Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 9 votes

Trump, Pence moving quickly on Supreme Court pick


  • Please log in to reply
372 replies to this topic

#1 Twister

Twister

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 709 posts

Posted 16 January 2017 - 03:42 PM


The list is made up of mostly federal appellate court judges including Judge William Pryor, Diane Sykes, Steven Colloton, Neil Gorsuch, Raymond Kethledge and Thomas Hardiman.
 
Manchin said he and Pence did not talk about a specific potential nominee, but was told it would be from the list of 20. "If you're a Democrat, you can assume it's going to be somebody conservative. That's a given," Manchin said.
 
The Federalist Society's Leonard Leo, Heritage Foundation President Jim DeMint and some senators are involved in the process, Trump said.

 

 

Thank goodness President Donald Trump will get to make this nomination (and hopefully a few more) instead of a raging leftist like Hillary.

 

Shaping the court for the next generation was truly the prize up for grabs last November.  

 

 



#2 zenwalk

zenwalk

    Pundit

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 48,444 posts

Posted 16 January 2017 - 04:07 PM

Yes, a 1000 year clown reich requires an enabling panel of stooges at the highest level of the court.  All autocrats subjugate the courts as their first act.


"A screaming comes across the sky. . ." -- Thomas Pynchon

#3 blowboatbethesda

blowboatbethesda

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,163 posts

Posted 16 January 2017 - 04:09 PM

Yes, a 1000 year clown reich requires an enabling panel of stooges at the highest level of the court.  All autocrats subjugate the courts as their first act.

 

Feeling bitter much?  :D  :lol:



#4 ncbirdfan

ncbirdfan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,330 posts

Posted 16 January 2017 - 04:16 PM

Feeling bitter much?  :D  :lol:

Нравится ли вам русская кухня?



#5 mrdeltoid

mrdeltoid

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,343 posts

Posted 16 January 2017 - 04:17 PM

There shouldn't be a litmus test. A SCJ should know the law, and to interpret it as it was written, NOT to legislate from the bench. If Trump appoints a partisan , he is no better than the dems.



#6 ncbirdfan

ncbirdfan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,330 posts

Posted 16 January 2017 - 04:24 PM

There shouldn't be a litmus test. A SCJ should know the law, and to interpret it as it was written, NOT to legislate from the bench. If Trump appoints a partisan , he is no better than the dems.

Don't you think Judge Merrick Garland was a good nominee?



#7 FatBoy

FatBoy

    Obama Did It Too

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 15,822 posts

Posted 16 January 2017 - 04:27 PM

I don't see Donny nominating a moderate. 


If we are here to help others, I often wonder what the others are here for. - Sir Thomas Robert Dewar

#8 Manny

Manny

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,342 posts
  • LocationEastern Shore of Maryland

Posted 16 January 2017 - 04:55 PM

I don't see Donny nominating a moderate.

Obama sure didn't. The only 2 moderates were appointed by Republican Presidents.

#9 genghiskhanraven

genghiskhanraven

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 11,270 posts

Posted 16 January 2017 - 05:11 PM

There shouldn't be a litmus test. A SCJ should know the law, and to interpret it as it was written, NOT to legislate from the bench. If Trump appoints a partisan , he is no better than the dems.


Unfortunately because of what Obama has done Trump needs to appoint a young extreme Bork type to balance out the court.

#10 stevez51

stevez51

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10,877 posts

Posted 16 January 2017 - 05:34 PM

Feeling bitter much?  :D  :lol:

 

He has since Nov 9th .......



#11 SmarterThanYou

SmarterThanYou

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,459 posts

Posted 16 January 2017 - 05:37 PM

There shouldn't be a litmus test. A SCJ should know the law, and to interpret it as it was written, NOT to legislate from the bench. If Trump appoints a partisan , he is no better than the dems.


Good luck with that.

#12 SmarterThanYou

SmarterThanYou

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,459 posts

Posted 16 January 2017 - 05:38 PM

Unfortunately because of what Obama has done Trump needs to appoint a young extreme Bork type to balance out the court.


Balance out the Court?

LMAO.

#13 genghiskhanraven

genghiskhanraven

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 11,270 posts

Posted 16 January 2017 - 05:41 PM

Balance out the Court?
LMAO.


Maybe you're right BUT
As Obama likes to say "Elections do have consequences"

#14 hst2

hst2

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 91,786 posts

Posted 16 January 2017 - 05:50 PM

Unfortunately because of what Obama has done Trump needs to appoint a young extreme Bork type to balance out the court.


The Supreme Court seat being, essentially, stolen from a Democratic president in order to maintain a conservative majority for which is now going on for generations, is a violation of our democratic principles, impugns the dignity of our democratic institutions. A permanent consensus, such as what the Republicans seek, is the antithesis of a democratic nation.

We're like a banana Republic; complete, soon enough, with a president who enriches himself through his public office.
"It is even harder for the average ape to believe that he has descended from man. - HL Mencken

#15 Eastsider

Eastsider

    Si vis bellum para pacem

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9,776 posts

Posted 16 January 2017 - 05:52 PM

Trump will make you lefties butt hurting way after he is gone from office with his picks.

#16 SmarterThanYou

SmarterThanYou

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,459 posts

Posted 16 January 2017 - 06:02 PM

Maybe you're right BUT
As Obama likes to say "Elections do have consequences"


Goes further back than that...

#17 SmarterThanYou

SmarterThanYou

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,459 posts

Posted 16 January 2017 - 06:03 PM

Trump will make you lefties butt hurting way after he is gone from office with his picks.


Trump will make our butts hurt?

Is that a sexual reference to The pee-pee Elect?

Edited by SmarterThanYou, 16 January 2017 - 06:05 PM.


#18 Eastsider

Eastsider

    Si vis bellum para pacem

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9,776 posts

Posted 16 January 2017 - 06:30 PM

Trump will make our butts hurt?

Is that a sexual reference to The pee-pee Elect?


Call it what you want whiners or butt hurt been going on since the election and will continue for a long time.

#19 bmorepunk

bmorepunk

    I Can't Read Good

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 11,555 posts

Posted 16 January 2017 - 07:05 PM

If I were the Democrats, I wouldn't resist at all, including a filibuster. Particularly if the nominee is actually awful from a functional law standpoint. Don't even show up for the committee or Senate proceedings, don't vote. Just let it be.



#20 FourTwenty

FourTwenty

    Advanced Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 388 posts

Posted 16 January 2017 - 07:20 PM

8 seems like a good number for the SC. B)






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users