AOC wants to impeach USSC judges

[Captain Caveman]

Using her standard you could impeach every justice on the court. Something that also seems to be going on is politicans wanting assurances from those nominated for the Court that they will vote a sepcific way in some cases if it should come before the court. That could be seen as politicans trying to bride a potential Justice in voting the way they want in exchange for them to vote in favor of confirmation.

I see the Democrats throw the word Impeachment around that much at those that they think are a nasty pasty, that they've made the word and process meaningless.

 

[bendog]

They already don't have say how they will rule. But when they lie about something there should be consequences, don't you think?

Imo at least Keggers misled about how he ended up voting on Roe based on stare decisis. But I'm not sure he explicitly lied.

I'm sure they lied in individual meetings with senators.

 

[Slade3200]

I won’t discuss anything except the ramifications of legislation.
When an idiot suggests legislation based on racism I will discuss and AOC is an overt racist.

Haha, whatever floats your boat buddy... Diversions and name calling is elementary school level.

 

[bendog]

Haha, whatever floats your boat buddy... Diversions and name calling is elementary school level.

While Riley Roberts is a silent guy and facts are sparse, it does appear that AOC is ok with at least on white guy with a fuzzy red beard LOL

 

[WEATHER53]

Impeachment just like racism has been so incorrectly overused as to become ineffective

 

[hadit]

OK great. But when its not stated and repeat and instead the nominee lies about how they view a topic would you agree that something is wrong with that?

They can view a topic in a certain way, but that does not mean they are committing to voting a certain way no matter the details of the case. While the Senators only care that their sacred cows are not gored, they have to acknowledge that the Court needs to be independent and not encumbered by political whims.

I don't see any way the nominee could possibly be held to a faux commitment like that for the next 20 or 30 years that they are on the Court. I mean, let's face it, many a Republican president has seen his supposedly staunch conservative nominees go moderate and squishy.

 

[Indeependent]

Haha, whatever floats your boat buddy... Diversions and name calling is elementary school level.

I’m being kind to AOC and YOU.
I know your MO and it gets dull real fast.

 

[Slade3200]

I’m being kind to AOC and YOU.
I know your MO and it gets dull real fast.

Right, direct answers to direct questions and staying on topic is super dull. Your method of diversions and insults is much more exciting.

 

[PeanutGallery]

Imo at least Keggers misled about how he ended up voting on Roe based on stare decisis. But I'm not sure he explicitly lied.

I'm sure they lied in individual meetings with senators.

Does anybody making the claims about Kavanaugh have, I don't know, quotes or video evidence, that shows that he or any current SC justice lied or misled Senators about RvE? If it comes to the end of the week and none of those things are out there, you can bet the mortgage that it didn't happen. There are too many groups/organizations that will be relooking at the hearings to try and find a "gotcha" moment.

 

[pknopp]

have you reviewed everything he has ever said? duh, no

Seems you can't either.

 

[jotathought]

Can you show an example?

What type of example are you looking to receive? That the judicial branch doesn't make law? Or something else?

 

[Nostra]

There is no rule in private conversations.

The rule also states that a potential justice has NO obligation to state how they might rule on a future case in a confirmation hearing, it does not bar one from answering a question though.

Ok, so let’s take your hypothetical and say one of these nominees told Collins what she claims.

Tell us the recourse.

 

[pknopp]

Ok, so let’s take your hypothetical and say one of these nominees told Collins what she claims.

Tell us the recourse.

What it does it further lessen people's faith in the courts and the government in general.

 

[Nostra]

The part where I said Manchin states what he was told in their personal meetings.

You are relying on what politicians say happened when nobody else was around vs the nominee’s testimony under oath in front of the world.

Just shows how gullible you are.

 

[Nostra]

What it does it further lessen people's faith in the courts and the government in general.

Only if you believe what a professional politician claims was said when nobody else was around vs testimony under oath in front of the world.

But then, you are stupid enough to believe the professional politician.

 

[rightnow909]

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Sunday accused the Supreme Court's conservative justices of lying under oath when they each suggested during their confirmation hearings that Roe v. Wade is settled precedent.
'The Supreme Court has dramatically overreached its authority. We had two conservative senators in the United States Senate, Senator Manchin and Senator Collins, come out with a very explosive allegation that several Supreme Court justices misled them during their confirmation hearings and in the lead-up to the confirmation,' Ocasio-Cortez said on NBC News' Meet the Press.
'There must be consequences for such a deeply destabilizing action and a hostile takeover of our democratic institutions. To allow that to stand is to allow it to happen.'
Asked if such misstatements warrant impeachment proceedings, she replied: 'I believe so. I believe lying under oath is an impeachable offense.'

AOC blasts Democrats' messaging on Roe v. Wade being overturned

The New York progressive also took aim at her party's leaders for sending out campaign fundraisers soon after the ruling was issued on Friday.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Comment:
AOC is a typical dumb liberal crackpot Democrat.
I would love to see the idiot Democrats attempt to impeach USSC judges.
It would be like watching a bunch of drunk monkeys trying to screw a greased football.
The USSC made a correction of a previous bogus USSC decision.
It's not the end of the world or of our country.
Soulless Neo-Marxists like AOC will still be able to get their abortions in their backwards blue States.
Why won't Liberal women just learn how to use birth control and contraceptives?
Maybe she should just get her tubes tied if contraceptives are too complex for her to use.

just another example of how you cannot win w/ these demonic people.

It's like

If you nominees say some Decision is precedent (at a nomination hearing), you'd best vote against breaking precedent-- but only when doing so helps us libs politically...

it's not dumbass
it's not clueless

it's evil

that's what they are, no 2 ways about it.. and even if by some stretch we could say they are sincerely wrong... doesn't matter. What they DO (what they propose doing) is objectively evil. 99% of the time That means it has to stop NOW

 

[pknopp]

Only if you believe what a professional politician claims was said when nobody else was around vs testimony under oath in front of the world.

But then, you are stupid enough to believe the professional politician.

Read a bit.

according to notes taken by “multiple” staffers at the meeting, the Times said.

Roe v Wade: senators say Trump supreme court nominees misled them

 

[Nostra]

Read a bit.

according to notes taken by “multiple” staffers at the meeting, the Times said.

Roe v Wade: senators say Trump supreme court nominees misled them

So, employees of Collins agree with her.

Ok, I read their “notes” and didn‘t see where they indicated how they would rule on a particular case if it came before them.


Keep flailing.

 

[Slade3200]

What type of example are you looking to receive? That the judicial branch doesn't make law? Or something else?

That people are proclaiming that SCOTUS are supposed to be making laws. That’s what you claimed wasn’t it?

 

[jotathought]

That people are proclaiming that SCOTUS are supposed to be making laws. That’s what you claimed wasn’t it?

Absolutely not .. in fact, I stated that the legislative branch creates law and the judicial branch interprets the law to determine constitutionality and resolves legal disputes and/or assigns punishment based on the severity of breaking law