Replacement SCOTUS Justice no males and no whites need apply

[g5000]

Really?

You think this a move indicative of 'three-dimensional chess.'

I cannot see how that statement applies at all.

Trump promises to replace Ginsburg with a woman - and soon

President Donald Trump is promising to put forth a female nominee in the coming week to fill the Supreme Court vacancy created by the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, pushing the Republican-controlled Senate to consider the pick without delay.

www.pbs.org

IT'S OKAY WHEN TRUMP DOES IT!™

 

[FA_Q2]

Trump promises to replace Ginsburg with a woman - and soon

President Donald Trump is promising to put forth a female nominee in the coming week to fill the Supreme Court vacancy created by the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, pushing the Republican-controlled Senate to consider the pick without delay.

www.pbs.org

IT'S OKAY WHEN TRUMP DOES IT!™

Trollin trollin trollin.

How many ******* times do I have to point out to you G that I am not a Trump supporter. You act just like the Trumpettes you continually villainize. I cant see a difference anymore.

 

[Magnus]

I understand what he said, you completely dense retard.

We also see that he did select a female, you simpleton. Nobody disputes any of that, you twit.

What we do NOT know is whether he eventually excluded all males from even being considered. If he did, I think that was a mistake.

I can’t do anything about it even if he did follow through and exclude all males from even being considered. By contrast, I still have a microscopic say in what Brandon has said he would do.

I have no say in the fact that your skull is fact and logic impervious.

LOL. You read Reagan's statement and also know that he did carry it through. And yet... you "do NOT know is whether he eventually excluded all males from even being considered"?

Gad, I love how you right-wingers twist yourself into a pretzel trying to justify your side doing the exact same thing you accuse the Dems!

Poor retard. Stumbled into an argument he cannot win but he tries so hard!!!

 

[Magnus]

Isn’t Reagan dead? That’s called a diversion from today

You don't know if Reagan is dead? Another day...another moron. Thanks for playing.

 

[otto105]

We largely do these days.

In any event, that info does inform us at least a bit about how they “interpret” the Constitution.

No.

 

[otto105]

The 'wise latina' that makes rulings based on utterly spurious and incorrect information.

Not a black woman. A latina woman.

Hey, can you turn down your white privilege a bit...

 

[BackAgain]

LOL. You read Reagan's statement and also know that he did carry it through. And yet... you "do NOT know is whether he eventually excluded all males from even being considered"?

Gad, I love how you right-wingers twist yourself into a pretzel trying to justify your side doing the exact same thing you accuse the Dems!

Poor retard. Stumbled into an argument he cannot win but he tries so hard!!!

You are a poor retard. And you did manage to grasp (at long last) what I said.

1. Reagan said it.
2. He did end up selecting a woman.
3. Neither you nor I know that he didn’t at least consider males.
4. If he did proceed by refusing to consider males, I believe that was a mistake.
5. I can’t undo any historical fact one way or the other.
6. You are a retard.

Thus, I haven’t “stumbled” into anything. Your delusions are all on you. But it’s likely just because you’re a retard.

 

[BackAgain]

No.

Yes. It does.

It shows that they make shit up if they think the Constitution authorizes abortion “rights.” And this shows that they don’t feel constrained by the Constitution in making ruling on Constitutional law.

 

[Magnus]

You are a poor retard. And you did manage to grasp (at long last) what I said.

1. Reagan said it.
2. He did end up selecting a woman.
3. Neither you nor I know that he didn’t at least consider males.
4. If he did proceed by refusing to consider males, I believe that was a mistake.
5. I can’t undo any historical fact one way or the other.
6. You are a retard.

Thus, I haven’t “stumbled” into anything. Your delusions are all on you. But it’s likely just because you’re a retard.

Again, one more time... retard. You give a lot of leeway to Reagan but don't want to extend the same courtesy to Biden.

That's what makes you a moron. Get it now?

But keep equivocating. It is fun to see retards trying to justify their side.

 

[BackAgain]

Again, one more time... retard. You give a lot of leeway to Reagan but don't want to extend the same courtesy to Biden.

That's what makes you a moron. Get it now?

But keep equivocating. It is fun to see retards trying to justify their side.

I gave no leeway to Reagan at all, you lobotomized retard. So your assertion proves that you are a retard. But you’re far too stupid to ever understand it.

As proof, you claimed I was “equivocating.” I haven’t equivocated at all on this matter. Not even an iota’s worth. But in your retarded and surgically limited brain, you are allowed to see zero equivocation as an equivocation.

That’s also just because you’re incapable of grasping that words have meaning.

 

[jc456]

You don't know if Reagan is dead? Another day...another moron. Thanks for playing.

It’s obvious you didn’t know, you diverted to him like he should be addressed for xidens insecurities

 

[BackAgain]

It’s obvious you didn’t know, you diverted to him like he should be addressed for xidens insecurities

Lardo ain’t too bright.

 

[otto105]

Yes. It does.

It shows that they make shit up if they think the Constitution authorizes abortion “rights.” And this shows that they don’t feel constrained by the Constitution in making ruling on Constitutional law.

Does not the Constitution make a person secure in their person and papers?

 

[Turtlesoup]

How many minority Judges did Trump consider in his THREE picks?

Trump only looked at whites

Trump looked at the best qualified-------------regardless of sex or color.

 

[jc456]

BackAgain thanks

 

[Coyote]

All violated Federal Law, yes?

How?

 

[otto105]

Trump looked at the best qualified-------------regardless of sex or color.

The former 1-term president valued loyalty to him over everything else.

In fact he nominated multiple unqualified judges because of it.

 

[BackAgain]

Does not the Constitution make a person secure in their person and papers?

No. But it does guarantee that right.

and it applies to all people. Even the pre born helpless ones. But liberal jurists somehow try to conflate an inferential right to privacy with a “right” to abort preborn babies.

It ain’t supportable by the Constitution or by logic.

 

[otto105]

No. But it does guarantee that right.

and it applies to all people. Even the pre born helpless ones. But liberal jurists somehow try to conflate an inferential right to privacy with a “right” to abort preborn babies.

It ain’t supportable by the Constitution or by logic.

Zygotes aren't people.

Fetus's aren't persons.

 

[jc456]

No. But it does guarantee that right.

and it applies to all people. Even the pre born helpless ones. But liberal jurists somehow try to conflate an inferential right to privacy with a “right” to abort preborn babies.

It ain’t supportable by the Constitution or by logic.

Yep, 14th amendment doesn’t mention murders