HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Gorsuch is the most radic...

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 05:20 PM

Gorsuch is the most radical SCJ in America's history....


35 replies, 2930 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 35 replies Author Time Post
Reply Gorsuch is the most radical SCJ in America's history.... (Original post)
pbmus Jun 11 OP
pandr32 Jun 11 #1
ProudLib72 Jun 11 #8
bucolic_frolic Jun 11 #9
ProudLib72 Jun 11 #11
bucolic_frolic Jun 11 #13
ProudLib72 Jun 11 #14
pandr32 Jun 11 #16
beachbum bob Jun 11 #2
triron Jun 11 #4
malaise Jun 11 #5
oasis Jun 11 #35
grantcart Jun 11 #3
hedda_foil Jun 11 #6
dhol82 Jun 11 #12
stuffmatters Jun 11 #19
dhol82 Jun 11 #20
hedda_foil Jun 11 #26
orangecrush Jun 11 #7
dhol82 Jun 11 #10
orangecrush Jun 11 #29
dhol82 Jun 11 #30
orangecrush Jun 11 #31
Raysawesome34 Jun 11 #15
GulfCoast66 Jun 11 #18
Raysawesome34 Jun 11 #25
GulfCoast66 Jun 11 #33
sinkingfeeling Jun 11 #22
Raysawesome34 Jun 11 #24
tritsofme Jun 11 #32
Snake Plissken Jun 11 #17
dhol82 Jun 11 #21
Snake Plissken Jun 11 #23
dhol82 Jun 11 #27
c-rational Jun 11 #28
jmowreader Jun 11 #34

Response to pbmus (Original post)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 05:27 PM

1. If only he could be removed once it is proven Trump is installed by Russia for Russia.

I'm quite sure there will be little doubt once Mueller finishes his work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pandr32 (Reply #1)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 07:02 PM

8. He can be removed

But not because the Rump installed him. He must be impeached for offenses he has committed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudLib72 (Reply #8)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 07:05 PM

9. Like those confirmation hearings?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bucolic_frolic (Reply #9)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 07:10 PM

11. I said it was "possible", not "likely"

And it would need to be for something he did on his own, not because he was installed by Russian agents.

In saying that, I do believe there need to be some rule changes, starting with how hearings cannot be delayed for a year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudLib72 (Reply #11)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 07:13 PM

13. Russian agents strike right at the core of illegitimacy

To say we cannot find a way to undo the unjust is to give up. If the truth is ever laid bare for all to see, possibilities could improve. Theft is theft. Theft is a violation of property rights, in this case voting rights. Someday we will have this discussion as a nation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bucolic_frolic (Reply #13)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 07:16 PM

14. I fully agree, and I'm pissed as hell about it

But at the moment, we are bound by the laws that are in place. If we had a 2/3 majority in Congress, then we could do something more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudLib72 (Reply #8)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 07:27 PM

16. That is too bad

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbmus (Original post)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 05:35 PM

2. Elections have consequences...

We have many to thank, starting with those not supporting/voting because the "lesser of 2 evils"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beachbum bob (Reply #2)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 06:16 PM

4. Except it was a corrupt illegitimate election (it was a farce).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beachbum bob (Reply #2)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 06:24 PM

5. You seem to have forgotten that President Obama nominated a replacement

for Scalia - do you remember what the turtle and other ReTHUGs did?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beachbum bob (Reply #2)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 11:31 PM

35. Thank you Susan Sarandon, Cornel West, Jill Stein, NINA TURNER and

a host of other haughty "know it alls".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbmus (Original post)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 05:37 PM

3. His mother was the most radical nut job to be a cabinet secretary

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Reply #3)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 06:44 PM

6. Who was his mother and who nominated her?

If it's been covered here before, I apologize for not seeing it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to dhol82 (Reply #12)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 07:44 PM

19. Anne Gorsuch, Reagan's EPA Head as deiberate wrecking ball; she was the paradign

And Trump has followed the tradition with an almost entirely Mission Hostile/Unqualified Cabinet....DeVos, Carson, Pruitt, Zinke, Ross etc
Gorsuch is Trump's SCOTUS wrecking ball.

Neil has been brainwashed in same Birch/Kochism since birth. Plus he apparently has her same arrogant, condescending personality: Reportedly most of the other SCOTUS justices find Neil Gorsuch 's opinions pedantic and his presence obnoxious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stuffmatters (Reply #19)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 07:56 PM

20. Not surprised.

Even for McConnel this seems like a stretch for a SC pick.
Wonder who approved him?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dhol82 (Reply #12)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 08:32 PM

26. Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbmus (Original post)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 06:56 PM

7. Why are the replies in this thread

appearing in teeny tiny print?

(not the header, but the text.)

Doesn't seem to be happening on other threads.

Perhaps just on my device?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to orangecrush (Reply #7)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 07:08 PM

10. Mine is ok

Not sure why you have a problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dhol82 (Reply #10)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 10:20 PM

29. Back to normal


after leaving and returning.

Weird!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to orangecrush (Reply #29)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 10:22 PM

30. Whenever there is a problem the answer is to turn it off, wait a minute and turn it on again.

Solves virtually any problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dhol82 (Reply #30)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 10:29 PM

31. TRUTH








Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbmus (Original post)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 07:25 PM

15. Maybe if a certain group would have fought harder

To get thier guy confirmed we wouldn't be in this situation.
Our side laid down on the job when those asshole Republicans wouldn't even give Obama's pick a meeting.
There's enough blame to go around on this one.
Sorry. Not sorry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raysawesome34 (Reply #15)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 07:40 PM

18. Yep. It's all the Democrats fault

They had absolutely no power, but I guess they were supposed to do what?! Throw a bigger temper tantrum?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GulfCoast66 (Reply #18)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 08:09 PM

25. Yes!

The hugest fucking temper tantrum evah!
It's the SC for fucks sake!
Do you expect the notorious RBG to live to 150?!
Love her to pieces but that ain't happening.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raysawesome34 (Reply #25)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 11:05 PM

33. Alright Mr. Or Ms. blame the Democrats,

What could we have done to prevent it from happening?

You seem to have an answer that our most experienced leaders lacked.

Please enlighten us on what could have been done to prevent the Atrocity from happening?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raysawesome34 (Reply #15)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 07:58 PM

22. Says the member from 5/26/18.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sinkingfeeling (Reply #22)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 08:07 PM

24. That's the best you got?

The fact that I just found this place?
I stated an opinion that maybe we need to toughen up as a party.
So you disagree? Why?
SC appointments are pretty fucking important.
I would like to think we would treat them as such.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raysawesome34 (Reply #15)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 10:45 PM

32. Obama and minority Senate Democrats were powerless to force action on Garland.

The blame is wholly owned by McConnell and the GOP majority.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbmus (Original post)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 07:37 PM

17. When people are too lazy to vote things like Gorsuch happen

And this can keep happening as long as people can't be bothered to vote, all it takes is one election for a generation's worth of damage.

Voter turnout at 20-year low in 2016

https://www.cnn.com/2016/11/11/politics/popular-vote-turnout-2016/index.html

As a nation we take our democracy for granted and got exactly what we deserve.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Snake Plissken (Reply #17)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 07:58 PM

21. Do not blame me.

I kept screaming to anyone who would listen that the Supreme Court was at risk.
And see what happened?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dhol82 (Reply #21)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 08:06 PM

23. I'm not blaming you, or anyone else who voted, but it's really disheartening to know that

our destiny is in the hands of people who are too lazy to vote.

Which is pretty much the case, it's the only reason Republicans have control right now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Snake Plissken (Reply #23)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 08:58 PM

27. I got the feeling that many who voted just wanted to do a fuck you to Hillary.

They had no thoughts about anything else.
Supreme Court, any future control of Congress - no problem.
We won’t have Hillary to hate.
Pathetic. All of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbmus (Original post)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 09:18 PM

28. No surprise here. In high school he was a member of the Fascists Forever club. Why didn't we

hear that from any credible news source.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbmus (Original post)

Mon Jun 11, 2018, 11:23 PM

34. Read the article and you'll see how extreme this is

First, here's the decision: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-1432_7j8b.pdf

Minnesota statute 524.2-804 says: if you designated your spouse as the beneficiary of your life insurance policy and the two of you get divorced, that designation is nullified. (It also says you can voluntarily designate your ex as your beneficiary, and the procedure is not difficult.)

Mark Sveen married Kaye Melin in 1997. In 1998, Mr. Sveen bought a life insurance policy. The now-Mrs. Sveen was named as primary beneficiary and his two kids from a previous marriage were contingent beneficiaries. In 2007, the Sveens got divorced and Mr. Sveen died in 2011.

Ms. Melin argues that because the law hadn't been passed yet when the policy was purchased the Contracts Clause of the Constitution nullifies the law. All the justices who weren't nominated by our illegitimate president agreed that's not the way it works.

Gorsuch believes the Contracts Clause is absolute - any law that impairs a contract must be considered unconstitutional.

The problem with Gorsuch's stance is it effectively nullifies every law in existence.

Fun and easy - but extreme - example: I am a shopkeeper in Wall, South Dakota. I wish to sell marijuana to the public. I travel to Colorado and execute a contract with a cannabis farmer for ten tons of bulk cannabis flower per month to be delivered by a date certain. There are a vast number of laws I'd have to violate to enter into this business. Under the Gorsuch Doctrine, I could walk into court waving a copy of the contract and claim the drug laws of Wyoming, South Dakota and the federal government impair my contract with the pot farmer, and all those laws would be instantly erased.

Seriously though, any law on the books impairs someone's contract. Fortunately, the other eight justices didn't see things Gorsuch's way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread