It's Official, Russians Corrupted The Election

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by Oerets

Why, just why, ask yourself this? This ""Right"" (CULT) is so politicizing the Judicial Branch....

They figured out a work around on the "ole popular, or majority with voters.

A single Judge in the "Right" place can move the ball along...

I believe that the politicization of the judiciary started with the Obama presidency when states like Texas made it a game of suing the black guy. And then McConnell came along and the fix was on. Trump in four years appointed 200 judges to the Federal court and three Supreme Court justices and now we are paying the price with a politically active judiciary.

How does Thomas get to sit on the bench while his wife is carrying the MAGA torch like an Olympian?

[whell]

Originally Posted by Rajoo

I believe that the politicization of the judiciary started with the Obama presidency when states like Texas made it a game of suing the black guy. And then McConnell came along and the fix was on. Trump in four years appointed 200 judges to the Federal court and three Supreme Court justices and now we are paying the price with a politically active judiciary.

How does Thomas get to sit on the bench while his wife is carrying the MAGA torch like an Olympian?

It started further back than that. Bork and Thomas nominations were political shit shows.

https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallp...-maybe-forever

"The nomination changed everything, maybe forever," says Tom Goldstein, publisher of the popular SCOTUSblog, which extensively covers the Supreme Court. "Republicans nominated this brilliant guy to move the law in this dramatically more conservative direction. Liberal groups turned around and blocked him precisely because of those views. Their fight legitimized scorched-earth ideological wars over nominations at the Supreme Court, and to this day both sides remain completely convinced they were right. The upshot is that we have this ridiculous system now where nominees shut up and don't say anything that might signal what they really think."

And Thomas gets to remain on the bench because this is a free country, and his wife has as much right as anyone else to petition the government.

[Chicks]

Typical MAGAMoron hypocrisy.

Thomas' wife was DEEPLY involved in the fascist insurrection, clearly belongs behind bars.

Pelosi's hubby sells a stock, and Reich-wing media has a fit.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

And Thomas gets to remain on the bench because this is a free country, and his wife has as much right as anyone else to petition the government.

Conspiring to overthrow the government is not the same as petitioning the government. Dunno about you, but I'm not sure it's a great idea to have an admitted deprogrammed cultist and current QAnon fan being the best friend and biggest influence on a SCOTUS justice. YMMV.

[RickeyM]

Originally Posted by whell

...
And Thomas gets to remain on the bench because this is a free country, and "his wife has as much right as anyone else to petition the government".

LOL, whell got jokes

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by whell

It started further back than that. Bork and Thomas nominations were political shit shows.

https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallp...-maybe-forever

"The nomination changed everything, maybe forever," says Tom Goldstein, publisher of the popular SCOTUSblog, which extensively covers the Supreme Court. "Republicans nominated this brilliant guy to move the law in this dramatically more conservative direction. Liberal groups turned around and blocked him precisely because of those views. Their fight legitimized scorched-earth ideological wars over nominations at the Supreme Court, and to this day both sides remain completely convinced they were right. The upshot is that we have this ridiculous system now where nominees shut up and don't say anything that might signal what they really think."

And Thomas gets to remain on the bench because this is a free country, and his wife has as much right as anyone else to petition the government.

Bork? Robert Bork who started the Saturday Night Massacre? And because one blogger calls him brilliant you believe he is the standard bearer for Scotus nominations?

So how about McConnel blocking Garland but barrelling through Amy Barret, perhaps even weaker than Kavanaugh, who I doubt if he even had any judicial experience. Save your breath, I already know that Scotus justice need not have any prior judicial experience nor for that matter even need a law degree.

Didn't Bush 2 nominate a woman who was working for him for the Scotus, but the laughter got so loud he withdrew the nomination?

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Conspiring to overthrow the government is not the same as petitioning the government. Dunno about you, but I'm not sure it's a great idea to have an admitted deprogrammed cultist and current QAnon fan being the best friend and biggest influence on a SCOTUS justice. YMMV.

The official word from Meadows is Ginny Thomas was organizing a guided tour of our capitol for members of the Q'Anon Patriotic Front.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Rajoo

The official word from Meadows is Ginny Thomas was organizing a guided tour of our capitol for members of the Q'Anon Patriotic Front.

A normal tourist visit.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Rajoo

Bork? Robert Bork who started the Saturday Night Massacre?

Yeh, that Bork who had no business with 100 miles of the SCOTUS. He supported the rights of Southern states to impose a poll tax and he had a stated goal of rolling back the civil rights decisions of the Warren and Burger courts. He was also criticized for being an "advocate of disproportionate powers for the executive branch of Government, almost executive supremacy," most notably, his role in the Saturday Night Massacre.

He lost 58-42 with 6 Republicans voting against him (6 Republican voting against him after knowing that the Dems already had the votes is a testimony to how out-of-the-mainstream this freak was). He is just the type of reactionary weirdo that today's GOP still favors.

An aside - My first date with my future wife happened to be during the Bork hearings at a French bistro on Capitol Hill, La Colline, for lunch. Bork sat in the table right next to us. He was one freaky looking dude.

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Yeh, that Bork who had no business with 100 miles of the SCOTUS. He supported the rights of Southern states to impose a poll tax and he had a stated goal of rolling back the civil rights decisions of the Warren and Burger courts. He was also criticized for being an "advocate of disproportionate powers for the executive branch of Government, almost executive supremacy," most notably, his role in the Saturday Night Massacre.

He lost 58-42 with 6 Republicans voting against him (6 Republican voting against him after knowing that the Dems already had the votes is a testimony to how out-of-the-mainstream this freak was). He is just the type of reactionary weirdo that today's GOP still favors.

An aside - My first date with my future wife happened to be during the Bork hearings at a French bistro on Capitol Hill, La Colline, for lunch. Bork sat in the table right next to us. He was one freaky looking dude.

Happy that your marriage is a success despite enduring a freak show on your first date.