SCOTUS: No longer content with stacking, they're now dealing from the bottom of the deck

[No Excuses]

25 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

Sucks that the actual story is being buried because the NYT was sloppy in their handling of things, but that is really their fault.  They need to be better about they word articles. In 2019, they should know that semantics will be used to make their sloppiness in reporting the bigger story than the actual story. 

 

If anything, all this new information is bringing to light what most people knew in the first place, which was the FBI probe or "investigation" into Kavanaugh was a sham and designed, not to actually find anything.

 

Theatrics and point scoring as usual take over rather than the substance of the story. 

 

The fact that Dr. Ford was interrogated by a prosecutor and held her own, and Kavanaugh was having a meltdown until the prosecutor was shoved aside really was all that one needed to know about where the truth lies in this story.

 

It really should be no surprise that men highly interested in controlling women’s bodies and their choices are also perverts and sexual assailants. 

[bcl05]

This Alexandra Petri piece is devastating:  

 

https://beta.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/09/16/theres-nothing-wrong-with-good-harmless-fun/

[Cooked Crack]

 

[Dan T.]

Re-seeing clips of Kavanaugh's appearance at the confirmation hearing reminded me just how absolutely spot-on this was:

 

 

[The Evil Genius]

5 hours ago, Cooked Crack said:

Would have posted here yesterday but the Kavanaugh still a scumbag talks were going on.

 

I'd be curious if these bigoted business owners would be okay with making invitations to a wedding for a transgender woman marrying a man. Or a transgender woman and transgender man marrying?

 

One hopes someone tests them out and shows their religious freedom bull**** defense is just that. 

[Cooked Crack]

Just now, The Evil Genius said:

 

I'd be curious if these bigoted business owners would be okay with making invitations to a wedding for a transgender woman marrying a man. Or a transgender woman and transgender man marrying?

 

One hopes someone tests them out and shows their religious freedom bull**** defense is just that. 

Their heads would probably blow. A trans man marrying a cis male. "I don't accept that you're a man but I also can't perform gay weddings even though I don't think you're a man." Probably try to pull something in the bible about dressing in women's clothes or some nonsense.

[skinsmarydu]

3 hours ago, Dan T. said:

Re-seeing clips of Kavanaugh's appearance at the confirmation hearing reminded me just how absolutely spot-on this was:

I thought about it the other day too...

"All I've got are these...creepy calendars..." 

[Cooked Crack]

 

[kfrankie]

On 9/17/2019 at 3:25 PM, Cooked Crack said:

Their heads would probably blow. A trans man marrying a cis male. "I don't accept that you're a man but I also can't perform gay weddings even though I don't think you're a man." Probably try to pull something in the bible about dressing in women's clothes or some nonsense.

 

I'd be interested in seeing who funded the plaintiffs' litigation in this case.

[visionary]

 

[visionary]

 

[Cooked Crack]

 

Quote

Kennedy requested a private moment with President Trump to deliver a message about the next Supreme Court opening, Marcus reports. Kennedy told Trump he should consider another of his former clerks, Brett M. Kavanaugh, who was not on the president’s first two lists of candidates.

 

[skinsmarydu]

RBG hospitalized at Johns Hopkins last night with a fever & chills, expected to be released this morning. 

It is required of us to send her prayers, good juju, and healing woo. 

[visionary]

 

[Cooked Crack]

 

 

[TheGreatBuzz]

^^^I thought this was already decided.  There is no federal requirement for it.  Some states have laws that require it but even if the voter “breaks” that law, it is usually like a $100 fine.

[PCS]

 

 

 

[Burgold]

1 hour ago, PCS said:

 

 

 

This is always been McConnell's plan. He wanted to stack the Supreme Court with ideologues who would prejudge every case not on the merits or precedence, but on politics. 

[StillUnknown]

Every single institution meant to protect is caving

[Gallen5862]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-has-flipped-the-9th-circuit-—-and-some-new-judges-are-causing-a-shock-wave/ar-BB10gUTy?ocid=spartandhp

 

Trump has flipped the 9th Circuit — and some new judges are causing a 'shock wave' 

 

When President Trump ticks off his accomplishments since taking office, he frequently mentions his aggressive makeover of a key sector of the federal judiciary — the circuit courts of appeal, where he has appointed 51 judges to lifetime jobs in three years.

 

n few places has the effect been felt more powerfully than in the sprawling 9th Circuit, which covers California and eight other states. Because of Trump's success in filling vacancies, the San Francisco-based circuit, long dominated by Democratic appointees, has suddenly shifted to the right, with an even more pronounced tilt expected in the years ahead.

 

Trump has now named 10 judges to the 9th Circuit — more than one-third of its active judges — compared with seven appointed by President Obama over eight years.

 

"Trump has effectively flipped the circuit," said 9th Circuit Judge Milan D. Smith Jr., an appointee of President George W. Bush.

 

 

Edited February 23, 2020 by Gallen5862

[StillUnknown]

 

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

19 hours ago, Gallen5862 said:

Because of Trump's success in filling vacancies...

McConnell’s success in blocking Obama appointments is more accurate. Trump didn’t have to do ****.

[Cooked Crack]

 

 

Edited February 25, 2020 by Cooked Crack

[Larry]

Somebody needs to start a parallel case, working it's way up to the Supremes.  

 

Y'all want rule that the First Amendment gives adoption agencies the right to ignore state laws regarding the placement of children if their religion tells them to?  

 

I want a Muslim employee of an adoption agency to decide that he will only send children to Muslim families.  

[twa]

15 minutes ago, Larry said:

Somebody needs to start a parallel case, working it's way up to the Supremes.  

 

Y'all want rule that the First Amendment gives adoption agencies the right to ignore state laws regarding the placement of children if their religion tells them to?  

 

I want a Muslim employee of an adoption agency to decide that he will only send children to Muslim families.  

 

under the law a muslin adoption agency could do so....so what's your point?