Why I Think Trump Should Go Ahead and Nominate Amy Coney Barrett Over Democrat Objections

JimBowie1958

Old Fogey
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
63,110
Reaction score
15,720
Points
2,220
Location
Fredericksburg, VA
I was convinced we needed a calming choice that everyone can accept, but I have been chewing this thing like over-smoke beef jerkey since last night and I have changed my mind for the following reasons:

1) Amy Coney Barrett deserves her seat on the court as a very accomplished new American woman who balances career and family life (7 kids) and still is one of the top minds in her profession. She is also a Constitutional Original intent judge, the kind we really need to reign in all the bullshit case law we have h ad recently (United....) A woman a deserving as her should not be passed over for reasons based on political gamesmanship.

2) Realpolitical logic told me that picking a 'conservative' jurist to fill RBGs seat would inflame the left and drive them to the polls. But the left is already hysterical and hates everything Trump does, no matter what he does. Trump could pick Jesus Christ and the left would go ape shit batcrazy. So why bother? Just bolster your base and pick what they want, there is really no downside.

3) I reflected on how the Democrats treated Bret Kavanaugh and it still pisses me off.

Nail 'em Mr President.

Nail them to the wall, set them on fire and use them for target practice.

Fuck the Democrats all to Hell.
 
Last edited:

Polishprince

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2016
Messages
25,476
Reaction score
11,284
Points
950
I don't know this Amy Barrett broad from the man in the f'ing moon, so I'll have to take your word for it that she is tremendous. But whoever the President chooses, whether its Miss Barrett, or someone else, getting this in front of the Senate during the campaign season is paramount.
 
OP
JimBowie1958

JimBowie1958

Old Fogey
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
63,110
Reaction score
15,720
Points
2,220
Location
Fredericksburg, VA
I don't know this Amy Barrett broad from the man in the f'ing moon, so I'll have to take your word for it that she is tremendous. But whoever the President chooses, whether its Miss Barrett, or someone else, getting this in front of the Senate during the campaign season is paramount.

Since taking the bench, Judge Barrett has been a champion of originalism.
In the 2019 case of Kanter v. Barr, Judge Barrett dissented from a panel opinion that turned away a nonviolent felon’s Second Amendment challenge to federal and state laws prohibiting him from owning a gun. The challenger argued that the laws — which ban all felons, violent and nonviolent, from gun possession — were too broad in that they swept in low-risk people like him (the man had been convicted of Medicare-related mail fraud).
The court sided instead with the government, holding that while the fit between the government objective of reducing violent crime and the group of people banned from obtaining guns was not perfect, it did not need to be a perfect fit. As the court held, “a reasonable fit” is all that was needed for the law to be constitutional — little solace for the individual dispossessed of his Second Amendment rights.
Judge Barrett disagreed, discussing the relationship between felons and the right to bear arms at the Founding, and showcasing a serious commitment to originalism as a means of finding the correct answer to a constitutional question.
Judge Barrett drew an important distinction between civic rights, such as voting and jury service, and individual rights such as possessing a gun. She noted that individuals exercise the right to vote and serve on juries not for their own sake, but “as part of the collective enterprise of self-governance [and] administering justice.” By contrast, as the Supreme Court found in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller, the Second Amendment confers an individual right to keep and bear arms, rooted in a right to self-defense. This raises the bar: The government can take away civic rights from “unvirtuous” citizens even if they are not dangerous, but individual rights are a different story.

 

Coyote

Varmint
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
87,157
Reaction score
20,200
Points
2,180
Location
in between
I was convinced we needed a calming choice that everyone can accept, but I have been chewing this thing like over-smoke beef jerkey since last night and I have changed my mind for the following reasons:

1) Amy Coney Barrett deserves her seat on the court as a very accomplished new American woman who balances career and family life (7 kids) and still is one of the top minds in her profession. She is also a Constitutional Original intent judge, the kind we really need to reign in all the bullshit case law we have h ad recently (United....) A woman a deserving as her should not be passed over for reasons based on political gamesmanship.

2) Realpolitical logic told me that picking a 'conservative' jurist to fill RBGs seat would inflame the left and rive them to the polls. But the left is already hysterical and hates everything Trump does, no matter what he does. Trump could pick Jesus Christ and the left would go ape shit batcrazy. So why bother? Just bolster your base and pick what they want, there is really no downside.

3) I reflected on how the Democrats treated Bret Kavanaugh and it still pisses me off.

Nail 'em Mr President.

Nail them to the wall, set them on fire and use them for target practice.

Fuck the Democrats all to Hell.
Merrick Garland deserved a seat on the court too.
 

ABikerSailor

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
50,006
Reaction score
10,005
Points
2,040
Location
Amarillo TX
Even if she was nominated by Trump, it's doubtful that she would be able to get confirmed by the Senate before the election.
She was confirmed by the senate in 2017. There’s no reason this couldn’t be wrapped up in a week.
She was confirmed for being on the Seventh Circuit court of appeals, not SCOTUS. In order for her to be SCOTUS, she would have to go through the confirmation process again.
 

Tipsycatlover

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2016
Messages
43,660
Reaction score
16,094
Points
2,290
The main reason to appoint a justice is that the communists are threatening to burn the whole country down. Wonderful idea right before the election. We can finally deal with them as they need to be dealt with.
 

Death-Ninja

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2020
Messages
1,182
Reaction score
1,913
Points
1,908
Location
Hayward Wisconsin
Even if she was nominated by Trump, it's doubtful that she would be able to get confirmed by the Senate before the election.
I'd say its 50/50 she's confirmed before November 3rd.... the important thing is she is confirmed in time to help exterminate the democratic party plan to steal America from Americans.
 

ABikerSailor

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
50,006
Reaction score
10,005
Points
2,040
Location
Amarillo TX
Even if she was nominated by Trump, it's doubtful that she would be able to get confirmed by the Senate before the election.
Why does she have to be confirmed by the election? End of the year is doable.

But, I do believe in Trump. If anybody can put this on a fast track, Trump can.
If she's not confirmed before the election and Biden wins, Biden can simply say he doesn't want her and she's no longer in the running for SCOTUS.
 

Missouri_Mike

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2012
Messages
16,989
Reaction score
5,896
Points
350
Even if she was nominated by Trump, it's doubtful that she would be able to get confirmed by the Senate before the election.
She was confirmed by the senate in 2017. There’s no reason this couldn’t be wrapped up in a week.
She was confirmed for being on the Seventh Circuit court of appeals, not SCOTUS. In order for her to be SCOTUS, she would have to go through the confirmation process again.
The democrats already shot their wad during that first confirmation hearing. What are they going to do now? Rehash the same crap? I think after Kavanaugh there aren’t a lot of people willing to put up with the democrat bullshit this time around. That crap will be cut short.
 

Dont Taz Me Bro

Diamond Member
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Messages
51,674
Reaction score
16,093
Points
2,290
Location
Las Vegas, Nevada
Even if she was nominated by Trump, it's doubtful that she would be able to get confirmed by the Senate before the election.
they can do it after. Even if Trump loses and some of the Republicans lose in the Senate they are still there through the end of the year
 

Missouri_Mike

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2012
Messages
16,989
Reaction score
5,896
Points
350
Even if she was nominated by Trump, it's doubtful that she would be able to get confirmed by the Senate before the election.
Why does she have to be confirmed by the election? End of the year is doable.

But, I do believe in Trump. If anybody can put this on a fast track, Trump can.
If she's not confirmed before the election and Biden wins, Biden can simply say he doesn't want her and she's no longer in the running for SCOTUS.
Actually he can’t do shit about it until he’s sworn in along with the new senate. She could easily be voted in after the election. Assuming Biden even wins.
 

Polishprince

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2016
Messages
25,476
Reaction score
11,284
Points
950
I was convinced we needed a calming choice that everyone can accept, but I have been chewing this thing like over-smoke beef jerkey since last night and I have changed my mind for the following reasons:

1) Amy Coney Barrett deserves her seat on the court as a very accomplished new American woman who balances career and family life (7 kids) and still is one of the top minds in her profession. She is also a Constitutional Original intent judge, the kind we really need to reign in all the bullshit case law we have h ad recently (United....) A woman a deserving as her should not be passed over for reasons based on political gamesmanship.

2) Realpolitical logic told me that picking a 'conservative' jurist to fill RBGs seat would inflame the left and rive them to the polls. But the left is already hysterical and hates everything Trump does, no matter what he does. Trump could pick Jesus Christ and the left would go ape shit batcrazy. So why bother? Just bolster your base and pick what they want, there is really no downside.

3) I reflected on how the Democrats treated Bret Kavanaugh and it still pisses me off.

Nail 'em Mr President.

Nail them to the wall, set them on fire and use them for target practice.

Fuck the Democrats all to Hell.
Merrick Garland deserved a seat on the court too.

How do you figure? Mr. Garland didn't even show his High School Yearbooks, we have no idea what kind of disqualifying shenanigans he engaged in as a teen.
 

Bootney Lee Farnsworth

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
26,461
Reaction score
10,178
Points
910
Location
Tejas
I was convinced we needed a calming choice that everyone can accept, but I have been chewing this thing like over-smoke beef jerkey since last night and I have changed my mind for the following reasons:

1) Amy Coney Barrett deserves her seat on the court as a very accomplished new American woman who balances career and family life (7 kids) and still is one of the top minds in her profession. She is also a Constitutional Original intent judge, the kind we really need to reign in all the bullshit case law we have h ad recently (United....) A woman a deserving as her should not be passed over for reasons based on political gamesmanship.

2) Realpolitical logic told me that picking a 'conservative' jurist to fill RBGs seat would inflame the left and drive them to the polls. But the left is already hysterical and hates everything Trump does, no matter what he does. Trump could pick Jesus Christ and the left would go ape shit batcrazy. So why bother? Just bolster your base and pick what they want, there is really no downside.

3) I reflected on how the Democrats treated Bret Kavanaugh and it still pisses me off.

Nail 'em Mr President.

Nail them to the wall, set them on fire and use them for target practice.

Fuck the Democrats all to Hell.
For this nomination, Trump and Turtle Mitch need to be RUTHLESS.....just like the Supreme Court is now......
:laughing0301:



:banana:
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top