If it already wasn't, The Supreme Court Is Now On The Ballot.

[Papageorgio]

The Court had not conferred Presidential immunity in 2020.

That’s funny because when conservatives took a 6-3 advantage in the court the Dems were fired up and it was an issue in 2020, then we had the overturning of Roe v Wade and that was going to bring out every woman against the GOP, again, the Dems have lost momentum in the polls and they need an issue to cling to and they have nothing, this might catch on but the timing during the RNC convention is just Biden and his side take focus off the convention and the assassination attempt and refocus the voters to something they have in their favor that might stir voters.

 

[Lesh]

That’s funny because when conservatives took a 6-3 advantage in the court the Dems were fired up and it was an issue in 2020, then we had the overturning of Roe v Wade and that was going to bring out every woman against the GOP, again, the Dems have lost momentum in the polls and they need an issue to cling to and they have nothing, this might catch on but the timing during the RNC convention is just Biden and his side take focus off the convention and the assassination attempt and refocus the voters to something they have in their favor that might stir voters.

This has been building since McTurtle stole the Scalia seat for Gorsuch

The recent ruling was the tipping point

 

[M14 Shooter]

It wasn't. It was a Machiavellian power grab designed to carry out a very personal agenda.

if one of your people did this, you;d be proud.

 

[berg80]

Nice of him. Still, a friend is allowed to do nice things for another....you don't have any friends do you?

Hmmmmmmmmm. Seems like you purposely took an example with no context to the discussion. That being a wealthy businessman with a direct financial interest in a SC case giving lavish gifts and vacations to a justice who did not recuse himself. You aren't just disingenuous, you're dishonest.

 

[Foolardi]

Was blocking 80 judicial nominations "working within the framework?" The Senate has the responsibility of "advice and consent." Not obstruct nominees out of vindictive partisanship.

- Advise & Consent - { 1962 } was terrific Political
potboiler by often Mad as a hatter Director Otto Preminger.
Widely known for his Hitlerian domination on a Movie Set.
About the only actor able to tone down Preminger was
the jazzy,well-tailored yet snooty { some would say " uppity "}
actor Harry Belafonte who passed away last April at age 96.
He was lifelong Political Activist.
Last heard him on Radio with Al Sharpton { also with MSNBC }
talking about the possible need to arrest a certain political
class of americans.You guessed it Trump's people.Before the
word MAGA was created.

 

[struth]

“Nice things”?

Dude.

What?

 

[struth]

Hmmmmmmmmm. Seems like you purposely took an example with no context to the discussion. That being a wealthy businessman with a direct financial interest in a SC case giving lavish gifts and vacations to a justice who did not recuse himself. You aren't just disingenuous, you're dishonest.

He had no direct fin interest, he wasn’t. A party to the case

You keep lying.

 

[Papageorgio]

This has been building since McTurtle stole the Scalia seat for Gorsuch

The recent ruling was the tipping point

The tipping point was over Roe v Wade, or are you saying abortion that 60% of the population didn’t drive people to the polls in 2022? If there is an issue that is it. And it is all propaganda from Biden and even if re-elected he won’t push it. It is just a tool to spur his base and has little traction outside of his base.

 

[berg80]

That’s funny because when conservatives took a 6-3 advantage in the court the Dems were fired up and it was an issue in 2020, then we had the overturning of Roe v Wade and that was going to bring out every woman against the GOP, again, the Dems have lost momentum in the polls and they need an issue to cling to and they have nothing, this might catch on but the timing during the RNC convention is just Biden and his side take focus off the convention and the assassination attempt and refocus the voters to something they have in their favor that might stir voters.

As abortion looks like a key issue in 2024, voters more divided by party than ever​

https://www.npr.org/2024/05/02/1248599739/abortion-democrats-independents-republicans-voting-2024-election

Record Share of U.S. Electorate Is Pro-Choice and Voting on It​

Record Share of U.S. Electorate Is Pro-Choice and Voting on It

Pro-choice voters are showing record-high intensity on the abortion issue, and the pro-choice segment of the public remains historically large.

news.gallup.com

 

[berg80]

The tipping point was over Roe v Wade, or are you saying abortion that 60% of the population didn’t drive people to the polls in 2022? If there is an issue that is it. And it is all propaganda from Biden and even if re-elected he won’t push it. It is just a tool to spur his base and has little traction outside of his base.

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- A record-high 32% of U.S. voters say they would only vote for a candidate for major office who shares their views on abortion. The importance of a candidate’s abortion stance to one’s vote is markedly higher among pro-choice voters than it was during the 2020 presidential election cycle, while pro-life voters’ intensity about voting on the abortion issue has waned. Also, voters’ greater intensity on the issue today compared with 2020 is explained mainly by Democrats, while Republicans and independents have shown little change.

U.S. adults who are pro-choice are also significantly more likely now than two decades ago to say it is important that any future Supreme Court nominees share their views on abortion.

 

[berg80]

He had no direct fin interest, he wasn’t. A party to the case

You keep lying.

The facts say otherwise.

 

[struth]

The facts say otherwise.

Haha no he facts say he didn’t have a case before the court

You lied

 

[Whodatsaywhodat.]

It’s hard to know the precise combination of developments that changed President Biden’s mind about Supreme Court reforms and prompted him to place them more centrally in the framework of the 2024 election.

Was it the ethics scandals of Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito and the Supreme Court’s own ineptitude in dealing with them? Was it the series of controversial decisions across a whole host of issues and areas of civic life in which the court wrested power away from the executive and legislative branches and placed it firmly in the judicial branch? Was it the six-justice conservative majority aggressively uprooting the court’s own precedents in pursuit of its own preferred legal and policy outcomes? Was it the fact that he’s trailing in the polls with his own re-election more at risk that at any previous point in his presidency?

All of the above are in play, of course. A tipping point was reached, and it’s unlikely any one development was the difference-maker.

Biden Elevates Supreme Court Reform To His Re-Election Agenda

It’s hard to know the precise combination of developments that prompted President Biden to embrace Supreme Court reforms.

talkingpointsmemo.com

trump's Court's popularity is in the shitter. Deservedly so. Perhaps this is a move by Joe to capitalize on voter sentiment. No matter the motive, reform is overdue. There must be accountability for crass ethics violations and for the lack of recusals when there are demonstrable conflicts of interest (hello Clarence). I can understand the Founders wanting to somewhat insulate the Court in order to maintain its independence. But they did not contemplate such a corrupt Court nor such polarized times.

Cry on pussy . Didn't get to break the law ?

 

[berg80]

Cry on pussy . Didn't get to break the law ?

Welcome to my ignore list.

 

[berg80]

Haha no he facts say he didn’t have a case before the court

You lied

The facts say he had a financial interest in a case before the Court. You lied.

 

[Rawley]

Given the financial rewards Clarence and Ginni received from Crow it was incumbent on your uncle to make sure Harlan had no direct or tangential business before the Court. The standard being to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. Clarence having about as much concern for the standard as you do.

Report: Harlan Crow Has a Stake in 4 SCOTUS Cases — and Thomas Hasn’t Recused

Crow’s financial interest in the cases, as uncovered in new exclusive research, could sway Thomas’s decisions.

truthout.org

LOL Did you even read, let alone understand the nonsense they are feeding you? Do you understand Chevron?

 

[berg80]

LOL Did you even read, let alone understand the nonsense they are feeding you?

IRONY ALERT!

 

[Rawley]

IRONY ALERT!

So you don't have a clue. That gross ignorance, combined with the extreme hate you carry in your life is a toxic combination

 

[struth]

The facts say he had a financial interest in a case before the Court. You lied.

So what? The issue is he wasn’t a party to be case.

I mean if a judge has to recuse themselves from any case that might have an impact on their friends or family they couldn’t sit for anything

Every time a court rules on a tax issue it impacts everyone finincally

You are just desperate and grasping…it’s telling though when one of Obama’s justice actually heard a case involving a company that paid her three million you said nothing

 

[22lcidw]

This has been building since McTurtle stole the Scalia seat for Gorsuch

The recent ruling was the tipping point

Up until then the game was fixed for the Progressives, and they have had a huge advantage. Enough to get arrogant, obnoxious and ignorant as what people do when they control near everything. Except theirs was far different than the past. It is vicious dictator style government control that squashes everything. However, in the last couple of years a few Progs have been taken to task for it.