Alledged RBG Last Words PROVE What 'Uncreative, Simplistic Liars' the Democrats Are

bigrebnc1775

][][][% NC Sheepdog
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
78,693
Reaction score
9,629
Points
2,070
Location
Kannapolis, N.C.
Democrats allege that RBG said she wished that her replacement would only be nominated by a new President.

That is an obvious LIE. RBG was a judges judge, and was well aware that the Consitution says the President SHALL make an appointment when a seat on the SCOTUS is vacant.

SHALL is not 'may' or 'can think about it for a while'. 'Shall' is an imperative word that leaves no choice, THE PRESIDENT MUST MAKE AN APPOINTMENT.

Every lawyer should know the difference between 'shall' vrs 'may' or whatever else.

RBG did NOT say that, very obviously, but the 'Deplorable American' people Dimocrats think are too stupid to know the difference, just like they think we are too stupid to know that Trump does not have low regard for the American people.

THE DEMOCRATS DO AND THEY DEMONSTRATE THIS EVERY FOUR YEARS WITH THEIR RIDICULOUS LIES.
Just got this in an e-mail.


Ginsburg’s Words From 2016 Destroy the Democrat Narrative

The fight in 2016 over whether to take up then-President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee caused many to say things they regret. One of them was the late-Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

According to The Daily Wire:

When the GOP-led Senate used its constitutional powers to block the nomination of Judge Merrick Garland in 2016, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg admitted that the president had the power to nominate a candidate for a Supreme Court vacancy any time during his four-year tenure and that the Senate had every right to confirm the nomination or not.
The vacancy Obama chose Garland to fill was created by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia in February 2016; President Barack Obama nominated Garland in mid-March.
Ginsburg gave a speech at Georgetown Law School on Sept. 7, 2016, after which she took questions. A member of the audience asked, “I was wondering if you thought there were any valid constitutional arguments that would prevent President Obama from filling Justice Scalia’s seat on the Supreme Court?”

Ginsburg answered, “As you know, the president has the authority to name appointees to the Supreme Court, but he has to do so with the advice and consent of the Senate. And if the Senate does not act, as this current Senate is not acting, what can be done about it? Even if you could conceive of a testing lawsuit, what would the response be? ‘Well, you want us to vote? So we’ll vote no.’ But I do think that cooler heads will prevail; I hope sooner rather than later. The president is elected for four years not three years, so the powers that he has in year three continue into year four and maybe some members of the Senate will wake up and appreciate that that’s how it should be.”

Video and Twitter in the link


The repubs blocking the appointment was constitutionally allowable, but like so many other things that are technically allowable, it was a shitty thing to do.
Stop whining you leftists would do the same thing if the roles were reversed
 

jbrownson0831

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2020
Messages
2,758
Reaction score
2,086
Points
1,893
Democrats allege that RBG said she wished that her replacement would only be nominated by a new President.

That is an obvious LIE. RBG was a judges judge, and was well aware that the Consitution says the President SHALL make an appointment when a seat on the SCOTUS is vacant.

SHALL is not 'may' or 'can think about it for a while'. 'Shall' is an imperative word that leaves no choice, THE PRESIDENT MUST MAKE AN APPOINTMENT.

Every lawyer should know the difference between 'shall' vrs 'may' or whatever else.

RBG did NOT say that, very obviously, but the 'Deplorable American' people Dimocrats think are too stupid to know the difference, just like they think we are too stupid to know that Trump does not have low regard for the American people.

THE DEMOCRATS DO AND THEY DEMONSTRATE THIS EVERY FOUR YEARS WITH THEIR RIDICULOUS LIES.
So her granddaughter is now lying??..tin foil hats are reaching again
Just more wacko Trump bashing who cares what her dying wish was? Idiots make it public then whine when they get pushback.
 

Doc7505

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
4,047
Reaction score
4,905
Points
2,080
Location
North Carolina
Democrats allege that RBG said she wished that her replacement would only be nominated by a new President.

That is an obvious LIE. RBG was a judges judge, and was well aware that the Consitution says the President SHALL make an appointment when a seat on the SCOTUS is vacant.

SHALL is not 'may' or 'can think about it for a while'. 'Shall' is an imperative word that leaves no choice, THE PRESIDENT MUST MAKE AN APPOINTMENT.

Every lawyer should know the difference between 'shall' vrs 'may' or whatever else.

RBG did NOT say that, very obviously, but the 'Deplorable American' people Dimocrats think are too stupid to know the difference, just like they think we are too stupid to know that Trump does not have low regard for the American people.

THE DEMOCRATS DO AND THEY DEMONSTRATE THIS EVERY FOUR YEARS WITH THEIR RIDICULOUS LIES.
~~~~~~
 

BULLDOG

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2014
Messages
67,234
Reaction score
10,237
Points
2,030
Democrats allege that RBG said she wished that her replacement would only be nominated by a new President.

That is an obvious LIE. RBG was a judges judge, and was well aware that the Consitution says the President SHALL make an appointment when a seat on the SCOTUS is vacant.

SHALL is not 'may' or 'can think about it for a while'. 'Shall' is an imperative word that leaves no choice, THE PRESIDENT MUST MAKE AN APPOINTMENT.

Every lawyer should know the difference between 'shall' vrs 'may' or whatever else.

RBG did NOT say that, very obviously, but the 'Deplorable American' people Dimocrats think are too stupid to know the difference, just like they think we are too stupid to know that Trump does not have low regard for the American people.

THE DEMOCRATS DO AND THEY DEMONSTRATE THIS EVERY FOUR YEARS WITH THEIR RIDICULOUS LIES.
Just got this in an e-mail.


Ginsburg’s Words From 2016 Destroy the Democrat Narrative

The fight in 2016 over whether to take up then-President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee caused many to say things they regret. One of them was the late-Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

According to The Daily Wire:

When the GOP-led Senate used its constitutional powers to block the nomination of Judge Merrick Garland in 2016, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg admitted that the president had the power to nominate a candidate for a Supreme Court vacancy any time during his four-year tenure and that the Senate had every right to confirm the nomination or not.
The vacancy Obama chose Garland to fill was created by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia in February 2016; President Barack Obama nominated Garland in mid-March.
Ginsburg gave a speech at Georgetown Law School on Sept. 7, 2016, after which she took questions. A member of the audience asked, “I was wondering if you thought there were any valid constitutional arguments that would prevent President Obama from filling Justice Scalia’s seat on the Supreme Court?”

Ginsburg answered, “As you know, the president has the authority to name appointees to the Supreme Court, but he has to do so with the advice and consent of the Senate. And if the Senate does not act, as this current Senate is not acting, what can be done about it? Even if you could conceive of a testing lawsuit, what would the response be? ‘Well, you want us to vote? So we’ll vote no.’ But I do think that cooler heads will prevail; I hope sooner rather than later. The president is elected for four years not three years, so the powers that he has in year three continue into year four and maybe some members of the Senate will wake up and appreciate that that’s how it should be.”

Video and Twitter in the link


The repubs blocking the appointment was constitutionally allowable, but like so many other things that are technically allowable, it was a shitty thing to do.
Stop whining you leftists would do the same thing if the roles were reversed
That's the thing about you idiots. You think everybody is as unethical as you.
 

Death Angel

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2016
Messages
32,747
Reaction score
15,018
Points
1,600
You're all acting like her "dying wish" means a damn thing. It doesnt. I "wish" a lot of things. It means nothing.
 

bigrebnc1775

][][][% NC Sheepdog
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
78,693
Reaction score
9,629
Points
2,070
Location
Kannapolis, N.C.
Democrats allege that RBG said she wished that her replacement would only be nominated by a new President.

That is an obvious LIE. RBG was a judges judge, and was well aware that the Consitution says the President SHALL make an appointment when a seat on the SCOTUS is vacant.

SHALL is not 'may' or 'can think about it for a while'. 'Shall' is an imperative word that leaves no choice, THE PRESIDENT MUST MAKE AN APPOINTMENT.

Every lawyer should know the difference between 'shall' vrs 'may' or whatever else.

RBG did NOT say that, very obviously, but the 'Deplorable American' people Dimocrats think are too stupid to know the difference, just like they think we are too stupid to know that Trump does not have low regard for the American people.

THE DEMOCRATS DO AND THEY DEMONSTRATE THIS EVERY FOUR YEARS WITH THEIR RIDICULOUS LIES.
Just got this in an e-mail.


Ginsburg’s Words From 2016 Destroy the Democrat Narrative

The fight in 2016 over whether to take up then-President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee caused many to say things they regret. One of them was the late-Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

According to The Daily Wire:

When the GOP-led Senate used its constitutional powers to block the nomination of Judge Merrick Garland in 2016, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg admitted that the president had the power to nominate a candidate for a Supreme Court vacancy any time during his four-year tenure and that the Senate had every right to confirm the nomination or not.
The vacancy Obama chose Garland to fill was created by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia in February 2016; President Barack Obama nominated Garland in mid-March.
Ginsburg gave a speech at Georgetown Law School on Sept. 7, 2016, after which she took questions. A member of the audience asked, “I was wondering if you thought there were any valid constitutional arguments that would prevent President Obama from filling Justice Scalia’s seat on the Supreme Court?”

Ginsburg answered, “As you know, the president has the authority to name appointees to the Supreme Court, but he has to do so with the advice and consent of the Senate. And if the Senate does not act, as this current Senate is not acting, what can be done about it? Even if you could conceive of a testing lawsuit, what would the response be? ‘Well, you want us to vote? So we’ll vote no.’ But I do think that cooler heads will prevail; I hope sooner rather than later. The president is elected for four years not three years, so the powers that he has in year three continue into year four and maybe some members of the Senate will wake up and appreciate that that’s how it should be.”

Video and Twitter in the link


The repubs blocking the appointment was constitutionally allowable, but like so many other things that are technically allowable, it was a shitty thing to do.
Stop whining you leftists would do the same thing if the roles were reversed
That's the thing about you idiots. You think everybody is as unethical as you.
Obamacare forces people to buy something they may not have wanted and forcing them to lose their own healthcare voting at the midnight hour is not ethical
You must be really young and not experienced with democrat tactics
Hell yes they would have done the same thing if the roles were reversed
 

bigrebnc1775

][][][% NC Sheepdog
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
78,693
Reaction score
9,629
Points
2,070
Location
Kannapolis, N.C.
Democrats allege that RBG said she wished that her replacement would only be nominated by a new President.

That is an obvious LIE. RBG was a judges judge, and was well aware that the Consitution says the President SHALL make an appointment when a seat on the SCOTUS is vacant.

SHALL is not 'may' or 'can think about it for a while'. 'Shall' is an imperative word that leaves no choice, THE PRESIDENT MUST MAKE AN APPOINTMENT.

Every lawyer should know the difference between 'shall' vrs 'may' or whatever else.

RBG did NOT say that, very obviously, but the 'Deplorable American' people Dimocrats think are too stupid to know the difference, just like they think we are too stupid to know that Trump does not have low regard for the American people.

THE DEMOCRATS DO AND THEY DEMONSTRATE THIS EVERY FOUR YEARS WITH THEIR RIDICULOUS LIES.
~~~~~~
Democrats allege that RBG said she wished that her replacement would only be nominated by a new President.

That is an obvious LIE. RBG was a judges judge, and was well aware that the Consitution says the President SHALL make an appointment when a seat on the SCOTUS is vacant.

SHALL is not 'may' or 'can think about it for a while'. 'Shall' is an imperative word that leaves no choice, THE PRESIDENT MUST MAKE AN APPOINTMENT.

Every lawyer should know the difference between 'shall' vrs 'may' or whatever else.

RBG did NOT say that, very obviously, but the 'Deplorable American' people Dimocrats think are too stupid to know the difference, just like they think we are too stupid to know that Trump does not have low regard for the American people.

THE DEMOCRATS DO AND THEY DEMONSTRATE THIS EVERY FOUR YEARS WITH THEIR RIDICULOUS LIES.
~~~~~~
there is a leftist here that talks about being ethical Your meme reminded me of the time Ried bragged about lying on Romney when asked why he lied he smiled and said it worked now is that the party of ethics?
 

BULLDOG

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2014
Messages
67,234
Reaction score
10,237
Points
2,030
Democrats allege that RBG said she wished that her replacement would only be nominated by a new President.

That is an obvious LIE. RBG was a judges judge, and was well aware that the Consitution says the President SHALL make an appointment when a seat on the SCOTUS is vacant.

SHALL is not 'may' or 'can think about it for a while'. 'Shall' is an imperative word that leaves no choice, THE PRESIDENT MUST MAKE AN APPOINTMENT.

Every lawyer should know the difference between 'shall' vrs 'may' or whatever else.

RBG did NOT say that, very obviously, but the 'Deplorable American' people Dimocrats think are too stupid to know the difference, just like they think we are too stupid to know that Trump does not have low regard for the American people.

THE DEMOCRATS DO AND THEY DEMONSTRATE THIS EVERY FOUR YEARS WITH THEIR RIDICULOUS LIES.
~~~~~~
Democrats allege that RBG said she wished that her replacement would only be nominated by a new President.

That is an obvious LIE. RBG was a judges judge, and was well aware that the Consitution says the President SHALL make an appointment when a seat on the SCOTUS is vacant.

SHALL is not 'may' or 'can think about it for a while'. 'Shall' is an imperative word that leaves no choice, THE PRESIDENT MUST MAKE AN APPOINTMENT.

Every lawyer should know the difference between 'shall' vrs 'may' or whatever else.

RBG did NOT say that, very obviously, but the 'Deplorable American' people Dimocrats think are too stupid to know the difference, just like they think we are too stupid to know that Trump does not have low regard for the American people.

THE DEMOCRATS DO AND THEY DEMONSTRATE THIS EVERY FOUR YEARS WITH THEIR RIDICULOUS LIES.
~~~~~~
there is a leftist here that talks about being ethical Your meme reminded me of the time Ried bragged about lying on Romney when asked why he lied he smiled and said it worked now is that the party of ethics?
Do you really want to compare that one incident to the hundreds or thousands of blatant lies the right has spewed?
 

Grampa Murked U

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2011
Messages
82,541
Reaction score
21,649
Points
2,205
Location
Kansas City
Democrats allege that RBG said she wished that her replacement would only be nominated by a new President.

That is an obvious LIE. RBG was a judges judge, and was well aware that the Consitution says the President SHALL make an appointment when a seat on the SCOTUS is vacant.

SHALL is not 'may' or 'can think about it for a while'. 'Shall' is an imperative word that leaves no choice, THE PRESIDENT MUST MAKE AN APPOINTMENT.

Every lawyer should know the difference between 'shall' vrs 'may' or whatever else.

RBG did NOT say that, very obviously, but the 'Deplorable American' people Dimocrats think are too stupid to know the difference, just like they think we are too stupid to know that Trump does not have low regard for the American people.

THE DEMOCRATS DO AND THEY DEMONSTRATE THIS EVERY FOUR YEARS WITH THEIR RIDICULOUS LIES.
So her granddaughter is now lying??..tin foil hats are reaching again
If she's a leftist liberal its highly likely.

Anymore stupid questions?
 

Doc7505

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
4,047
Reaction score
4,905
Points
2,080
Location
North Carolina
Democrats allege that RBG said she wished that her replacement would only be nominated by a new President.

That is an obvious LIE. RBG was a judges judge, and was well aware that the Consitution says the President SHALL make an appointment when a seat on the SCOTUS is vacant.

SHALL is not 'may' or 'can think about it for a while'. 'Shall' is an imperative word that leaves no choice, THE PRESIDENT MUST MAKE AN APPOINTMENT.

Every lawyer should know the difference between 'shall' vrs 'may' or whatever else.

RBG did NOT say that, very obviously, but the 'Deplorable American' people Dimocrats think are too stupid to know the difference, just like they think we are too stupid to know that Trump does not have low regard for the American people.

THE DEMOCRATS DO AND THEY DEMONSTRATE THIS EVERY FOUR YEARS WITH THEIR RIDICULOUS LIES.
~~~~~~
Democrats allege that RBG said she wished that her replacement would only be nominated by a new President.

That is an obvious LIE. RBG was a judges judge, and was well aware that the Consitution says the President SHALL make an appointment when a seat on the SCOTUS is vacant.

SHALL is not 'may' or 'can think about it for a while'. 'Shall' is an imperative word that leaves no choice, THE PRESIDENT MUST MAKE AN APPOINTMENT.

Every lawyer should know the difference between 'shall' vrs 'may' or whatever else.

RBG did NOT say that, very obviously, but the 'Deplorable American' people Dimocrats think are too stupid to know the difference, just like they think we are too stupid to know that Trump does not have low regard for the American people.

THE DEMOCRATS DO AND THEY DEMONSTRATE THIS EVERY FOUR YEARS WITH THEIR RIDICULOUS LIES.
~~~~~~
there is a leftist here that talks about being ethical Your meme reminded me of the time Ried bragged about lying on Romney when asked why he lied he smiled and said it worked now is that the party of ethics?
Do you really want to compare that one incident to the hundreds or thousands of blatant lies the right has spewed?
~~~~~~
Seems that is what the Democrats have hung their hats on...
They've changed their tune since 2016 on the SCOTUS matter.
 

Turtlesoup

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2020
Messages
2,108
Reaction score
2,447
Points
1,893
Last edited:

konradv

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
28,269
Reaction score
4,322
Points
280
Location
Baltimore

bigrebnc1775

][][][% NC Sheepdog
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
78,693
Reaction score
9,629
Points
2,070
Location
Kannapolis, N.C.
Democrats allege that RBG said she wished that her replacement would only be nominated by a new President.

That is an obvious LIE. RBG was a judges judge, and was well aware that the Consitution says the President SHALL make an appointment when a seat on the SCOTUS is vacant.

SHALL is not 'may' or 'can think about it for a while'. 'Shall' is an imperative word that leaves no choice, THE PRESIDENT MUST MAKE AN APPOINTMENT.

Every lawyer should know the difference between 'shall' vrs 'may' or whatever else.

RBG did NOT say that, very obviously, but the 'Deplorable American' people Dimocrats think are too stupid to know the difference, just like they think we are too stupid to know that Trump does not have low regard for the American people.

THE DEMOCRATS DO AND THEY DEMONSTRATE THIS EVERY FOUR YEARS WITH THEIR RIDICULOUS LIES.
~~~~~~
Democrats allege that RBG said she wished that her replacement would only be nominated by a new President.

That is an obvious LIE. RBG was a judges judge, and was well aware that the Consitution says the President SHALL make an appointment when a seat on the SCOTUS is vacant.

SHALL is not 'may' or 'can think about it for a while'. 'Shall' is an imperative word that leaves no choice, THE PRESIDENT MUST MAKE AN APPOINTMENT.

Every lawyer should know the difference between 'shall' vrs 'may' or whatever else.

RBG did NOT say that, very obviously, but the 'Deplorable American' people Dimocrats think are too stupid to know the difference, just like they think we are too stupid to know that Trump does not have low regard for the American people.

THE DEMOCRATS DO AND THEY DEMONSTRATE THIS EVERY FOUR YEARS WITH THEIR RIDICULOUS LIES.
~~~~~~
there is a leftist here that talks about being ethical Your meme reminded me of the time Ried bragged about lying on Romney when asked why he lied he smiled and said it worked now is that the party of ethics?
Do you really want to compare that one incident to the hundreds or thousands of blatant lies the right has spewed?
from 2016 to 9/23/2020 it has been a flood of never-ending lies from the democrats assisted by the leftist's controlled mainstream media
 

Crixus

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2015
Messages
24,290
Reaction score
3,614
Points
290
Location
BFE Texas.
Democrats allege that RBG said she wished that her replacement would only be nominated by a new President.

That is an obvious LIE. RBG was a judges judge, and was well aware that the Consitution says the President SHALL make an appointment when a seat on the SCOTUS is vacant.

SHALL is not 'may' or 'can think about it for a while'. 'Shall' is an imperative word that leaves no choice, THE PRESIDENT MUST MAKE AN APPOINTMENT.

Every lawyer should know the difference between 'shall' vrs 'may' or whatever else.

RBG did NOT say that, very obviously, but the 'Deplorable American' people Dimocrats think are too stupid to know the difference, just like they think we are too stupid to know that Trump does not have low regard for the American people.

THE DEMOCRATS DO AND THEY DEMONSTRATE THIS EVERY FOUR YEARS WITH THEIR RIDICULOUS LIES.


even if she did say that it means nothing. RBG was seated, not elected. the only power she had was to interpret the las, period. she is dead now. the constitution does not say a judge has any say in who replaces them. all this emoting is just dumb. no one who laments the demise of RBG couldnt quote 5 decisions she made without google. all this is just another fit being thrown because of a percieved loss of power.
 

22lcidw

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2018
Messages
14,020
Reaction score
3,830
Points
275
Democrats allege that RBG said she wished that her replacement would only be nominated by a new President.

That is an obvious LIE. RBG was a judges judge, and was well aware that the Consitution says the President SHALL make an appointment when a seat on the SCOTUS is vacant.

SHALL is not 'may' or 'can think about it for a while'. 'Shall' is an imperative word that leaves no choice, THE PRESIDENT MUST MAKE AN APPOINTMENT.

Every lawyer should know the difference between 'shall' vrs 'may' or whatever else.

RBG did NOT say that, very obviously, but the 'Deplorable American' people Dimocrats think are too stupid to know the difference, just like they think we are too stupid to know that Trump does not have low regard for the American people.

THE DEMOCRATS DO AND THEY DEMONSTRATE THIS EVERY FOUR YEARS WITH THEIR RIDICULOUS LIES.
Just got this in an e-mail.


Ginsburg’s Words From 2016 Destroy the Democrat Narrative

The fight in 2016 over whether to take up then-President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee caused many to say things they regret. One of them was the late-Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

According to The Daily Wire:

When the GOP-led Senate used its constitutional powers to block the nomination of Judge Merrick Garland in 2016, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg admitted that the president had the power to nominate a candidate for a Supreme Court vacancy any time during his four-year tenure and that the Senate had every right to confirm the nomination or not.
The vacancy Obama chose Garland to fill was created by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia in February 2016; President Barack Obama nominated Garland in mid-March.
Ginsburg gave a speech at Georgetown Law School on Sept. 7, 2016, after which she took questions. A member of the audience asked, “I was wondering if you thought there were any valid constitutional arguments that would prevent President Obama from filling Justice Scalia’s seat on the Supreme Court?”

Ginsburg answered, “As you know, the president has the authority to name appointees to the Supreme Court, but he has to do so with the advice and consent of the Senate. And if the Senate does not act, as this current Senate is not acting, what can be done about it? Even if you could conceive of a testing lawsuit, what would the response be? ‘Well, you want us to vote? So we’ll vote no.’ But I do think that cooler heads will prevail; I hope sooner rather than later. The president is elected for four years not three years, so the powers that he has in year three continue into year four and maybe some members of the Senate will wake up and appreciate that that’s how it should be.”

Video and Twitter in the link


The repubs blocking the appointment was constitutionally allowable, but like so many other things that are technically allowable, it was a shitty thing to do.
Stop whining you leftists would do the same thing if the roles were reversed
That's the thing about you idiots. You think everybody is as unethical as you.
The old broad's cult followers are spreading covid right now.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top