Bill Barr's DOJ changed the rules to allow election interference and investigations

[Coyote]

You obviously don't understand what packing the court means. There were 9 justices when Trump took office. How many will there be when Barrett is confirmed?

Congress gets to pick how many justices will be on the Supreme Court. They've changed the number several times, even within just years of their previous change.

Bullshit. There have been 9 justices for 150 years.

He's totally correct. Why do you say bullshit?

 

[jbrownson0831]

I'm extremely conflicted on that frankly. I'm so angry at what McConnell did, denying Obama his right to fill a vacancy, then flipping it around in 2020 that I want to say - why SHOULDN'T the Dems do this? Y'all started a precedent of upping the ante you deserve the fall out from it. But the thing is, I don't think it's good for the country. Very conflicted.

I'm not conflicted at all.

To me it's very clear and simple.

Break the Republican's tools. That's it.

They've been maneuvering for a piss aunt move like this for decades and the tides fell in their favor and they're breaking their own word to do this wickedness.

The path is clear...break. their. damn. tools. Break them.

That is done by adding 10 or more new SCOTUS. I'd like to see 20 or 21.

If/when they ever get power again to do that, let them do it. But don't worry about it.

You have to deal w/now.

This questioning is exactly why the Democrats are weak.

Republicans never do this.

I believe a new breed of Democrats are coming up who are willing to fight Republicans they way they need to be fought.

I hope I live to see that come to full fruition.

New breed of what, progressive Marxists? Yipee, destroy America....

Well...let's be clear, you have already taken care of that bit.

Baloney....we are the only party that still holds America's values at the forefront. You America haters have such twisted logic.

 

[progressive hunter]

They've put judges on the federal bench that were rated as UNQUALIFIED.

That never happened under a democratic senate. Their candidates were qualified or well qualified ONLY.

as long as their ideology is constitution based whats your problem???

Republicans put ideology (politics) above competence.

They would rather have an idiot that agrees with them, then a genius who might or might not.

thats also the dem attitude,,,
and why I reject both parties and the party system,,

but as I said if a judge rules with what the constitution says and not what they think it says whats the problem??

cause thats what liberal judges do,,,

 

[progressive hunter]

They've put judges on the federal bench that were rated as UNQUALIFIED.

That never happened under a democratic senate. Their candidates were qualified or well qualified ONLY.

as long as their ideology is constitution based whats your problem???

Republicans put ideology (politics) above competence.

They would rather have an idiot that agrees with them, then a genius who might or might not.

OH and politics isnt an ideology,,,

 

[MarcATL]

Precedents.


And the Dems (like the Pubs) will not always be in power.

Yeah, and...?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I'm conflicted too. Republicans would deserve court packing. It is after all what they've been doing for the past four years. And their should be some payback for Judge Garland and this last second ram job with Barrett after a few of them promised they wouldn't. But is it a good precedent is the question I guess. The part of me that wants revenge says yes. But then Dems would be behaving like Republicans. Could be a bad look that bites 'em in the butt.

Have you seen what republicans are doing to the federal courts. Their plan is to put young inexperienced people on the bench for a lifetime, that aren't qualified to be there, except for their political ideology.

They've put judges on the federal bench that were rated as UNQUALIFIED.

That never happened under a democratic senate. Their candidates were qualified or well qualified ONLY.

They've put judges on the federal bench that were rated as UNQUALIFIED.

Which liberal group rated them?

 

[BS Filter]

You obviously don't understand what packing the court means. There were 9 justices when Trump took office. How many will there be when Barrett is confirmed?

Congress gets to pick how many justices will be on the Supreme Court. They've changed the number several times, even within just years of their previous change.

Bullshit. There have been 9 justices for 150 years.

He's totally correct. Why do you say bullshit?

Read my post.

 

[meaner gene]

You obviously don't understand what packing the court means. There were 9 justices when Trump took office. How many will there be when Barrett is confirmed?

Congress gets to pick how many justices will be on the Supreme Court. They've changed the number several times, even within just years of their previous change.

Bullshit. There have been 9 justices for 150 years.

There was slavery for 400 years.

Things change.

Elections have consequences.

 

[progressive hunter]

You obviously don't understand what packing the court means. There were 9 justices when Trump took office. How many will there be when Barrett is confirmed?

Congress gets to pick how many justices will be on the Supreme Court. They've changed the number several times, even within just years of their previous change.

Bullshit. There have been 9 justices for 150 years.

There was slavery for 400 years.

Things change.

Elections have consequences.

dude,,,slavery still exists,,,

 

[meaner gene]

You obviously don't understand what packing the court means. There were 9 justices when Trump took office. How many will there be when Barrett is confirmed?

Congress gets to pick how many justices will be on the Supreme Court. They've changed the number several times, even within just years of their previous change.

Bullshit. There have been 9 justices for 150 years.

He's totally correct. Why do you say bullshit?

In 1866, Congress passed the Judicial Circuits Act, which shrank the number of justices back down to seven and prevented President Andrew Johnson from appointing anyone new to the court. Three years later, in 1869, Congress raised the number of justices to nine,

 

[DrLove]

I'm conflicted too. Republicans would deserve court packing. It is after all what they've been doing for the past four years. And their should be some payback for Judge Garland and this last second ram job with Barrett after a few of them promised they wouldn't. But is it a good precedent is the question I guess. The part of me that wants revenge says yes. But then Dems would be behaving like Republicans. Could be a bad look that bites 'em in the butt.

Have you seen what republicans are doing to the federal courts. Their plan is to put young inexperienced people on the bench for a lifetime, that aren't qualified to be there, except for their political ideology.

They've put judges on the federal bench that were rated as UNQUALIFIED.

That never happened under a democratic senate. Their candidates were qualified or well qualified ONLY.

Yep, here are the American Bar Association unqualified judges from Rump

Brett Talley	Middle District of Alabama	Trump	Unanimously not qualified	Nomination withdrawn
Charles B. Goodwin	Western District of Oklahoma	Trump	Majority not qualified	Confirmed on August 28, 2018
Holly Lou Teeter	District of Kansas	Trump	Substantial majority not qualified	Confirmed on August 1, 2018
John O'Connor	Northern, Eastern, and Western Districts of Oklahoma	Trump	Unanimously not qualified	Nomination withdrawn
Jonathan Kobes	Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals	Trump	Substantial majority not qualified	Confirmed on December 11, 2018
Justin Walker	Western District of Kentucky	Trump	Substantial majority not qualified	Confirmed on October 24, 2019
L. Steven Grasz	Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals	Trump	Unanimously not qualified	Confirmed on December 12, 2017
Lawrence VanDkye	Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals	Trump	Substantial majority not qualified	Confirmed on December 11, 2019

There were a bunch from GWB too - NONE under Obama

ABA ratings during the Trump administration

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

Remember RW blogger Brett Talley who never tried a case and graduated from law school three years earlier? Thankfully he withdrew.

And then there was THIS guy!

 

[OKTexas]

Good for him....I hope he follows through...It's bull shit that you want to be able to fraud the vote with impugnity....

Translation - Fine with me if Donald wants to cheat to win!

Oh right, I'm sure you objected to palousey bringing up the 25th Amendment to try to effect the election, RIGHT??????????? You commies are a total waste of oxygen.

.

 

[meaner gene]

OH and politics isnt an ideology,,,

In social studies, a political ideology is a certain set of ethical ideals, principles, doctrines, myths or symbols of a social movement, institution, class or large group that explains how society should work and offers some political and cultural blueprint for a certain social order.

List of political ideologies - Wikipedia

In short, everything you just said is wrong.

 

[meaner gene]

They've put judges on the federal bench that were rated as UNQUALIFIED.

That never happened under a democratic senate. Their candidates were qualified or well qualified ONLY.

They've put judges on the federal bench that were rated as UNQUALIFIED.

Cite? Since I know that's a lie, and i'm just wondering where you get your bullshit from.

 

[meaner gene]

He's totally correct. Why do you say bullshit?

Read my post.

Because in the span on Andrew Johnsons (D) term, the republicans changed the number of justices twice.

 

[j-mac]

I really hope so...I've never seen such corruption of our normally non-political institutions in my life time. If the only thing a Biden win accomplishes is the cleaning up and de-politicizing, and the restoring of norms, rules of behavior...it will be more than enough.

Cleaning up Trump's filthy swamp.

To me, if they pack the court w/10 or more SCOTUS I'd be ecstatic.

I'm extremely conflicted on that frankly. I'm so angry at what McConnell did, denying Obama his right to fill a vacancy, then flipping it around in 2020 that I want to say - why SHOULDN'T the Dems do this? Y'all started a precedent of upping the ante you deserve the fall out from it. But the thing is, I don't think it's good for the country. Very conflicted.

Google Podcasts

With Google Podcasts, you can find and listen to the world's podcasts for free.

podcasts.google.com

Start listening at 8:25

 

[BS Filter]

I'm conflicted too. Republicans would deserve court packing. It is after all what they've been doing for the past four years. And their should be some payback for Judge Garland and this last second ram job with Barrett after a few of them promised they wouldn't. But is it a good precedent is the question I guess. The part of me that wants revenge says yes. But then Dems would be behaving like Republicans. Could be a bad look that bites 'em in the butt.

Have you seen what republicans are doing to the federal courts. Their plan is to put young inexperienced people on the bench for a lifetime, that aren't qualified to be there, except for their political ideology.

They've put judges on the federal bench that were rated as UNQUALIFIED.

That never happened under a democratic senate. Their candidates were qualified or well qualified ONLY.

Yep, here are the American Bar Association unqualified judges from Rump

Brett Talley	Middle District of Alabama	Trump	Unanimously not qualified	Nomination withdrawn
Charles B. Goodwin	Western District of Oklahoma	Trump	Majority not qualified	Confirmed on August 28, 2018
Holly Lou Teeter	District of Kansas	Trump	Substantial majority not qualified	Confirmed on August 1, 2018
John O'Connor	Northern, Eastern, and Western Districts of Oklahoma	Trump	Unanimously not qualified	Nomination withdrawn
Jonathan Kobes	Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals	Trump	Substantial majority not qualified	Confirmed on December 11, 2018
Justin Walker	Western District of Kentucky	Trump	Substantial majority not qualified	Confirmed on October 24, 2019
L. Steven Grasz	Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals	Trump	Unanimously not qualified	Confirmed on December 12, 2017
Lawrence VanDkye	Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals	Trump	Substantial majority not qualified	Confirmed on December 11, 2019

There were a bunch from GWB too - NONE under Obama

ABA ratings during the Trump administration

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

Remember RW blogger Brett Talley who never tried a case and graduated from law school three years earlier? Thankfully he withdrew.

And then there was THIS guy!

You don't need a law degree to be appointed to Supreme Court.

 

[BS Filter]

He's totally correct. Why do you say bullshit?

Read my post.

Because in the span on Andrew Johnsons (D) term, the republicans changed the number of justices twice.

150 years ago.

 

[meaner gene]

Yep, here are the American Bar Association unqualified judges from Rump

Brett Talley	Middle District of Alabama	Trump	Unanimously not qualified	Nomination withdrawn
Charles B. Goodwin	Western District of Oklahoma	Trump	Majority not qualified	Confirmed on August 28, 2018
Holly Lou Teeter	District of Kansas	Trump	Substantial majority not qualified	Confirmed on August 1, 2018
John O'Connor	Northern, Eastern, and Western Districts of Oklahoma	Trump	Unanimously not qualified	Nomination withdrawn
Jonathan Kobes	Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals	Trump	Substantial majority not qualified	Confirmed on December 11, 2018
Justin Walker	Western District of Kentucky	Trump	Substantial majority not qualified	Confirmed on October 24, 2019
L. Steven Grasz	Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals	Trump	Unanimously not qualified	Confirmed on December 12, 2017
Lawrence VanDkye	Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals	Trump	Substantial majority not qualified	Confirmed on December 11, 2019

There were a bunch from GWB too - NONE under Obama

ABA ratings during the Trump administration

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

 

[DrLove]

Good for him....I hope he follows through...It's bull shit that you want to be able to fraud the vote with impugnity....

Translation - Fine with me if Donald wants to cheat to win!

Oh right, I'm sure you objected to palousey bringing up the 25th Amendment to try to effect the election, RIGHT??????????? You commies are a total waste of oxygen.

.

The 25th should be invoked immediately. Our president is NOT well.