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

[OKTexas]

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 drugs Trump is on for COVID-19, are known to cause dementia, mental changes, and emotional changes.

I think his treatment has ended, except maybe for low dose aspirin. You ever think palousey may be trying to lay the ground work to remove biden and install harris?

.

 

[Coyote]

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.

Mitch didn't deny Barry's right to anything, Dummy.

Barry nominated someone. That's where his rights end.

And the Dems would be perfectly within their legal rights to pack the courts.

The question, as always, is just because you can - should you?

McConnel said yes. YOU lot said HELL YES (but - change the rules again in 2020).

Don't whine if you lose and the Dems do this.

Precedents. Elections have consequences. And all that crap you spout every other week to justify setting bad precedents for political power gains.

 

[BS Filter]

That's your opinion. The President and the Senate are doing their Constitutional duty.

And in 2016 they said it was their "duty" to let the people have a voice by the election outcome during a presidential election year.

Now in 2020, their "duty" has reversed itself.

When you control the Senate, you can do that. Like Obama said, "Elections have consequences".

 

[Nostra]

How dare Trump fill a spot on the SC as required by the Constitution.

Show me in the constitution where that is a "REQITEMENT"

You can't because you lied it was required.

Here ya go, Stupid.

I always get a hoot out of exposing your ignorance...............


Article II

• Section 2
  • Clause 2
  • He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

 

[OKTexas]

Oh, so when Democrats were in power to make the choice they advanced middle of the road Justices that would follow the Constitution to the letter eh?

They put justices in that were so well qualified in the law, that even republicans nearly unanimously voted for them.

Democrats got justices with 90 or more votes in the senate.

Like Ginsburg 96 to 3, including a super majority of republicans.

Ginsburg, Ruth Bader

White

Jun 22, 1993

96-3 No. 232

C

Aug 3, 1993

And she had to die to remedy that mistake.

.

 

[Nostra]

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.

Mitch didn't deny Barry's right to anything, Dummy.

Barry nominated someone. That's where his rights end.

And the Dems would be perfectly within their legal rights to pack the courts.

The question, as always, is just because you can - should you?

McConnel said yes. YOU lot said HELL YES (but - change the rules again in 2020).

Don't whine if you lose and the Dems do this.

Precedents. Elections have consequences. And all that crap you spout every other week to justify setting bad precedents for political power gains.

Show me where McConnell said he wants to "pack the courts". He has never said anything about wanting to add justices to the SC.

 

[meaner gene]

YOu are saying the NY DA hasn't seen Trump's tax returns yet, but anonymous sources in that office have leaked the contents of Trump's tax returns to the Fake News NYTs?

How does that work, Stupid?

Um, you just confirmed my post you raving lunatic.

They have not seen his returns, as your link proves. Man, you really are stupid.

But you just claimed they were the source of Trumps tax return leak. Now you admit they never got them.

Stop lying man.

 

[Nostra]

YOu are saying the NY DA hasn't seen Trump's tax returns yet, but anonymous sources in that office have leaked the contents of Trump's tax returns to the Fake News NYTs?

How does that work, Stupid?

Um, you just confirmed my post you raving lunatic.

They have not seen his returns, as your link proves. Man, you really are stupid.

But you just claimed they were the source of Trumps tax return leak. Now you admit they never got them.

Stop lying man.

No lie by me, Sport.

 

[BS Filter]

Obfuscation....I was specific...And you dodged, because you know that Democrat's nominated ideological Justices.

Democrats never put ideology above qualification. Every democratic justice, no matter their ideology, was WELL qualified first and foremost.

Republicans put UNQUALIFIED judges on the federal bench, merely because of their political ideology. People barely out of law school. Some who barely knew what happened inside a federal court.

Bullshit. I watched Sotomayor tell the committee that she was qualified because she was a "wise Latina woman".

 

[Coyote]

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.

Mitch didn't deny Barry's right to anything, Dummy.

Barry nominated someone. That's where his rights end.

And the Dems would be perfectly within their legal rights to pack the courts.

The question, as always, is just because you can - should you?

McConnel said yes. YOU lot said HELL YES (but - change the rules again in 2020).

Don't whine if you lose and the Dems do this.

Precedents. Elections have consequences. And all that crap you spout every other week to justify setting bad precedents for political power gains.

Show me where McConnell said he wants to "pack the courts". He has never said anything about wanting to add justices to the SC.

Show me where I said he wanted to.

 

[Coyote]

Obfuscation....I was specific...And you dodged, because you know that Democrat's nominated ideological Justices.

Democrats never put ideology above qualification. Every democratic justice, no matter their ideology, was WELL qualified first and foremost.

Republicans put UNQUALIFIED judges on the federal bench, merely because of their political ideology. People barely out of law school. Some who barely knew what happened inside a federal court.

Bullshit. I watched Sotomayor tell the committee that she was qualified because she was a wise Latina.

No you did not. She never said that was her qualification.

 

[Nostra]

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.

Mitch didn't deny Barry's right to anything, Dummy.

Barry nominated someone. That's where his rights end.

And the Dems would be perfectly within their legal rights to pack the courts.

The question, as always, is just because you can - should you?

McConnel said yes. YOU lot said HELL YES (but - change the rules again in 2020).

Don't whine if you lose and the Dems do this.

Precedents. Elections have consequences. And all that crap you spout every other week to justify setting bad precedents for political power gains.

Show me where McConnell said he wants to "pack the courts". He has never said anything about wanting to add justices to the SC.

Show me where I said he wanted to.

You can't keep up with what you posted just minutes ago?

And the Dems would be perfectly within their legal rights to pack the courts.

The question, as always, is just because you can - should you?

McConnel said yes.

 

[BS Filter]

Obfuscation....I was specific...And you dodged, because you know that Democrat's nominated ideological Justices.

Democrats never put ideology above qualification. Every democratic justice, no matter their ideology, was WELL qualified first and foremost.

Republicans put UNQUALIFIED judges on the federal bench, merely because of their political ideology. People barely out of law school. Some who barely knew what happened inside a federal court.

Bullshit. I watched Sotomayor tell the committee that she was qualified because she was a wise Latina.

No you did not. She never said that was her qualification.

She most certainly did. It's recorded on video.

 

[meaner gene]

Stop lying man.

No lie by me, Sport.

You posted it man

YOu are saying the NY DA hasn't seen Trump's tax returns yet, but anonymous sources in that office have leaked the contents of Trump's tax returns to the Fake News NYTs?

How does that work, Stupid?

You don't believe what you post man?

 

[Coyote]

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.

Mitch didn't deny Barry's right to anything, Dummy.

Barry nominated someone. That's where his rights end.

And the Dems would be perfectly within their legal rights to pack the courts.

The question, as always, is just because you can - should you?

McConnel said yes. YOU lot said HELL YES (but - change the rules again in 2020).

Don't whine if you lose and the Dems do this.

Precedents. Elections have consequences. And all that crap you spout every other week to justify setting bad precedents for political power gains.

Show me where McConnell said he wants to "pack the courts". He has never said anything about wanting to add justices to the SC.

Show me where I said he wanted to.

You can't keep up with what you posted just minutes ago?

And the Dems would be perfectly within their legal rights to pack the courts.

The question, as always, is just because you can - should you?

McConnel said yes.

Thanks for proving to us once again that, not only can you not read, you miss the general point.

Just because you can do something (in a discussion involving multiple actions setting precedents) - should you?

McConnel by his actions, has clearly said yes.

 

[meaner gene]

Republicans put UNQUALIFIED judges on the federal bench, merely because of their political ideology. People barely out of law school. Some who barely knew what happened inside a federal court.

Bullshit. I watched Sotomayor tell the committee that she was qualified because she was a "wise Latina woman".

That was an additional qualification, not qualified "BECAUSE"

 

[BS Filter]

Republicans put UNQUALIFIED judges on the federal bench, merely because of their political ideology. People barely out of law school. Some who barely knew what happened inside a federal court.

Bullshit. I watched Sotomayor tell the committee that she was qualified because she was a "wise Latina woman".

That was an additional qualification, not qualified "BECAUSE"

Okay. Now explain how being a wise Latina woman is a qualification for the Supreme Court.

 

[Nostra]

Stop lying man.

No lie by me, Sport.

You posted it man

YOu are saying the NY DA hasn't seen Trump's tax returns yet, but anonymous sources in that office have leaked the contents of Trump's tax returns to the Fake News NYTs?

How does that work, Stupid?

You don't believe what you post man?

That's where the leak came from. Prove me wrong.

 

[Nostra]

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.

Mitch didn't deny Barry's right to anything, Dummy.

Barry nominated someone. That's where his rights end.

And the Dems would be perfectly within their legal rights to pack the courts.

The question, as always, is just because you can - should you?

McConnel said yes. YOU lot said HELL YES (but - change the rules again in 2020).

Don't whine if you lose and the Dems do this.

Precedents. Elections have consequences. And all that crap you spout every other week to justify setting bad precedents for political power gains.

Show me where McConnell said he wants to "pack the courts". He has never said anything about wanting to add justices to the SC.

Show me where I said he wanted to.

You can't keep up with what you posted just minutes ago?

And the Dems would be perfectly within their legal rights to pack the courts.

The question, as always, is just because you can - should you?

McConnel said yes.

Thanks for proving to us once again that, not only can you not read, you miss the general point.

Just because you can do something (in a discussion involving multiple actions setting precedents) - should you?

McConnel by his actions, has clearly said yes.

Now it's "by his actions"??????????????????????

When did Mitch pack the SC, Dummy?

Your lies are piling up here.

 

[meaner gene]

No you did not. She never said that was her qualification.

She most certainly did. It's recorded on video.

This is where selective video clips taken out of context to twist an argument fail.