Here's Why We Need Conservative Justices On The Court

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Oct 6, 2008
124,863
60,200
2,300
Brooklyn, NY
1. In Medellin vs. Texas (2008), the International Court of Justice ruled that Texas could not execute a convicted murderer. The Supreme Court ruled that decisions of the International Court of Justice are not binding domestic law. The vote was 6 to 3 (Souter, Breyer, Ginsburg). How long before the Supreme Court throws out the Constitution?



2. In May, 2009 Spanish judges are boldly declaring their authority to prosecute high-ranking government officials in the United States, but our government has not protested this nonsense, akin to piracy, and has, in fact, accepted an internationalist atmosphere which makes this sort of thing seem plausible.
From a speech by Jeremy Rabkin, professor of law, George Mason School of Law, June 5, 2009 at Washington, D.C.




3. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg defended the use of foreign law by American judges,...American hostility to the consideration of foreign law, she said, “is a passing phase.”
Ginsburg Shares Views on Influence of Foreign Law on Her Court, and Vice Versa




4. "Obama Pursuing Climate Accord in Lieu of Treaty

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is working to forge a sweeping international climate change agreement to compel nations to cut their planet-warming fossil fuel emissions, but without ratification from Congress.

b. ....to be signed at a United Nations summit meeting in 2015 in Paris,... a deal to commit some of the world’s largest economies to enact laws to reduce their carbon pollution.

c. But under the Constitution, a president may enter into a legally binding treaty only if it is approved by a two-thirds majority of the Senate.

d. To sidestep that requirement, President Obama’s climate negotiators are devising what they call a “politically binding” deal....

e. Countries would be legally required to enact domestic climate change policies....channel money to poor countries to help them adapt to climate change."
Obama Pursuing Climate Accord in Lieu of Treaty






5. Yesterday:

“President Trump let the world know at the U.N. today that he’s sticking to his vision of America-first sovereignty, rather than cede power to U.N. multilateralists — to their great dismay. Too bad for them: Mr. Trump’s approach is working.

“America will always choose independence and cooperation over global governance, control and domination,” he told world leaders at the UN General Assembly. This country “will not tell you how to live or work or worship.” But we “ask that you honor our sovereignty in return.”

…vowing to “never surrender America’s sovereignty to an unelected, unaccountable, global bureaucracy.” Globalists at U.N. Rage at Trump




No wonder the Left/Democrats/Liberals are fighting, tooth and nail, against Trump.....
 
1. In Medellin vs. Texas (2008), the International Court of Justice ruled that Texas could not execute a convicted murderer. The Supreme Court ruled that decisions of the International Court of Justice are not binding domestic law. The vote was 6 to 3 (Souter, Breyer, Ginsburg). How long before the Supreme Court throws out the Constitution?

Okay, you realize that if we start executing other country's citizens, they are going to start executing our citizens, right?
 
Do we really need another corporate tool? And the gutless republicans hired a woman to do their job. Sad. While republicans are bunch of sniveling cowards, even cowards know that questioning a women in the usually stupid and misogynist manner they are born with, scars their already weak image - with one exception. Guess it yet, Hillary Clinton. The hate they showed in questioning Secretary Clinton was unreal, it spread on their faces like a virus. But their base knows hate for it is their only virtue. Leave it to draft dodger Donnie, he has twitter, the cowards reply mechanism, he can talk nonsense and hide in bed. Heard Kavanaugh's favorite word in reply to being a spoiled rich boy drunk and sexual predator will be 'fair' treat me fair even though i'm gonna fuuck the working class once I get to be the fifth corporate tool.

'Injustices: The Supreme Court's History of Comforting the Comfortable and Afflicting the Afflicted by Ian Millhiser

Injustices: The Supreme Court's History of Comforting the Comfortable and Afflicting the Afflicted by Ian Millhiser

'Let’s start telling the truth about what the Supreme Court does'

Opinion | Let’s start telling the truth about what the Supreme Court does

The answer is simple and has to do with the fact that law is not anything like science — and that what the Supreme Court does has little to do with the dispassionate application of clear laws to clear facts.

The Conservative Pipeline to the Supreme Court

"A Supreme Court ruling saying a homophobic baker didn’t get a fair hearing because of his religion. Another ruling that said the Muslim travel ban had nothing to do with religion. Yet another ruling making it harder for public sector unions to do their job."

Did You Think The Gods Were Lying?
 
Do we really need another corporate tool? And the gutless republicans hired a woman to do their job. Sad. While republicans are bunch of sniveling cowards, even cowards know that questioning a women in the usually stupid and misogynist manner they are born with, scars their already weak image - with one exception. Guess it yet, Hillary Clinton. The hate they showed in questioning Secretary Clinton was unreal, it spread on their faces like a virus. But their base knows hate for it is their only virtue. Leave it to draft dodger Donnie, he has twitter, the cowards reply mechanism, he can talk nonsense and hide in bed. Heard Kavanaugh's favorite word in reply to being a spoiled rich boy drunk and sexual predator will be 'fair' treat me fair even though i'm gonna fuuck the working class once I get to be the fifth corporate tool.

'Injustices: The Supreme Court's History of Comforting the Comfortable and Afflicting the Afflicted by Ian Millhiser

Injustices: The Supreme Court's History of Comforting the Comfortable and Afflicting the Afflicted by Ian Millhiser

'Let’s start telling the truth about what the Supreme Court does'

Opinion | Let’s start telling the truth about what the Supreme Court does

The answer is simple and has to do with the fact that law is not anything like science — and that what the Supreme Court does has little to do with the dispassionate application of clear laws to clear facts.

The Conservative Pipeline to the Supreme Court

"A Supreme Court ruling saying a homophobic baker didn’t get a fair hearing because of his religion. Another ruling that said the Muslim travel ban had nothing to do with religion. Yet another ruling making it harder for public sector unions to do their job."

Did You Think The Gods Were Lying?



Since you voluntarily subscribed to this thread....yet another one that irked your Leftist sensibilities....yet ignored the import of the OP, one is led to conclude that you could find no way to deny the truth therein.


Excellent.


In effect, you've served as validation of the OP, that support for the "unelected, unaccountable, global bureaucracy” that is the UN is the political arm of the communist take-over of Western Civilization.



How lucky the United States....and the world is....that Americans chose Trump, to refresh the Founders view of our place in history.



Americans favor sovereignty.....Leftists, not so much.




Antifa 'No Trump, No Wall, No USA at all '


 
1. In Medellin vs. Texas (2008), the International Court of Justice ruled that Texas could not execute a convicted murderer. The Supreme Court ruled that decisions of the International Court of Justice are not binding domestic law. The vote was 6 to 3 (Souter, Breyer, Ginsburg). How long before the Supreme Court throws out the Constitution?

Okay, you realize that if we start executing other country's citizens, they are going to start executing our citizens, right?



What sort of moron are you, exactly???


An individual comes to the United States, commits a murder, and you say "if we start executing other country's citizens, they are going to start executing our citizens"....



Every time I think you've posted the stupidest post ever....you manage to lower the bar still further.
 
1. In Medellin vs. Texas (2008), the International Court of Justice ruled that Texas could not execute a convicted murderer. The Supreme Court ruled that decisions of the International Court of Justice are not binding domestic law. The vote was 6 to 3 (Souter, Breyer, Ginsburg). How long before the Supreme Court throws out the Constitution?

Okay, you realize that if we start executing other country's citizens, they are going to start executing our citizens, right?

If the crime they commited warrants the death penalty I dont have a problem with that.
 
The United States has long ignored international law, even treaties we signed, and expect others to follow, we ignore.

A simple thing like Extradition. We demand that people extradite the people accused of crimes to face our Justice, and when the shoe is on the other foot, at a minimum we drag that foot, and often work tirelessly to thwart the justice we purportedly hold as vital.

JFK said that there America was no better friend, and no more determined enemy. Yet, the truth is that today, we are a poor friend. Pressuring Europe to screw with Diplomatic travel, ignoring extradition requests, and conducting indefensible covert operations within the borders of our friends.

Take the case of Robert Lady. Robert Lady was a CIA station chief in Italy. He participated in the “rendition” of a man who was innocent. After five years, the man was freed from the Egyptian prison we had dumped him into. When he returned to Italy, the nation of his citizenship, the Italian Authorities were horrified to learn of what had happened. They investigated, and found that nearly a Dozen CIA agents had participated in the kidnapping of an Italian Citizen from Italian soil. They demanded extradition of these people to face justice.

We denied the request, and so Italy tried them in absentia. A trick we’ve used before. When convicted, the Italians put warrants out on Interpol. Lady was stopped in Panama trying to cross the border. We found out about this, and rushed down to Panama to pressure the Panamanians to give us Lady first. We took him and rushed him to Florida.

If you wonder why the international legal community holds us in such contempt, you need look no further than our own actions. Here again, as in most issues, the Democrats and Republicans do the same thing time and time again. Now, we are annoyed that the world is taking notice, and demanding action to end these abuses.
 
The United States has long ignored international law, even treaties we signed, and expect others to follow, we ignore.

A simple thing like Extradition. We demand that people extradite the people accused of crimes to face our Justice, and when the shoe is on the other foot, at a minimum we drag that foot, and often work tirelessly to thwart the justice we purportedly hold as vital.

JFK said that there America was no better friend, and no more determined enemy. Yet, the truth is that today, we are a poor friend. Pressuring Europe to screw with Diplomatic travel, ignoring extradition requests, and conducting indefensible covert operations within the borders of our friends.

Take the case of Robert Lady. Robert Lady was a CIA station chief in Italy. He participated in the “rendition” of a man who was innocent. After five years, the man was freed from the Egyptian prison we had dumped him into. When he returned to Italy, the nation of his citizenship, the Italian Authorities were horrified to learn of what had happened. They investigated, and found that nearly a Dozen CIA agents had participated in the kidnapping of an Italian Citizen from Italian soil. They demanded extradition of these people to face justice.

We denied the request, and so Italy tried them in absentia. A trick we’ve used before. When convicted, the Italians put warrants out on Interpol. Lady was stopped in Panama trying to cross the border. We found out about this, and rushed down to Panama to pressure the Panamanians to give us Lady first. We took him and rushed him to Florida.

If you wonder why the international legal community holds us in such contempt, you need look no further than our own actions. Here again, as in most issues, the Democrats and Republicans do the same thing time and time again. Now, we are annoyed that the world is taking notice, and demanding action to end these abuses.



Really?

So, you imagine (I almost said 'think') that America should gauge its actions vis-a-vis the international community?


What benefit did America, or the world, accrue by guaranteeing nuclear weapons to the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism?
 
1. In Medellin vs. Texas (2008), the International Court of Justice ruled that Texas could not execute a convicted murderer. The Supreme Court ruled that decisions of the International Court of Justice are not binding domestic law. The vote was 6 to 3 (Souter, Breyer, Ginsburg). How long before the Supreme Court throws out the Constitution?

Okay, you realize that if we start executing other country's citizens, they are going to start executing our citizens, right?
Climate change is execution?
 
The first thing you should do is define what a conservative is.

Today’s conservative are anti-Jesus anti-black anti-gay anti-Hispanic basically anti-minority.

Today’s conservatives against healthcare for the majority of Americans. It’s too expensive.

Today’s conservatives are fine with seeing the elderly living in poverty.

Today’s conservatives believe billionaires and corporations should pay none or next to none in taxes.

Today’s conservatives believe the United States should have an authoritarian type of government.

If you understand what a republican conservative is today then it’s obvious the kind of person they would want on the supreme court.
 
The first thing you should do is define what a conservative is.

Today’s conservative are anti-Jesus anti-black anti-gay anti-Hispanic basically anti-minority.

Today’s conservatives against healthcare for the majority of Americans. It’s too expensive.

Today’s conservatives are fine with seeing the elderly living in poverty.

Today’s conservatives believe billionaires and corporations should pay none or next to none in taxes.

Today’s conservatives believe the United States should have an authoritarian type of government.

If you understand what a republican conservative is today then it’s obvious the kind of person they would want on the supreme court.


Currently, we have the most conservative President in my lifetime.


Case in point:

"We are standing up for America and for the American people and we are also standing up for the world. This is great news for our citizens and for peace-loving people everywhere," Trump said. "We will never surrender America's sovereignty to an unelected, unaccountable, global bureaucracy. America is governed by Americans. We reject the ideology of globalism and we embrace the doctrine of patriotism."
Trump 'didn't expect' UN speech reaction he got - CNNPolitics


Please cite your objection to Trump's conservative statement.
 
1. In Medellin vs. Texas (2008), the International Court of Justice ruled that Texas could not execute a convicted murderer. The Supreme Court ruled that decisions of the International Court of Justice are not binding domestic law. The vote was 6 to 3 (Souter, Breyer, Ginsburg). How long before the Supreme Court throws out the Constitution?



2. In May, 2009 Spanish judges are boldly declaring their authority to prosecute high-ranking government officials in the United States, but our government has not protested this nonsense, akin to piracy, and has, in fact, accepted an internationalist atmosphere which makes this sort of thing seem plausible.
From a speech by Jeremy Rabkin, professor of law, George Mason School of Law, June 5, 2009 at Washington, D.C.




3. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg defended the use of foreign law by American judges,...American hostility to the consideration of foreign law, she said, “is a passing phase.”
Ginsburg Shares Views on Influence of Foreign Law on Her Court, and Vice Versa




4. "Obama Pursuing Climate Accord in Lieu of Treaty

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is working to forge a sweeping international climate change agreement to compel nations to cut their planet-warming fossil fuel emissions, but without ratification from Congress.

b. ....to be signed at a United Nations summit meeting in 2015 in Paris,... a deal to commit some of the world’s largest economies to enact laws to reduce their carbon pollution.

c. But under the Constitution, a president may enter into a legally binding treaty only if it is approved by a two-thirds majority of the Senate.

d. To sidestep that requirement, President Obama’s climate negotiators are devising what they call a “politically binding” deal....

e. Countries would be legally required to enact domestic climate change policies....channel money to poor countries to help them adapt to climate change."
Obama Pursuing Climate Accord in Lieu of Treaty






5. Yesterday:

“President Trump let the world know at the U.N. today that he’s sticking to his vision of America-first sovereignty, rather than cede power to U.N. multilateralists — to their great dismay. Too bad for them: Mr. Trump’s approach is working.

“America will always choose independence and cooperation over global governance, control and domination,” he told world leaders at the UN General Assembly. This country “will not tell you how to live or work or worship.” But we “ask that you honor our sovereignty in return.”

…vowing to “never surrender America’s sovereignty to an unelected, unaccountable, global bureaucracy.” Globalists at U.N. Rage at Trump




No wonder the Left/Democrats/Liberals are fighting, tooth and nail, against Trump.....

We are opposed to Trumpism, which everyday and in every way mirrors fascism. Trump is a danger to us and the world. He is a megalomaniac, a narcissist and an Authoritarian.

He is not a conservative, not a liberal, and in my opinion, and the opinion of many others (liberal and conservative) nuts. More precisely he does not learn from experience and acts without due consideration for the consequence of his words and actions.

That he is your idea of what a President should be, is not surprising. You have much in common with him, i.e. Narcissism.
 
The first thing you should do is define what a conservative is.

Today’s conservative are anti-Jesus anti-black anti-gay anti-Hispanic basically anti-minority.

Today’s conservatives against healthcare for the majority of Americans. It’s too expensive.

Today’s conservatives are fine with seeing the elderly living in poverty.

Today’s conservatives believe billionaires and corporations should pay none or next to none in taxes.

Today’s conservatives believe the United States should have an authoritarian type of government.

If you understand what a republican conservative is today then it’s obvious the kind of person they would want on the supreme court.


Currently, we have the most conservative President in my lifetime.


Case in point:

"We are standing up for America and for the American people and we are also standing up for the world. This is great news for our citizens and for peace-loving people everywhere," Trump said. "We will never surrender America's sovereignty to an unelected, unaccountable, global bureaucracy. America is governed by Americans. We reject the ideology of globalism and we embrace the doctrine of patriotism."
Trump 'didn't expect' UN speech reaction he got - CNNPolitics


Please cite your objection to Trump's conservative statement.
Sure no problem.
Trump goes on and on about American sovereignty and then suggested we should interfere with Venezuela, Iran, and he listed a host of other countries.

Who the fuk is he to tell other countries with they should be doing when he saying leave us alone?

It seemed so obvious to me.
 
1. In Medellin vs. Texas (2008), the International Court of Justice ruled that Texas could not execute a convicted murderer. The Supreme Court ruled that decisions of the International Court of Justice are not binding domestic law. The vote was 6 to 3 (Souter, Breyer, Ginsburg). How long before the Supreme Court throws out the Constitution?



2. In May, 2009 Spanish judges are boldly declaring their authority to prosecute high-ranking government officials in the United States, but our government has not protested this nonsense, akin to piracy, and has, in fact, accepted an internationalist atmosphere which makes this sort of thing seem plausible.
From a speech by Jeremy Rabkin, professor of law, George Mason School of Law, June 5, 2009 at Washington, D.C.




3. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg defended the use of foreign law by American judges,...American hostility to the consideration of foreign law, she said, “is a passing phase.”
Ginsburg Shares Views on Influence of Foreign Law on Her Court, and Vice Versa




4. "Obama Pursuing Climate Accord in Lieu of Treaty

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is working to forge a sweeping international climate change agreement to compel nations to cut their planet-warming fossil fuel emissions, but without ratification from Congress.

b. ....to be signed at a United Nations summit meeting in 2015 in Paris,... a deal to commit some of the world’s largest economies to enact laws to reduce their carbon pollution.

c. But under the Constitution, a president may enter into a legally binding treaty only if it is approved by a two-thirds majority of the Senate.

d. To sidestep that requirement, President Obama’s climate negotiators are devising what they call a “politically binding” deal....

e. Countries would be legally required to enact domestic climate change policies....channel money to poor countries to help them adapt to climate change."
Obama Pursuing Climate Accord in Lieu of Treaty






5. Yesterday:

“President Trump let the world know at the U.N. today that he’s sticking to his vision of America-first sovereignty, rather than cede power to U.N. multilateralists — to their great dismay. Too bad for them: Mr. Trump’s approach is working.

“America will always choose independence and cooperation over global governance, control and domination,” he told world leaders at the UN General Assembly. This country “will not tell you how to live or work or worship.” But we “ask that you honor our sovereignty in return.”

…vowing to “never surrender America’s sovereignty to an unelected, unaccountable, global bureaucracy.” Globalists at U.N. Rage at Trump




No wonder the Left/Democrats/Liberals are fighting, tooth and nail, against Trump.....

We are opposed to Trumpism, which everyday and in every way mirrors fascism. Trump is a danger to us and the world. He is a megalomaniac, a narcissist and an Authoritarian.

He is not a conservative, not a liberal, and in my opinion, and the opinion of many others (liberal and conservative) nuts. More precisely he does not learn from experience and acts without due consideration for the consequence of his words and actions.

That he is your idea of what a President should be, is not surprising. You have much in common with him, i.e. Narcissism.


When you learn to read, you can read about the modern Fascists here, you dunce.


414aX-0cJUL._SX330_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg
 
The first thing you should do is define what a conservative is.

Today’s conservative are anti-Jesus anti-black anti-gay anti-Hispanic basically anti-minority.

Today’s conservatives against healthcare for the majority of Americans. It’s too expensive.

Today’s conservatives are fine with seeing the elderly living in poverty.

Today’s conservatives believe billionaires and corporations should pay none or next to none in taxes.

Today’s conservatives believe the United States should have an authoritarian type of government.

If you understand what a republican conservative is today then it’s obvious the kind of person they would want on the supreme court.


Currently, we have the most conservative President in my lifetime.


Case in point:

"We are standing up for America and for the American people and we are also standing up for the world. This is great news for our citizens and for peace-loving people everywhere," Trump said. "We will never surrender America's sovereignty to an unelected, unaccountable, global bureaucracy. America is governed by Americans. We reject the ideology of globalism and we embrace the doctrine of patriotism."
Trump 'didn't expect' UN speech reaction he got - CNNPolitics


Please cite your objection to Trump's conservative statement.
Sure no problem.
Trump goes on and on about American sovereignty and then suggested we should interfere with Venezuela, Iran, and he listed a host of other countries.

Who the fuk is he to tell other countries with they should be doing when he saying leave us alone?

It seemed so obvious to me.



American sovereignty.


American.


Not Venezuelan, or Iranian, or any of the tin-pot tyrannies you Liberals love.



Now....try again:

"We are standing up for America and for the American people and we are also standing up for the world. This is great news for our citizens and for peace-loving people everywhere," Trump said. "We will never surrender America's sovereignty to an unelected, unaccountable, global bureaucracy. America is governed by Americans. We reject the ideology of globalism and we embrace the doctrine of patriotism."
Trump 'didn't expect' UN speech reaction he got - CNNPolitics


Please cite your objection to Trump's conservative statement.
 
1. In Medellin vs. Texas (2008), the International Court of Justice ruled that Texas could not execute a convicted murderer. The Supreme Court ruled that decisions of the International Court of Justice are not binding domestic law. The vote was 6 to 3 (Souter, Breyer, Ginsburg). How long before the Supreme Court throws out the Constitution?



2. In May, 2009 Spanish judges are boldly declaring their authority to prosecute high-ranking government officials in the United States, but our government has not protested this nonsense, akin to piracy, and has, in fact, accepted an internationalist atmosphere which makes this sort of thing seem plausible.
From a speech by Jeremy Rabkin, professor of law, George Mason School of Law, June 5, 2009 at Washington, D.C.




3. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg defended the use of foreign law by American judges,...American hostility to the consideration of foreign law, she said, “is a passing phase.”
Ginsburg Shares Views on Influence of Foreign Law on Her Court, and Vice Versa




4. "Obama Pursuing Climate Accord in Lieu of Treaty

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is working to forge a sweeping international climate change agreement to compel nations to cut their planet-warming fossil fuel emissions, but without ratification from Congress.

b. ....to be signed at a United Nations summit meeting in 2015 in Paris,... a deal to commit some of the world’s largest economies to enact laws to reduce their carbon pollution.

c. But under the Constitution, a president may enter into a legally binding treaty only if it is approved by a two-thirds majority of the Senate.

d. To sidestep that requirement, President Obama’s climate negotiators are devising what they call a “politically binding” deal....

e. Countries would be legally required to enact domestic climate change policies....channel money to poor countries to help them adapt to climate change."
Obama Pursuing Climate Accord in Lieu of Treaty






5. Yesterday:

“President Trump let the world know at the U.N. today that he’s sticking to his vision of America-first sovereignty, rather than cede power to U.N. multilateralists — to their great dismay. Too bad for them: Mr. Trump’s approach is working.

“America will always choose independence and cooperation over global governance, control and domination,” he told world leaders at the UN General Assembly. This country “will not tell you how to live or work or worship.” But we “ask that you honor our sovereignty in return.”

…vowing to “never surrender America’s sovereignty to an unelected, unaccountable, global bureaucracy.” Globalists at U.N. Rage at Trump




No wonder the Left/Democrats/Liberals are fighting, tooth and nail, against Trump.....

We are opposed to Trumpism, which everyday and in every way mirrors fascism. Trump is a danger to us and the world. He is a megalomaniac, a narcissist and an Authoritarian.

He is not a conservative, not a liberal, and in my opinion, and the opinion of many others (liberal and conservative) nuts. More precisely he does not learn from experience and acts without due consideration for the consequence of his words and actions.

That he is your idea of what a President should be, is not surprising. You have much in common with him, i.e. Narcissism.


When you learn to read, you can read about the modern Fascists here, you dunce.


414aX-0cJUL._SX330_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg
Hilarious you . to some book about free-speech when Republicans are trying to block the free speech of sexual assault survivors. Rich!
 
Speaking of sexual assault the name of another woman has been released, her name is Julie Swetnik.
 
1. In Medellin vs. Texas (2008), the International Court of Justice ruled that Texas could not execute a convicted murderer. The Supreme Court ruled that decisions of the International Court of Justice are not binding domestic law. The vote was 6 to 3 (Souter, Breyer, Ginsburg). How long before the Supreme Court throws out the Constitution?



2. In May, 2009 Spanish judges are boldly declaring their authority to prosecute high-ranking government officials in the United States, but our government has not protested this nonsense, akin to piracy, and has, in fact, accepted an internationalist atmosphere which makes this sort of thing seem plausible.
From a speech by Jeremy Rabkin, professor of law, George Mason School of Law, June 5, 2009 at Washington, D.C.




3. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg defended the use of foreign law by American judges,...American hostility to the consideration of foreign law, she said, “is a passing phase.”
Ginsburg Shares Views on Influence of Foreign Law on Her Court, and Vice Versa




4. "Obama Pursuing Climate Accord in Lieu of Treaty

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is working to forge a sweeping international climate change agreement to compel nations to cut their planet-warming fossil fuel emissions, but without ratification from Congress.

b. ....to be signed at a United Nations summit meeting in 2015 in Paris,... a deal to commit some of the world’s largest economies to enact laws to reduce their carbon pollution.

c. But under the Constitution, a president may enter into a legally binding treaty only if it is approved by a two-thirds majority of the Senate.

d. To sidestep that requirement, President Obama’s climate negotiators are devising what they call a “politically binding” deal....

e. Countries would be legally required to enact domestic climate change policies....channel money to poor countries to help them adapt to climate change."
Obama Pursuing Climate Accord in Lieu of Treaty






5. Yesterday:

“President Trump let the world know at the U.N. today that he’s sticking to his vision of America-first sovereignty, rather than cede power to U.N. multilateralists — to their great dismay. Too bad for them: Mr. Trump’s approach is working.

“America will always choose independence and cooperation over global governance, control and domination,” he told world leaders at the UN General Assembly. This country “will not tell you how to live or work or worship.” But we “ask that you honor our sovereignty in return.”

…vowing to “never surrender America’s sovereignty to an unelected, unaccountable, global bureaucracy.” Globalists at U.N. Rage at Trump




No wonder the Left/Democrats/Liberals are fighting, tooth and nail, against Trump.....

We are opposed to Trumpism, which everyday and in every way mirrors fascism. Trump is a danger to us and the world. He is a megalomaniac, a narcissist and an Authoritarian.

He is not a conservative, not a liberal, and in my opinion, and the opinion of many others (liberal and conservative) nuts. More precisely he does not learn from experience and acts without due consideration for the consequence of his words and actions.

That he is your idea of what a President should be, is not surprising. You have much in common with him, i.e. Narcissism.


When you learn to read, you can read about the modern Fascists here, you dunce.


414aX-0cJUL._SX330_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

Is this Bill O'really in drag? Do you believe everything you read, and only read what supports your agenda?

Trumpism is the modern day iteration of fascism. That's a fact based on history, not the history rewritten by people like you. Real history, not the fake stuff we hear from you.

There is no greater danger to our democratic republic than the rhetoric of mendacious narcissists; another thing you and trump have in common.
 
1. In Medellin vs. Texas (2008), the International Court of Justice ruled that Texas could not execute a convicted murderer. The Supreme Court ruled that decisions of the International Court of Justice are not binding domestic law. The vote was 6 to 3 (Souter, Breyer, Ginsburg). How long before the Supreme Court throws out the Constitution?



2. In May, 2009 Spanish judges are boldly declaring their authority to prosecute high-ranking government officials in the United States, but our government has not protested this nonsense, akin to piracy, and has, in fact, accepted an internationalist atmosphere which makes this sort of thing seem plausible.
From a speech by Jeremy Rabkin, professor of law, George Mason School of Law, June 5, 2009 at Washington, D.C.




3. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg defended the use of foreign law by American judges,...American hostility to the consideration of foreign law, she said, “is a passing phase.”
Ginsburg Shares Views on Influence of Foreign Law on Her Court, and Vice Versa




4. "Obama Pursuing Climate Accord in Lieu of Treaty

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is working to forge a sweeping international climate change agreement to compel nations to cut their planet-warming fossil fuel emissions, but without ratification from Congress.

b. ....to be signed at a United Nations summit meeting in 2015 in Paris,... a deal to commit some of the world’s largest economies to enact laws to reduce their carbon pollution.

c. But under the Constitution, a president may enter into a legally binding treaty only if it is approved by a two-thirds majority of the Senate.

d. To sidestep that requirement, President Obama’s climate negotiators are devising what they call a “politically binding” deal....

e. Countries would be legally required to enact domestic climate change policies....channel money to poor countries to help them adapt to climate change."
Obama Pursuing Climate Accord in Lieu of Treaty






5. Yesterday:

“President Trump let the world know at the U.N. today that he’s sticking to his vision of America-first sovereignty, rather than cede power to U.N. multilateralists — to their great dismay. Too bad for them: Mr. Trump’s approach is working.

“America will always choose independence and cooperation over global governance, control and domination,” he told world leaders at the UN General Assembly. This country “will not tell you how to live or work or worship.” But we “ask that you honor our sovereignty in return.”

…vowing to “never surrender America’s sovereignty to an unelected, unaccountable, global bureaucracy.” Globalists at U.N. Rage at Trump




No wonder the Left/Democrats/Liberals are fighting, tooth and nail, against Trump.....

We are opposed to Trumpism, which everyday and in every way mirrors fascism. Trump is a danger to us and the world. He is a megalomaniac, a narcissist and an Authoritarian.

He is not a conservative, not a liberal, and in my opinion, and the opinion of many others (liberal and conservative) nuts. More precisely he does not learn from experience and acts without due consideration for the consequence of his words and actions.

That he is your idea of what a President should be, is not surprising. You have much in common with him, i.e. Narcissism.


When you learn to read, you can read about the modern Fascists here, you dunce.


414aX-0cJUL._SX330_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg
Hilarious you . to some book about free-speech when Republicans are trying to block the free speech of sexual assault survivors. Rich!



You don't read books, do you.


Powers is a well-know Liberal, but embarrassed at folks like you calling yourselves Liberals when you're actually Fascists.
 
1. In Medellin vs. Texas (2008), the International Court of Justice ruled that Texas could not execute a convicted murderer. The Supreme Court ruled that decisions of the International Court of Justice are not binding domestic law. The vote was 6 to 3 (Souter, Breyer, Ginsburg). How long before the Supreme Court throws out the Constitution?



2. In May, 2009 Spanish judges are boldly declaring their authority to prosecute high-ranking government officials in the United States, but our government has not protested this nonsense, akin to piracy, and has, in fact, accepted an internationalist atmosphere which makes this sort of thing seem plausible.
From a speech by Jeremy Rabkin, professor of law, George Mason School of Law, June 5, 2009 at Washington, D.C.




3. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg defended the use of foreign law by American judges,...American hostility to the consideration of foreign law, she said, “is a passing phase.”
Ginsburg Shares Views on Influence of Foreign Law on Her Court, and Vice Versa




4. "Obama Pursuing Climate Accord in Lieu of Treaty

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is working to forge a sweeping international climate change agreement to compel nations to cut their planet-warming fossil fuel emissions, but without ratification from Congress.

b. ....to be signed at a United Nations summit meeting in 2015 in Paris,... a deal to commit some of the world’s largest economies to enact laws to reduce their carbon pollution.

c. But under the Constitution, a president may enter into a legally binding treaty only if it is approved by a two-thirds majority of the Senate.

d. To sidestep that requirement, President Obama’s climate negotiators are devising what they call a “politically binding” deal....

e. Countries would be legally required to enact domestic climate change policies....channel money to poor countries to help them adapt to climate change."
Obama Pursuing Climate Accord in Lieu of Treaty






5. Yesterday:

“President Trump let the world know at the U.N. today that he’s sticking to his vision of America-first sovereignty, rather than cede power to U.N. multilateralists — to their great dismay. Too bad for them: Mr. Trump’s approach is working.

“America will always choose independence and cooperation over global governance, control and domination,” he told world leaders at the UN General Assembly. This country “will not tell you how to live or work or worship.” But we “ask that you honor our sovereignty in return.”

…vowing to “never surrender America’s sovereignty to an unelected, unaccountable, global bureaucracy.” Globalists at U.N. Rage at Trump




No wonder the Left/Democrats/Liberals are fighting, tooth and nail, against Trump.....

We are opposed to Trumpism, which everyday and in every way mirrors fascism. Trump is a danger to us and the world. He is a megalomaniac, a narcissist and an Authoritarian.

He is not a conservative, not a liberal, and in my opinion, and the opinion of many others (liberal and conservative) nuts. More precisely he does not learn from experience and acts without due consideration for the consequence of his words and actions.

That he is your idea of what a President should be, is not surprising. You have much in common with him, i.e. Narcissism.


When you learn to read, you can read about the modern Fascists here, you dunce.


414aX-0cJUL._SX330_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

Is this Bill O'really in drag? Do you believe everything you read, and only read what supports your agenda?

Trumpism is the modern day iteration of fascism. That's a fact based on history, not the history rewritten by people like you. Real history, not the fake stuff we hear from you.

There is no greater danger to our democratic republic than the rhetoric of mendacious narcissists; another thing you and trump have in common.



You don't read books, do you.


Powers is a well-know Liberal, but embarrassed at folks like you calling yourselves Liberals when you're actually Fascists.
 

Forum List

Back
Top