Trump Releases List of 11 Potential Nominees to U.S. Supreme Court

[Correll]

Where do they stand on eminent domain for real estate developers?

Considering it was Republicans who handed down that decision they could be pretty cool with it.

All the justices voting in favor of it except for Kennedy were leftwingers.

That's what I thought.

 

[chikenwing]

Where do they stand on eminent domain for real estate developers?

Do you really care, or are you just trying for a gotcha?

We need to get our priorities right

Protection of real estate developers has to be a priority

I asked a serious question.

And you dodge.

Asking a question you don't care about is intellectually dishonest.

No dodge......

Trump is more interested in eminent domain than rightwing favorites Roe v Wade, Heller and Obamacare

He might be ,or not ,but you sure don't know what he thinks,unless you just got off the phone with him,ypur full of shit more than most days

 

[Correll]

Only 3 women and WHITES ONLY… A GOP wet dream…

Probably a reflection of the success you lefties have had over the years, attracting and keeping minorities.

After all, you wouldn't expect a Republican Candidate to promise to appoint democrats would you?

 

[2aguy]

I just googled Hardiman of Pennsylvania . Guy is 50 years old , looks VERY Conservative to me so if I read things correctly and if the Trump can stack the court , err , I mean if the TRUMP can appoint suitable Judges Gun Rights should be good for the next 50years L.Laugher !!

Yeah..the gun cites point out Sykes in particular..and another judge......so far not bad if he picks them.......I still like Cruz for Justice......but he will probably be the V.P.

 

[LoneLaugher]

He doesn't need to have any knowledge of all of the judges in America. But he does need to have detailed knowledge about the 11 judges that he has just suggested are his top choices for the SC.

Ya dumb shit ya.

I'm sure he gave some expert on judges some parameters on what he wanted, and then told them to go make him a list.

Just like Hillary will do, if she ever gets to that point.

YOu are just a dishonest partisan hack who is throwing crap against the wall desperately searching for something that might "Stick" that you can use against your enemies.

YOU DON'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT HOW MUCH TRUMP DOES OR DOES NOT KNOW ABOUT HIS LIST.

You seem upset. And...you are very dramatic for a tough guy.

Hillary will not provide a list of people she would appoint. It's not something she needs to do. Trump needed to do this because he has failed to get enough support from conservatives in his own party.

I think asking Trump to discuss the names on this list would bring joy to many people. Why do you want to deny people joy?

Oh, you are so full of shit, it's funny.

1. Insult someone and then act as though it is weird of them to be offended. Standard dishonest lefty asshole behavior. Fuck you.

2. I did not ask for a list from HIllary. I did not claim it was something she needs to do.

3. I do not care about her list. I know that they will all be leftists who want to abuse their power to advance their lefty agenda.

4. MY GOD. This is, I can't believe it, a valid point. Yes, this is an attempt by Trump to gather support from the Conservatives in the GOP who he does not yet have.

You say that like it is a bad thing. Would you like to explain why you think that is a bad thing?

5. And you lie.

YOu are just a dishonest partisan hack who is throwing crap against the wall desperately searching for something that might "Stick" that you can use against your enemies.

You ask a lot of questions. Maybe you'd like to answer one for a change?

You answer my questions, and you have a serious and/or honest and/or on topic question, and I'll be happy to answer it.


Still, do you note where I admitted that you not only had a valid point, but agreed with you?

It really seemed to be the central point you were trying to make.

And you didn't follow up.

That's very odd.

Here, for discussion's sake.

The part where I agreed you were right.


4. MY GOD. This is, I can't believe it, a valid point. Yes, this is an attempt by Trump to gather support from the Conservatives in the GOP who he does not yet have.

You say that like it is a bad thing. Would you like to explain why you think that is a bad thing?

For some reason, you think I'm impressed with your comment. I'm not. You don't understand what I said and you think you do. It's boring.

My question for you is the same one I've asked you before. The one you refuse to answer. Until you answer it honestly....how can we ever have a meaningful discussion?

 

[bripat9643]

Hillary should release a list of one...

...Joe Biden...

Game over.

Biden, a Supreme Court judge? You're joking, right? The man is a buffoon.

What do you care? You don't even believe in the power of judicial review.

I'm against it precisely because buffoons like Biden manage to get on the court.

 

[2aguy]

Here is a look at two of the judges and how they stooped gun control nuts...

BREAKING: Trump Reveals List of Potential SCOTUS Nominees - The Truth About Guns

 

[LoneLaugher]

Gentlemen,

Did Trump say that, if elected, his SC pick(s) would definitely come from this list?

He did not.

Please be prepared for him to tell you that in the coming days. This list is meaningless.

Enjoy your circle jerk.

 

[2aguy]

Where do they stand on eminent domain for real estate developers?

Do you really care, or are you just trying for a gotcha?

We need to get our priorities right

Protection of real estate developers has to be a priority

As you should know, the Supreme Court has already ruled on eminent domain.

I don't know about other states but Florida produced legislation which plugged the loophole left by the decision.

And the lefties on the court ruled it was okay to take your property so another private individual could use it to generate more taxes......

 

[2aguy]

Here they are in no particular order:

1. Steven Colloton of Iowa
2. Allison Eid of Colorado
3. Raymond Gruender of Missouri.
4. Thomas Hardiman of Pennsylvania
5. Raymond Kethledge of Michigan
6. Joan Larsen of Michigan
7. Thomas Lee of Utah
8. William Pryor of Alabama
9. David Stras of Minnesota
10. Diane Sykes of Wisconsin
11. Don Willett of Texas

awwww..... how cute. all from states he needs to win.

and not a single decent judge among them.

True.

All pretty much rightwing reactionaries hostile to settled, accepted Constitutional jurisprudence – hostile to the privacy rights of women, the equal protection rights of gay Americans, and the Framers’ mandate that church and state be kept separate.

So...they actually know how to read the Constitution......?

 

[2aguy]

--------------------- just do some googling , you have the names and where they are from so it should be easy to do L.L..

You misunderstand.

I want to hear John Miller discuss why he selected one or more of those people. I don't believe he could express an original thought regarding any one of them. I believe he had someone find him the names of some conservative judges....and that is the extent of his personal research.

You mean a New York Real Estate guy didn't have personal knowledge of all the judges in America?

He doesn't need to have any knowledge of all of the judges in America. But he does need to have detailed knowledge about the 11 judges that he has just suggested are his top choices for the SC.

Ya dumb shit ya.

I'm sure he gave some expert on judges some parameters on what he wanted, and then told them to go make him a list.

Just like Hillary will do, if she ever gets to that point.

YOu are just a dishonest partisan hack who is throwing crap against the wall desperately searching for something that might "Stick" that you can use against your enemies.

YOU DON'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT HOW MUCH TRUMP DOES OR DOES NOT KNOW ABOUT HIS LIST.

You seem upset. And...you are very dramatic for a tough guy.

Hillary will not provide a list of people she would appoint. It's not something she needs to do. Trump needed to do this because he has failed to get enough support from conservatives in his own party.

I think asking Trump to discuss the names on this list would bring joy to many people. Why do you want to deny people joy?

There is no surprise in any list Hilary will make...they will all hate the U.S? And undermine the Constitution.......

 

[LoneLaugher]

You misunderstand.

I want to hear John Miller discuss why he selected one or more of those people. I don't believe he could express an original thought regarding any one of them. I believe he had someone find him the names of some conservative judges....and that is the extent of his personal research.

You mean a New York Real Estate guy didn't have personal knowledge of all the judges in America?

He doesn't need to have any knowledge of all of the judges in America. But he does need to have detailed knowledge about the 11 judges that he has just suggested are his top choices for the SC.

Ya dumb shit ya.

I'm sure he gave some expert on judges some parameters on what he wanted, and then told them to go make him a list.

Just like Hillary will do, if she ever gets to that point.

YOu are just a dishonest partisan hack who is throwing crap against the wall desperately searching for something that might "Stick" that you can use against your enemies.

YOU DON'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT HOW MUCH TRUMP DOES OR DOES NOT KNOW ABOUT HIS LIST.

You seem upset. And...you are very dramatic for a tough guy.

Hillary will not provide a list of people she would appoint. It's not something she needs to do. Trump needed to do this because he has failed to get enough support from conservatives in his own party.

I think asking Trump to discuss the names on this list would bring joy to many people. Why do you want to deny people joy?

There is no surprise in any list Hilary will make...they will all hate the U.S? And undermine the Constitution.......

Of course. You aren't crazy. You never overstate for effect. Not you!

 

[Correll]

I'm sure he gave some expert on judges some parameters on what he wanted, and then told them to go make him a list.

Just like Hillary will do, if she ever gets to that point.

YOu are just a dishonest partisan hack who is throwing crap against the wall desperately searching for something that might "Stick" that you can use against your enemies.

YOU DON'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT HOW MUCH TRUMP DOES OR DOES NOT KNOW ABOUT HIS LIST.

You seem upset. And...you are very dramatic for a tough guy.

Hillary will not provide a list of people she would appoint. It's not something she needs to do. Trump needed to do this because he has failed to get enough support from conservatives in his own party.

I think asking Trump to discuss the names on this list would bring joy to many people. Why do you want to deny people joy?

Oh, you are so full of shit, it's funny.

1. Insult someone and then act as though it is weird of them to be offended. Standard dishonest lefty asshole behavior. Fuck you.

2. I did not ask for a list from HIllary. I did not claim it was something she needs to do.

3. I do not care about her list. I know that they will all be leftists who want to abuse their power to advance their lefty agenda.

4. MY GOD. This is, I can't believe it, a valid point. Yes, this is an attempt by Trump to gather support from the Conservatives in the GOP who he does not yet have.

You say that like it is a bad thing. Would you like to explain why you think that is a bad thing?

5. And you lie.

YOu are just a dishonest partisan hack who is throwing crap against the wall desperately searching for something that might "Stick" that you can use against your enemies.

You ask a lot of questions. Maybe you'd like to answer one for a change?

You answer my questions, and you have a serious and/or honest and/or on topic question, and I'll be happy to answer it.


Still, do you note where I admitted that you not only had a valid point, but agreed with you?

It really seemed to be the central point you were trying to make.

And you didn't follow up.

That's very odd.

Here, for discussion's sake.

The part where I agreed you were right.


4. MY GOD. This is, I can't believe it, a valid point. Yes, this is an attempt by Trump to gather support from the Conservatives in the GOP who he does not yet have.

You say that like it is a bad thing. Would you like to explain why you think that is a bad thing?

For some reason, you think I'm impressed with your comment. I'm not. You don't understand what I said and you think you do. It's boring.

My question for you is the same one I've asked you before. The one you refuse to answer. Until you answer it honestly....how can we ever have a meaningful discussion?

Considering how hostile our interactions are, the fact that we are in agreement on something is noteworthy.

Your pretense that it is not is not credible.

Your lack of interest in following up on YOUR point is very, very interesting.

I asked you a fairly open ended question, giving you the opportunity to make additional points while rambling on and on and liberally sprinkling your post with snarky pokes and smears.

ANd yet, you dodge that.

VERY STRANGE.

The only possible reason I can imagine is that you cannot explain why that is a bad thing. YOu were just trying it out to see if it was received in a negative fashion, and since it wasn't you have no interest in it.

Thus you didn't care about your own point, enough to talk about it.

Take that away and there is nothing else to your post but partisan bile.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Judge On Trump’s SCOTUS List Mercilessly Mocked Him On Twitter

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

There is no surprise in any list Hilary will make...they will all hate the U.S? And undermine the Constitution.......

So long as its not a fat Corrupt GOP Fuck head like the now corrupted underground Two Ton Tony Scalia ..."The Fixer"

Trump SCOTUS pick William Pryor would have let states jail LGBT people for having sex in their homes
A legal advocacy group for LGBT people has called one of the Donald Trump’s prospective Supreme Court nominees “the most demonstrably anti-gay judicial nominee in recent memory.”

 

[LoneLaugher]

You seem upset. And...you are very dramatic for a tough guy.

Hillary will not provide a list of people she would appoint. It's not something she needs to do. Trump needed to do this because he has failed to get enough support from conservatives in his own party.

I think asking Trump to discuss the names on this list would bring joy to many people. Why do you want to deny people joy?

Oh, you are so full of shit, it's funny.

1. Insult someone and then act as though it is weird of them to be offended. Standard dishonest lefty asshole behavior. Fuck you.

2. I did not ask for a list from HIllary. I did not claim it was something she needs to do.

3. I do not care about her list. I know that they will all be leftists who want to abuse their power to advance their lefty agenda.

4. MY GOD. This is, I can't believe it, a valid point. Yes, this is an attempt by Trump to gather support from the Conservatives in the GOP who he does not yet have.

You say that like it is a bad thing. Would you like to explain why you think that is a bad thing?

5. And you lie.

YOu are just a dishonest partisan hack who is throwing crap against the wall desperately searching for something that might "Stick" that you can use against your enemies.

You ask a lot of questions. Maybe you'd like to answer one for a change?

You answer my questions, and you have a serious and/or honest and/or on topic question, and I'll be happy to answer it.


Still, do you note where I admitted that you not only had a valid point, but agreed with you?

It really seemed to be the central point you were trying to make.

And you didn't follow up.

That's very odd.

Here, for discussion's sake.

The part where I agreed you were right.


4. MY GOD. This is, I can't believe it, a valid point. Yes, this is an attempt by Trump to gather support from the Conservatives in the GOP who he does not yet have.

You say that like it is a bad thing. Would you like to explain why you think that is a bad thing?

For some reason, you think I'm impressed with your comment. I'm not. You don't understand what I said and you think you do. It's boring.

My question for you is the same one I've asked you before. The one you refuse to answer. Until you answer it honestly....how can we ever have a meaningful discussion?

Considering how hostile our interactions are, the fact that we are in agreement on something is noteworthy.

Your pretense that it is not is not credible.

Your lack of interest in following up on YOUR point is very, very interesting.

I asked you a fairly open ended question, giving you the opportunity to make additional points while rambling on and on and liberally sprinkling your post with snarky pokes and smears.

ANd yet, you dodge that.

VERY STRANGE.

The only possible reason I can imagine is that you cannot explain why that is a bad thing. YOu were just trying it out to see if it was received in a negative fashion, and since it wasn't you have no interest in it.

Thus you didn't care about your own point, enough to talk about it.

Take that away and there is nothing else to your post but partisan bile.

I never said it was a bad thing. You said that. What's bad is that he has to do it. Idiot.

Now...answer my question, please.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

 

[Correll]

Oh, you are so full of shit, it's funny.

1. Insult someone and then act as though it is weird of them to be offended. Standard dishonest lefty asshole behavior. Fuck you.

2. I did not ask for a list from HIllary. I did not claim it was something she needs to do.

3. I do not care about her list. I know that they will all be leftists who want to abuse their power to advance their lefty agenda.

4. MY GOD. This is, I can't believe it, a valid point. Yes, this is an attempt by Trump to gather support from the Conservatives in the GOP who he does not yet have.

You say that like it is a bad thing. Would you like to explain why you think that is a bad thing?

5. And you lie.

YOu are just a dishonest partisan hack who is throwing crap against the wall desperately searching for something that might "Stick" that you can use against your enemies.

You ask a lot of questions. Maybe you'd like to answer one for a change?

You answer my questions, and you have a serious and/or honest and/or on topic question, and I'll be happy to answer it.


Still, do you note where I admitted that you not only had a valid point, but agreed with you?

It really seemed to be the central point you were trying to make.

And you didn't follow up.

That's very odd.

Here, for discussion's sake.

The part where I agreed you were right.


4. MY GOD. This is, I can't believe it, a valid point. Yes, this is an attempt by Trump to gather support from the Conservatives in the GOP who he does not yet have.

You say that like it is a bad thing. Would you like to explain why you think that is a bad thing?

For some reason, you think I'm impressed with your comment. I'm not. You don't understand what I said and you think you do. It's boring.

My question for you is the same one I've asked you before. The one you refuse to answer. Until you answer it honestly....how can we ever have a meaningful discussion?

Considering how hostile our interactions are, the fact that we are in agreement on something is noteworthy.

Your pretense that it is not is not credible.

Your lack of interest in following up on YOUR point is very, very interesting.

I asked you a fairly open ended question, giving you the opportunity to make additional points while rambling on and on and liberally sprinkling your post with snarky pokes and smears.

ANd yet, you dodge that.

VERY STRANGE.

The only possible reason I can imagine is that you cannot explain why that is a bad thing. YOu were just trying it out to see if it was received in a negative fashion, and since it wasn't you have no interest in it.

Thus you didn't care about your own point, enough to talk about it.

Take that away and there is nothing else to your post but partisan bile.

I never said it was a bad thing. You said that. What's bad is that he has to do it. Idiot.

Now...answer my question, please.

It is not bad that he has to do it.

He won a primary, and now is reaching out to the supporters of the other candidates.

Once Sanders withdraws, Hillary will do the same.

and I did answer your question.

 

[Correll]

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

God is every thing including evil....evil is not Independent of God...