Rants and Raves

[TMeister]

Just a nice little reminder that most of Rapist Donnie's family have turned against him because they think he's a vile piece of shit.

Stare at this one long and hard, MAGA Rats. You're all melting down knowing President Biden is going to send this lying criminal scumbag to prison in a few months!

[Worf359]

This photo will really sting a Low IQ Deplorable like you but it proves all you worthless MAGA Cucks are cocksucking queers LOL.

Come on snowflake you need to find some new material. Your chants of Russia Russia Russia are as played out as Don Lemmons ass. Soon we will have another conservative Supreme Court justice and we will start reversing the liberal bans on everything from criminal illegal immigrants to these Antifa and BLM terrorist.

[TMeister]

I agree. Curious how it will play out, but I hope a conservative will occupy RBG's place. After all, it's only for life.

Just wait until President Biden and a Democrat-controlled House and Senate seize power from the Corrupt Repukes.

We'll stack the SCOTUS with 4 or 5 more justices that are so left-wing it will make your little Deplorable Swamp Rat heads explode with anger.

And they will rule that bench for LIFE, which means you'll be rotting in the ground for decades and that court will still be obeying the Democrat agenda.

DEMS WIN LIKE WE ALWAYS DO.

[Bullett64]

The main part you're leaving out is that Moscow Mitch is playing dirty and NOBODY likes a lying dirty hypocrite like him and Pedo Trump.

...

You've been WARNED, right wing pieces of shit.

I'm not leaving out any salient point. I'm just patiently explaining what the Constitution says -- and what it doesn't say. I have been very careful to not put my personal political beliefs into any of my posts. You infer what they are at your own risk.

I also am very careful to call people, of all parties by their actual names or titles. What I am leaving out is all the name calling, personal slurs, doctored pictures, and actual lies that you seem to thrive on.

How old are you? 12?

[Niteluvr]

You are just reinforcing my point. The argument that started this off was whether or not a Supreme Court vacancy could be filled during an election year or whether we need to wait until after the election. My point was, and you seem to agree, that the Constitution says nothing about "election year exceptions. " Is it right to delay? Possibly. It unfortunately depends on your party affiliation. Is it the moral thing to do? Same answer. But if you are the President, you have the legal authority to nominate a replacement justice. That is all I ever said.

I agree. Curious how it will play out, but I hope a conservative will occupy RBG's place. After all, it's only for life. .

[TMeister]

Damn after that whooping you took from admin I thought like most yellowed belly Democratic cowards you wouldn't be back, but just like these liberal feminists are learning there is nothing better than a big MAGA cock to shut you up.

This photo will really sting a Low IQ Deplorable like you but it proves all you worthless MAGA Cucks are cocksucking queers LOL.

[SkyWookie]

I wasn't clear. We are governed as a democratic republic. We elect local and state officials, send them to DC to vote on our behalf. Civil rights Act was a piece of legislation passed by a majority of congress and senate and signed into law by a president. Courts don't legislate

I agree courts don't legislate, but a judge with not much more than a snap of his fingers can rule ANY law Unconstitutional making it null and void, thus again it falls on the constitution. Congress and the pres. Can pass all the laws they want and judges can line up and nullify every single one of them.

[Aaron Hamlet]

Quote Originally Posted by AaronHamlet.

Of course it does. It's a democracy, a democratic republic. Majority rules.

First problem I see is that most people don't even know what type of gov. We have. Bullett is right we are governed by the constitution. We are a constitutional republic which means majority only matters in elections. Constitutional Republics actually protect the few over the many. Look at civil rights movement, look at LGBT rights movements, they were the minority and the constitution is where they argued that they had equal rights in all aspects and through the courts rulings were made based off the constitution give them the rights they deserved. Just saying we are not even close to being a Democratic Republic.

I wasn't clear. We are governed as a democratic republic. We elect local and state officials, send them to DC to vote on our behalf. Civil rights Act was a piece of legislation passed by a majority of congress and senate and signed into law by a president. Courts don't legislate

[TMeister]

While the Constitution does not expressly prohibit "packing" the Supreme Court, both parties realize that this is a very slippery slope indeed and I believe that they will avoid attempting to change the size of the court to fulfill their wishes. They are smart enough to realize that any attempt to do so will eventually result in a counter-"pack" by the other party and the court will get larger and larger as time goes on, eventually rendering a meaningless and useless body.

The main part you're leaving out is that Moscow Mitch is playing dirty and NOBODY likes a lying dirty hypocrite like him and Pedo Trump.

So when Moscow Mitch blocked the SCOTUS nomination of Merrick Garland in 2016 because it was an election year but now claims that a vacancy should be quickly filled before Commie Donnie is booted out of the White House, well then the gloves come off and the Mighty Democrats unleash our fury upon the CORRUPT and WICKED GOP with ZERO MERCY at our disposal.

Like I said, if you Low IQ assholes play nice with us Powerful Dems and you MIGHT get some compromises from us since the Blue Team we will have ALL the power after Big Joe is sworn in. But if you choose to play like crybabies and sore losers, we WILL destroy you until you are ALL gone.

You've been WARNED, right wing pieces of shit.

[Bullett64]

' . 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'.

Your argument makes no sense. What amendment is needed? You call it the whims of the majority, constitution calls it advice and consent. If you don't use the power you have, you lose it. If a SC justice dies 45 days before a general election and you have a D president and a D led senate or a Rep president and a Rep led senate, nominee gets a hearing. If you have a D president and a rep led senate or a rep president and a D led senate, nominee doesn't. Providing a hearing or not providing a hearing is not a whim, both are advice and consent. It's not hard.

You are just reinforcing my point. The argument that started this off was whether or not a Supreme Court vacancy could be filled during an election year or whether we need to wait until after the election. My point was, and you seem to agree, that the Constitution says nothing about "election year exceptions. " Is it right to delay? Possibly. It unfortunately depends on your party affiliation. Is it the moral thing to do? Same answer. But if you are the President, you have the legal authority to nominate a replacement justice. That is all I ever said.

[Bullett64]

... We'll pack the court with a dozen liberal justices ...

While the Constitution does not expressly prohibit "packing" the Supreme Court, both parties realize that this is a very slippery slope indeed and I believe that they will avoid attempting to change the size of the court to fulfill their wishes. They are smart enough to realize that any attempt to do so will eventually result in a counter-"pack" by the other party and the court will get larger and larger as time goes on, eventually rendering a meaningless and useless body.

President Roosevelt tried it but did not succeed. The foundation of our political system requires three separate and independent branches. It's not a perfect system, but no-one has come up with a better one.

[Worf359]

That is why I want to see Commie Donnie and the Fascist Repukes even TRY to get a justice confirmed before January 20.

We mighty Democrats will bring a HELL down upon you MAGA-Rats for the next 8 years like you've never seen and you'll be begging for your lives. We'll pack the court with a dozen liberal justices that make RBG look like a NeoCon warmonger.

Like I sad just fucking try it. Democrats always win in the end.

Damn after that whooping you took from admin I thought like most yellowed belly Democratic cowards you wouldn't be back, but just like these liberal feminists are learning there is nothing better than a big MAGA cock to shut you up.

[TMeister]

I warned you motherfucking worthless MAGA-Cunts not to mess with us Mighty Dems!

Killer Nancy is taking off the gloves and ready to deliver the TKO to Draft Dodging Donnie during his final months in office:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pel...eme-court-pick

[TMeister]

Related: the Senate can also add justices to the Supreme Court aka "pack" the Court. This is also Constitutional.

Also related: the Senate can change procedural rules that greatly affect the confirmation process of Supreme Court justices. Ask Harry Reid about that.

The majority party of the Senate has significant influence, arguably more power than the Presidency when it comes to confirming Justices.

That is why I want to see Commie Donnie and the Fascist Repukes even TRY to get a justice confirmed before January 20.

We mighty Democrats will bring a HELL down upon you MAGA-Rats for the next 8 years like you've never seen and you'll be begging for your lives. We'll pack the court with a dozen liberal justices that make RBG look like a NeoCon warmonger.

Like I sad just fucking try it. Democrats always win in the end.

[SkyWookie]

Quote Originally Posted by AaronHamlet.

Of course it does. It's a democracy, a democratic republic. Majority rules.

Not when the rule is stated in the Constitution. It is not subject to the whims of the majority and can only be changed by amendment. The filling of Supreme Court vacancies falls into this category.

The president has the constitutional authority to appoint a nominee when vacancy arises, and the Senate has the constitutional authority to confirm or block that nominee. Period.

First problem I see is that most people don't even know what type of gov. We have. Bullett is right we are governed by the constitution. We are a constitutional republic which means majority only matters in elections. Constitutional Republics actually protect the few over the many. Look at civil rights movement, look at LGBT rights movements, they were the minority and the constitution is where they argued that they had equal rights in all aspects and through the courts rulings were made based off the constitution give them the rights they deserved. Just saying we are not even close to being a Democratic Republic.