boutons_deux]

Chucky S announces filibuster of Such judicial Gore.

Will Repugs nuke the filibuster?

[boutons_deux]

Gorsuch wrote The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia, a book that describes how to defeat medical aid-in-dying laws.

Gorsuch refused to recant his earlier vocal criticism of medical aid in dying. Not only that, but the judge mentioned some of the same arguments our opponents have been using for years.

[Spurminator]

One of the "consequences" of a Presidential Election used to be that a justice nominated for SCOTUS by the winner received a congressional hearing.

[boutons_deux]

One of the "consequences" of a Presidential Election used to be that a justice nominated for SCOTUS by the winner received a congressional hearing.

That was before the VRWC/BigCorp/1% oligarchy stole, owned, operated America for themselves.

[spurraider21]

was pretty cool to see Dean (well, recently retired) Deanell Tacha of Pepperdine Law testify in today's hearing.

[mavsfan1000]

Neil Gorsuch will be awesome! Great pick! :tu

[boutons_deux]

Why Is Dark Money Spending so Much on Neil Gorsuch?

One of the most remarkable moments (https://www.democracynow.org/2017/3/22/neil_gorsuch_backed_by_10_of) during Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch's confirmation hearings came when Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island, questioned Gorsuch about the role of money in politics.

Noting that “dark money” groups had spent around $7 million to defeat Merrick Garland, President Obama’s ill-fated nominee, and have now spent $10 million to support Gorsuch, Whitehouse asked what ideological bent had endeared him to this group of secret donors.

After all, Gorsuch insisted that as a justice he would remain independent from outside pressure.

“I’m trying to figure out what they see in you that makes that $17 million delta worth their spending,”

Whitehouse said. “Do you have any answer to that?”

“You’d have to ask them,” Gorsuch replied, tersely. :lol a FUCKING LIAR, a pro-oligarchy VRWC stooge

“I can’t, because I don’t know who they are,” Whitehouse shot back. “It’s just a front group.”

The moment underscored how wealthy, anonymous donors can sway an election.

It also underscored the significance of this Supreme Court pick.

With the Court’s current ideological deadlock at 4-4, the question that hovered over the exchange was whether this influx of dark money would influence Gorsuch, or

would he, in fact, be capable of complete independence? :lol HELL FUCKING NO

http://progressive.org/dispatches/zephyr-teachout-on-gorsuch/

[boutons_deux]

 Yes, Dems Should Block Gorsuch While the FBI’s Trump Probe Goes on

Mitch McConnell obstructed not only Obama’s Supreme Court pick but his effort to alert voters about Russian election hacking—inextricably tying these issues together.


https://www.thenation.com/article/yes-dems-should-block-gorsuch-while-the-fbis-trump-probe-goes-on/

[boutons_deux]

Neil Gorsuch Shouldn’t Be Confirmed Until Donald Trump’s Presidential Legitimacy Is Proved

Neil Gorsuch shouldn’t be confirmed until Trump comes clean.

Nominating a new justice of the Supreme Court is one of the most important responsibilities of a president. But until we know Trump is a legitimate president, he can’t be presumed to have the authority to make such a pick.

First, we need to be sure Trump didn’t collaborate with Russia to rig the election. The FBI says it has enough “credible evidence” that Trump aides colluded with Russian operatives to affect the outcome of the election, to move forward with a full-scale investigation.

At the least, Gorsuch shouldn’t be considered until that investigation is concluded.

We also need to be sure Trump isn’t motivated by financial conflicts of interest around the world.

We need to see his tax records to know he doesn’t owe a bundle to Russian oligarchs or big global banks that would affect his judgement.

http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/item/gorsuch_shouldnt_be_confirmed_until_we_know_the_pe rson_20170327?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%253A+Truthdig+Truthdig%253A+Dril ling+Beneath+the+Headlines

That's a great strategy. Do the Dems have the spine to do it?

Repugs would nuke the filibuster, anyway.

[CosmicCowboy]

Lol boutons. Credible evidence of collusion :lol

[mavsfan1000]

Lol boutons. Credible evidence of collusion :lol
Boutons loves fake news.

[boutons_deux]

GOP Dares Call Gorsuch Filibuster Unprecedented—While Ignoring Their Blockade Of Garland

they are claiming that Democrats are the norm-breakers for threatening to filibuster President Trump’s own Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch.

Republicans are in a full-scale pressure campaign to convince 41 Democrats not to vote against invoking “cloture” on the debate over Gorsuch, which would prevent him from moving to a floor vote, where he would need only a simple majority to be confirmed. GOP leaders have suggested, if that occurred, they would move to “nuke” the filibuster on Supreme Court nominees.

They’re correct in that typically a cloture vote is not called for a Supreme Court nominees, having occurred only four times in the modern era, according to the Washington Post (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/02/02/senate-democrats-misleading-language-on-a-60-vote-standard-for-supremer-court-nominees/?tid=a_inl&utm_term=.60a1325f4844).

Most nominees were able to go directly from committee to an up-or-down simple majority vote on the Senate floor. Democrats’ current rhetoric about a 60-vote standard is a twisting of how things have usually happened.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/gop-dares-call-gorsuch-filibuster-unprecedented-while-ignoring-their-blockade-of-garland?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+tpm-news+%28TPMNews%29

[boutons_deux]

Top Dem Rips Senate GOP Saying Every Single One of Them Blocked Obama’s Nominee for a Year

"Let me repeat that:

only three of the current senators on the Republican side voted for either one of President Obama's confirmed nominees.

Most voted for neither."

"And every single one of them lined up to conduct an 'audacious' partisan blockade of Merrick Garland,"

the top Democrat reminded Republicans.

http://www.politicususa.com/2017/03/30/top-dem-slams-senate-republicans-single-blocked-obamas-nominee-year.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+politicususa%2FfJAl+%28Politi cus+USA+%29

[boutons_deux]

With Gorsuch in mind, McCain pretends debilitating ill-will in the Senate appeared out of the blue (http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/3/30/1648647/-With-Gorsuch-in-mind-McCain-pretends-debilitating-ill-will-in-the-Senate-appeared-out-of-the-blue)

McCain in the pre-election vanguard of Republicans last October saying the party would sandbag (http://www.npr.org/2016/10/17/498328520/sen-mccain-says-republicans-will-block-all-court-nominations-if-clinton-wins) any Supreme Court nominations made by Hillary Clinton if she were to win the presidency.

"I promise you that we will be united against any Supreme Court nominee that Hillary Clinton, if she were president, would put up,”

“The Senate has changed,” said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who’s fought rules changes in the past. “You can’t do what we used to do, what I did in the past. There’s too much ill will.”

Ill will did not arrive in the Senate on a puff stray wind. Its genesis was not spontaneous.

The GOP’s record of scorched-earth politics and its eight-year-long to everything on Obama’s agenda was the catalyst.

McCain’s act long ago grew tedious. And now it’s just pathetic

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2017/03/30/1648647/-With-Gorsuch-in-mind-McCain-pretends-debilitating-ill-will-in-the-Senate-appeared-out-of-the-blue?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+dailykos%2Findex+%28Daily+Kos %29

Repugs can obstruct anything and everything, but wonder why Dems want to obstruct? :lol

[baseline bum]

So the Democrats just got to 41 votes against Gorsuch, and will filibuster his ass. Anyone think there is any chance McConnell doesn't invoke the nuclear option? It has been such a valuable rule for the GOP in the past.

[boutons_deux]

Neil Gorsuch Accused of Plagiarism Days Before Confirmation Vote

Republicans have painted Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch as a man whose character and legal scholarship are unimpeachable, but on Tuesday night he became the latest Trump pick (http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/01/monica-crowley-wont-join-trump-administration.html) to be accused of plagiarism.

(http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/gorsuch-writings-supreme-court-236891)Politico (http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/gorsuch-writings-supreme-court-236891) and BuzzFeed (https://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/a-short-section-in-neil-gorsuchs-2006-book-appears-to-be?utm_term=.md4l8AZAw%23.cpjJvzez6) reported that in several sections of Gorsuch’s 2006 book The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia, and in an article on the same subject published in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy in 2000, he repeats the facts, words, and structures of other sources without citing them.

The most egregious example is a summary in Gorsuch’s book of a 1982 case involving a baby with Down syndrome. Gorsuch repeats about 11 sentences from an Indiana Law Journal article by Abigail Lawlis Kuzma, omitting and altering only a few words and sentences. Rather than giving Kuzma attribution, Gorsuch cites the same sources that she relied on.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/04/neil-gorsuch-accused-of-plagiarizing-parts-of-his-book.html

[pgardn]

Read this instead:

The actual Politico article for a much more accurate description. No wonder Boots did not use this.

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/gorsuch-writings-supreme-court-236891

[boutons_deux]

Read this instead:

The actual Politico article for a much more accurate description. No wonder Boots did not use this.

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/gorsuch-writings-supreme-court-236891

G F Y

[boutons_deux]

Mitch McConnell Goes ‘Nuclear’ To Break Supreme Court Filibuster

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and his fellow Republicans pulled the nuclear rules trigger Thursday, moving to end filibusters for Supreme Court justices

He began that by launching a string of procedural moves that allows a Senate majority to change longstanding rules with a simple majority, or 51 votes.

Democrats responded by trying to adjourn the Senate, but McConnell was expected to triumph by this afternoon.

It normally takes a two-thirds vote to jettison rules in the middle of a session, and using procedural tools to do it is a rare step that generates extreme ill-will in historically deliberative body.

Gorsuch is expected to be confirmed on Friday.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/republicans-nuclear-option_us_58e664ace4b05894715eabda?utm_medium=emai l&utm_campaign=Mitch%20McConnell%20Goes%20Nuclear%20 To%20Break%20Supreme%20Court%20Filibuster&utm_content=Mitch%20McConnell%20Goes%20Nuclear%20T o%20Break%20Supreme%20Court%20Filibuster+CID_75934 ae436ac548bfee8c17651a035a5&utm_source=Email%20marketing%20software&utm_term=Read%20More&

Repugs fuck America into unfuckability.

[Adam Lambert]

fuck republicans.

[tlongII]

#Winning!

[MultiTroll]

Why didn't the Demons go *nuclear* when the Repugs blocked Garland?
Tried to but not enough votes?

Either way, why even support any of these phucktard politicians?
Freaking jerking off game playing retards.

[rmt]

Why didn't the Demons go *nuclear* when the Repugs blocked Garland?
Tried to but not enough votes?

Either way, why even support any of these phucktard politicians?
Freaking jerking off game playing retards.

The Dems did not have the majority in the Senate to go nuclear when Garland was nominated.

[boutons_deux]

One of the key objectives of the 60 vote rule was to obtain "bi partisan" agreement to get to 60 when a party didn't have 60

with 51, that objective is gone, polarizing the Senate even more.

Fucking Confederate bitch McConnell, fucking up the Senate

[rmt]

One of the key objectives of the 60 vote rule was to obtain "bi partisan" agreement to get to 60 when a party didn't have 60

with 51, that objective is gone, polarizing the Senate even more.

Fucking Confederate bitch McConnell, fucking up the Senate

Clarence Thomas was confirmed with 52-48 votes and Alito with 58-42 votes. It hasn't always been a 60 vote threshold.

Ginsberg had a 96-3 vote - I guess those repub senators were more "bi-partisan" that the "resist" Dems of today.

[baseline bum]

Clarence Thomas was confirmed with 52-48 votes and Alito with 58-42 votes. It hasn't always been a 60 vote threshold.

Ginsberg had a 96-3 vote - I guess those repub senators were more "bi-partisan" that the "resist" Dems of today.

LOL republicans calling the democrats obstructionists after not holding a vote for almost a year after Scalia's post went vacant. Remember when the democrat senate confirmed Kennedy 97-0 in Reagan's lame duck year?

[rmt]

The point is that the Senate was not the partisan group back then (for both Ginsberg and Kennedy) that it is today, and 60 is not some magic number.

[baseline bum]

The point is that the Senate was not the partisan group back then (for both Ginsberg and Kennedy) that it is today, and 60 is not some magic number.

The point is you're butthurt about democrats trying to pull the same thing republicans had been doing for 8 years.

[AaronY]

https://pbs-h2.twimg.com/media/C8v-bOGVYAAqlPF.jpg

[AaronY]

Democrats would have nuked it too if they won the White House. Would have had to.

[CosmicCowboy]

Democrats would have nuked it too if they won the White House. Would have had to.

?????

They couldn't when republicans had the majority.

BTW...The meltdowns today are boutons caliber...fucking hilarious

[spurraider21]

?????

They couldn't when republicans had the majority.

BTW...The meltdowns today are boutons caliber...fucking hilariousyeah! liberal tears! fuck yeah! most important thing!

[rmt]

The point is you're butthurt about democrats trying to pull the same thing republicans had been doing for 8 years.

In the past 8 years, Sotomayor (68-31) and Kagan (63-37) - not as partisan as now. Butthurt - I don't think so. In the end, Gorsuch will be on the Supreme Court. Hopefully, Kennedy will announce retirement this summer, and Trump will nominate another 40-something conservative to the SC.

[Spurminator]

Clarence Thomas was confirmed with 52-48 votes and Alito with 58-42 votes. It hasn't always been a 60 vote threshold.

Not exactly compelling examples.

And there's never been a 60 vote threshold for SCOTUS justices. The 60 vote threshold is to break a filibuster.

[Reck]

Will be hilarious when the democrats regain the senate and they put in an ultra far left justice to piss these faggots off when one of these old hags die off.

[baseline bum]

In the past 8 years, Sotomayor (68-31) and Kagan (63-37) - not as partisan as now. Butthurt - I don't think so. In the end, Gorsuch will be on the Supreme Court. Hopefully, Kennedy will announce retirement this summer, and Trump will nominate another 40-something conservative to the SC.

Yeah it is butthurt son. LOL Kagan got a whopping 4 GOP votes and you're whining about the DNC being partisan. You teabaggers started this shit and now you faggots want to play the victim card.

[CosmicCowboy]

Yeah it is butthurt son. LOL Kagan got a whopping 4 GOP votes and you're whining about the DNC being partisan. You teabaggers started this shit and now you faggots want to play the victim card.

Considering he will be confirmed tomorrow I don't see any republican victims here.

The tears all seem to be coming from the left.

[CosmicCowboy]

Will be hilarious when the democrats regain the senate and they put in an ultra far left justice to piss these faggots off when one of these old hags die off.

Lol we have 4 years to take Ginsberg quail hunting...:lol

[pgardn]

It was a huge mistake not giving Obama's man at least a hearing.
Apparently the presidency has a magic cutoff date on SC nominees. You don't get a full term. It's the new rule.

[pgardn]

Considering he will be confirmed tomorrow I don't see any republican victims here.

The tears all seem to be coming from the left.

They will ibe given license to destroy. And you think they are crying... They are daring and don't care. They get to punch below the belt later. This is good for no one.

[baseline bum]

Considering he will be confirmed tomorrow I don't see any republican victims here.

The tears all seem to be coming from the left.

Chink black jamaican sockpuppet has done plenty of whining in this thread.

[baseline bum]

They will ibe given license to destroy. And you think they are crying... They are daring and don't care. They get to punch below the belt later. This is good for no one.

Meh the filibuster has never been a friend to the DNC.

[AaronY]

?????

They couldn't when republicans had the majority.

BTW...The meltdowns today are boutons caliber...fucking hilarious
Well if they did better in the election and won they might have had a majority in the senate.

Certainly not me melting down if that's who you're talking about. My point was dems would do same thing if circumstances were flipped actually.

[Fabbs]

Who the f ever coined the term "nuclear" for this lazy bullshit?

Why doesn't the media term Mitch McConnel went into "Super Jerk off mode"?
People out here working for a living while these phucksticks are jacking off.

[pgardn]

G F Y

Oh dear...

[CosmicCowboy]

It was a huge mistake not giving Obama's man at least a hearing.
Apparently the presidency has a magic cutoff date on SC nominees. You don't get a full term. It's the new rule.

How was it a huge mistake?

Nobody except political junkies even noticed.

Democrats swore the Republicans would be smashed in the 2016 elections because of it and it simply didn't happen.

Same thing will happen in 2018. Nobody in middle america gives a shit.

[pgardn]

How was it a huge mistake?

Nobody except political junkies even noticed.

Democrats swore the Republicans would be smashed in the 2016 elections because of it and it simply didn't happen.

Same thing will happen in 2018. Nobody in middle america gives a shit.

Giving the opposition an excuse to make the process completely partisan.

As for the rest, Same could be said of any topic on this board. Until the vast number of mining jobs created by the coal industry fling us into competitive nothingness. And in 2020... uhohs at this rate. I know the stock market rising has got the ex-miners all excited.

[CosmicCowboy]

Ginsberg is 84 and showing signs of dementia.. Think she can hold out for 4 years? :lol

[baseline bum]

How was it a huge mistake?

Nobody except political junkies even noticed.

Democrats swore the Republicans would be smashed in the 2016 elections because of it and it simply didn't happen.

Same thing will happen in 2018. Nobody in middle america gives a shit.

Trump's approval rate is in the thirties. You think people aren't noticing how terrible a president he is?

[CosmicCowboy]

Trump's approval rate is in the thirties. You think people aren't noticing how terrible a president he is?

That has very little to do with Senate elections which is the topic. Democrats have three times the senators up for reelection in 2018 (25!) than the Republicans do. They not only have to win all those seats but knock off 5 of 8 Republicans up for reelection to get control.

[baseline bum]

That has very little to do with Senate elections which is the topic. Democrats have three times the senators up for reelection in 2018 than the Republicans do. They not only have to win all those seats but knock off 5 of 8 Republicans up for reelection to get control.

How does an unpopular president have nothing to do with senate elections? When Obama's numbers were at Trump's level the Democrats lost Massachusetts of all places. With Obama's numbers like Trump's the DNC got massacred in the 2010 midterms. When Bush's numbers were like this the GOP got massacred in the 2006 midterms. Trump is now the face of Washington, not Obama. And people hate Washington, especially right at this moment. It's pretty early to call victory.

[CosmicCowboy]

How does an unpopular president have nothing to do with senate elections? When Obama's numbers were at Trump's level the Democrats lost Massachusetts of all places. With Obama's numbers like Trump's the DNC got massacred in the 2010 midterms. When Bush's numbers were like this the GOP got massacred in the 2006 midterms. Trump is now the face of Washington, not Obama. And people hate Washington, especially right at this moment. It's pretty early to call victory.

I'm not calling victory. Just saying its a hella steep hill for Democrats to climb.

Fix the VA, get some tax simplification/reform, tweak Obamacare, and the economy keep kicking ass and his popularity may not be so bad in 2 years.

I agree the guy is a dick. :lol

[baseline bum]

I'm not calling victory. Just saying its a hella steep hill for Democrats to climb.

Fix the VA, get some tax simplification/reform, tweak Obamacare, and the economy keep kicking ass and his popularity may not be so bad in 2 years.

I agree the guy is a dick. :lol

He has been a really ineffective president and the GOP won't have the benefit of being able to run against Clinton like they could in 2016. The only bad guy the public is going to really recognize in the 2018 races is Trump. I think it's definitely more likely the GOP retains control of the senate, but I don't think it would be a shock to see them lose their majority. Just like I wasn't shocked by Trump's win. The states aren't a bunch of coin flips just like they weren't in last year's election, politics is all national. It's why the DNC should continue to keep pushing the Russian collusion investigation no matter what. Just like the GOP kept pushing with Benghazi and it killed Clinton's favorability ratings despite there being nothing there.

[pgardn]

Ginsberg is 84 and showing signs of dementia.. Think she can hold out for 4 years? :lol

I am young.
The tide will turn.
Thanks for a world in which the Supreme Court will one day fully recognize 13 different sex types in humans.
You will be dead with Thread, but think of the grand children.

[rmt]

I am young.
The tide will turn.
Thanks for a world in which the Supreme Court will one day fully recognize 13 different sex types in humans.
You will be dead with Thread, but think of the grand children.

I wonder if there are 13 different sex types in other species too or is this something special only for humans? And I guess my grandchildren will be taught about these 13 different sex types in kindergarten - better prepare myself to homeschool them too.

[spurraider21]

its funny with how big an issue this gender shit has become, people still fail to differentiate sex and gender

[boutons_deux]

its funny with how big an issue this gender shit has become, people still fail to differentiate sex and gender

It's you rightwingnutjobs and Christian Taliban haters of LGBT who made it an issue.

[pgardn]

I wonder if there are 13 different sex types in other species too or is this something special only for humans? And I guess my grandchildren will be taught about these 13 different sex types in kindergarten - better prepare myself to homeschool them too.

Yes.

In a certain protist.

[pgardn]

its funny with how big an issue this gender shit has become, people still fail to differentiate sex and gender

You mean because they are unrelated...

[spurraider21]

You mean because they are unrelated...no, because they aren't interchangeable. arteries and veins are "related" but we can tell those apart too. arms and legs. psychopathy and sociopathy

[spurraider21]

It's you rightwingnutjobs and Christian Taliban haters of LGBT who made it an issue.YOU LIE

GFY

[rmt]

It's you rightwingnutjobs and Christian Taliban haters of LGBT who made it an issue.

13 different sex types is something I don't even want to think/know about, much less make an issue of - that just boggles my mind.

[pgardn]

13 different sex types is something I don't even want to think/know about, much less make an issue of - that just boggles my mind.

What?

There are very specific rules about which sex type can have offspring with the others. And when they just go asexual. It's a fascinating evolutionary topic I would think.

[pgardn]

no, because they aren't interchangeable. arteries and veins are "related" but we can tell those apart too. arms and legs. psychopathy and sociopathy

So the rules.

The nomenclature.

If a transgender female has sex and then marries a Greek eunuch what is this called?

[spurraider21]

So the rules.

The nomenclature.

If a transgender female has sex and then marries a Greek eunuch what is this called?
It's not nomenclature. Gender and sex are inherently different characteristics

[Spurminator]

13 different sex types is something I don't even want to think/know about, much less make an issue of - that just boggles my mind.

Then quit voting people who cause you to hear about it by writing legislation on it.