General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMadame Speaker is on MSNBC now and she just said...
"How about those 3 judges who stated they respected stare decisis, privacy. We're they lying then?"
Yes they were. And now they're SCOTUS justices.
Kavanaugh, Gorsuch and Coney Barrett...liars all.
Fullduplexxx
(7,818 posts)brush
(53,475 posts)Democrats had no way to block trump from nominating them or McConnell from giving them a vote on the floor of the Senate.
Fullduplexxx
(7,818 posts)Ray Bruns
(4,023 posts)stand up and run his mouth on the Senate floor until everyone gets sick of listening to him
mcar
(42,210 posts)Willis88
(109 posts)A legendary scholar of parliamentary procedures
bucolic_frolic
(42,678 posts)Don't rule anything out. Democrats need open-minded collective brainstorming at every level, and hope that some leaders pick up the ball and run with it. Grass roots at the legal level.
I still say forced birth is slavery and kidnapping.
And why not go after marriage itself? It's a legacy of religion, in some ways no business of the state.
2naSalit
(86,066 posts)GB_RN
(2,267 posts)It won't make any difference, even if they have evidence of perjury lock, stock and barrel (which they don't)*, because not a single Repuke in the Senate will vote to convict.
*The reason they don't, at least with respect to their statements on Roe, is these guys never once said that they wouldn't vote to overturn Roe. They said they respected stare decisis or that Roe was settled precedent. Also, a person is entitled to change their mind, even if they said that they wouldn't vote to overturn Roe.
I'm NOT defending these assclowns. I'm merely pointing out the facts surrounding impeachment and any attempts to charge them with perjury WRT Roe.
Now, Kavanaugh could potentially be charged with perjury WRT his testimony on sexual assault allegations, but we all know that ship has sailed. It just simply isn't going to happen as no criminal investigation will be opened, ever.
Ray Bruns
(4,023 posts)Their minds were made up long before the hearings.
GB_RN
(2,267 posts)What I said was that even if one of these guys said they wouldn't vote to overturn it - which not one of them did - they could always have come out and said that based on the arguments, they changed their minds. That would nullify a perjury charge right there.
And I acknowledge the fact that these guys have been gunning for Roe since before they were installed on the SCOTUS.
reACTIONary
(5,749 posts).... that they would not testify regarding any specific issue that might come before the court. So anything they said would have to be taken as not necessarily referring to Roe.
paleotn
(17,781 posts)Slippery little SOBs they are.
Texin
(2,585 posts)"acceptable" candidates for SCOTUS.
msfiddlestix
(7,265 posts)What I mean is, "we" went after the NRA heads of the oranization with a vigor which effectively rendered them bankrupt, at least for a time. I feel like we should have given FS the same treatment with the same amount of vengence.
I think we still can, but I don't see it happening on my radar. It's late in the game for now, but gosh we can see the next agenda as laid about Clarence Thomas.
Seems a very significant campaign to bring that organization to it's knees is long over due, and certainly in order now.
If there is already a campaign of this nature presently, I'd be happy to support it.
NullTuples
(6,017 posts)msfiddlestix
(7,265 posts)They could come out and say "Haha! I was lying the whole time and definitely committed perjury", and I doubt even Susan Collins would be concerned enough to vote to convict.
Justice matters.
(6,874 posts)Note: Is it doable?
GB_RN
(2,267 posts)Congress can change the size of the court, and has done so in the past, shrinking it and expanding it. The last time it was changed, expanding it from seven to the current nine was back in the 1870s. Per the Constitution, Congress can even strip the court of jurisdiction over cases except "original jurisdiction", which includes cases between states. Congress could create a constitutional court to hear cases like these and strip the SCOTUS of that power, should it chose to do so.
reACTIONary
(5,749 posts)... I umderstand that the "need to do this or that" sentiments are basically just a way of venting, but my practical nature always has me rolling my eyes at it.
burrowowl
(17,607 posts)Irish_Dem
(45,640 posts)He is getting a pass because the light is being directed upon Trump and his minions.
But McConnell is the master engineer of the GOP taking permanent control over the US.
And installing white male christian minority rule.
lindysalsagal
(20,444 posts)Irish_Dem
(45,640 posts)No way he will let his majority take a hit.
bdamomma
(63,658 posts)he did say he would ban abortion in the US. He is that evil. They have did it this time, and the GOP will take more away from Americans. Vote in November your life depends on it.
Irish_Dem
(45,640 posts)He is calling the shots.
misanthrope
(7,405 posts)Trump didn't deny Garland his hearings.
inthewind21
(4,616 posts)He single handedly did all that? Pretty sure McConnell was elected. Over and over and over. As several other "conservative" congress members. Hell, even "concerned" Susan Collins keeps getting re-elected. The American voters bear much of the responsibility. So far as I know, none of them took their seats at gunpoint.
Irish_Dem
(45,640 posts)Some of their elections looked suspicious to me.
Keep people ignorant and then flood them with vicious propaganda.
Are they victims or perpetrators?
But I agree, half the responsibility lies with the American people.
Justice matters.
(6,874 posts)RepubliQans are LIARS, and they demand their subordinates to LIE.
That's what they DO.
onetexan
(12,994 posts)Then sold their souls for power.
Dave says
(4,608 posts)bdamomma
(63,658 posts)and bear it, is nothing but a handmaid.
RestoreAmerica2020
(3,433 posts)..no more words! Perdon, not Speaker Pelosi yet words are inutile now ..action is needed or simultaneously. I certainly don't need to tell her how to do her job bc she's the brightest of them all --thank god she's been at the helm! She has saved us on more than one occasion, and knows how to deal with checanerous ole Republiklans. Pero, something needs to be done to put them in check.
I just want her to take decisive action-- slap them with article (s) of impeachment for perjury [bill clinton was impeach for same ] impeach SCJ? Why not, It's been done before e.g. SC Justice, Samuel Chase 1805, but was acquitted by Senate. Yet, his maldad, malfeasance is on the books of Congress, of public record. Perhaps that is all we get--perhaps that is their only punishment. Yet, does bring some sort of satisfaction e.g. 2x impeached ffg-- that their malfeasance did not go unnoticed. Add Thomas to list of impeachment candidates.. for say being a culero (a$$h) sure there is something they [Dem leadership] can snag him on.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.senate.gov/about/powers-procedures/impeachment/impeachment-chase.htm&ved=2ahUKEwifpYTHscb4AhU4EEQIHa3uCvoQFnoECAgQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1UZb4rdKAYvT7ot3Ie60p4
BumRushDaShow
(127,322 posts)And then what?
(Hint 1 - we just went through what was next, in 2019 and 2021. Hint 2 - you need 2/3d of the Senate to convict and remove)
And you didn't need to go back to 1804 and 1805, just go back to former U.S. District Court judge for the SD of FL and later U.S. Rep. Alcee Hastings (to use a notable example). In 1989 he was impeached for 17 Articles and convicted of 10. He ran for a U.S. House seat in 1993 (FL-23) and later served (FL-20 being the latest district) until he passed away last year.
Sugarcoated
(7,707 posts)the cons were shrieking about for the last 30 years. Every accusation they make is a confession.
moose65
(3,164 posts)That could be their slogan: Every accusation is a confession.
hvn_nbr_2
(6,481 posts)I just want your main statement to appear in the thread summary for anyone who doesn't read the whole thread.
hvn_nbr_2
(6,481 posts)SergeStorms
(18,903 posts)Marthe48
(16,692 posts)They all said they would uphold Roe v. Wade and 6 of the 9 lied their fat asses off. They lied to get on the court to do this. What makes that okay? Absolutely nothing. A criminal traitor and his criminal henchmen packed the bench with a bunch of f**king liars and half the population is enslaved by the stroke of a pen.
They only said it was settled precedent or they respected stare decisis. None of them ever said that they would vote to uphold it or outright said they wouldn't vote to overturn it. Every statement they made WRT Roe was carefully worded as to let you think what you wanted to hear.
As I stated above, I'm NOT defending them or their actions. I'm merely stating facts. Perjury doesn't apply.
Marthe48
(16,692 posts)improperly-mcconnell made up bs to prevent Pres. Obama from seating a justice, so we got gorsuch, after kennedy retired and his kid got a plum job somewhere connected to gorsuch. Then he ok'd that lame duck traitor pos to seat that incompetent twit. And the drunken pig. We knew what we were getting and didn't want them. The senate members who voted for the crap we have knew and didn't care. Americans are getting bulldozed and cheated. I hope they pay dearly and forever.
GB_RN
(2,267 posts)And traditions to keep Obama from seating Garland, and then broke his own rule to seat Amy COVID Barrett (R-Handmaiden). But, no laws were broken. All three were appointed by a pResident who lost the popular vote, but won the EC, like Bush.
I don't like any of these guys. They make up shit out of whole cloth to justify the rulings they want. But aside from probable perjury by Kavanaugh, there was nothing illegal with the appointments of Gorsuch or COVID Barrett. They were just there due to McConnell's ruthlessness and willingness to bend/break the rules and traditions so as to get his way.
The only real way we have to counteract these guys is 1) expand the court and 2) term limit the justices to rotations off of the federal bench where they have lifetime appointments (which wouldn't violate the Constitution). Since they'd have the lifetime appointment as a federal judge, we simply limit the SCOTUS appointment to say, 14 years or something. A president could also be limited to a certain number of appointments. Also, make it so that if an appointment was not given a vote within 60 days, the appointment is automatic (so as to prevent another McConnell stunt).
Marthe48
(16,692 posts)It's time we broke some rules and traditions, which might not be written as law, but were observed by honorable people and ignored by the pos of this discussion.
The 3 at least were seated outside mores of our culture and do not belong on the court. Every day they sit is an insult to the Constitution.
I hope you are replying to others. I am not the only one saying they were appointed illegally. And not the only one wishing them in hell.
GB_RN
(2,267 posts)But, if/when I see those posts, I will reply to those as well: I post strictly for informational/educational purposes.
We need to make sure we keep the facts on our side, and not lose our heads with misinformation and myths.
Cheers. 🖖
ShazzieB
(15,958 posts)That doesn't mean we have a way to make it happen. Saying they were appointed illegally is just wishful thinking. Violating rules and traditions =/= breaking the law.
The court needs to be enlarged so that the extremists will no longer be in the majority. That's the only viable approach, imo.
ShazzieB
(15,958 posts)Unethical does not necessarily = illegal. Same with underhanded and sneaky. As you say, actual laws have to be broken. And even when a law is broken, it's not always as easy to prove as people tend to assume.
Nobody understands this better than those who are trained in the law. TFG's 3 handpicked injustices all knew exactly what to say to get people to think they would uphold Roe without actually saying they would uphold Wade. I wouldn't be surprised if they had some coaching as well.
It sucks, big time, to pull the wool over the nation's eyes like that, but there's no law that can be invoked to punish them for it. We were all duped by people who knew exactly how to do it without breaking the law.
intheflow
(28,407 posts)And removed. And their decisions need to be revisited.
William769
(55,124 posts)bdamomma
(63,658 posts)be a long hot summer. They need more Justices on the court!!!!!!!! Or maybe, men should be sterilized to stop making unwanted children. Okay not all men yes, I am upset CRAP!!!!!!
LymphocyteLover
(5,601 posts)bdamomma
(63,658 posts)and Barr and whoever else wanted this. Handmaids Tale anyone???? They hate women.
LymphocyteLover
(5,601 posts)bdamomma
(63,658 posts)some men hated the "Me Too" movement. Thought women should just keep quiet and throw us back in the dark ages again.
Oh boy, women are going to be in the streets fighting for their rightful rights. They better watch out!!!!!!!!!!!!
LymphocyteLover
(5,601 posts)bdamomma
(63,658 posts)going to be deluge of women being scorned, the wrath of all those who unleashed this be warned. We will not go back!!!!!!!
LymphocyteLover
(5,601 posts)cloudboy07
(351 posts)the fire has been lit ! now is the time too burn the GRAND OL' PARTY DOWN ! they have Liars, insurrectionist, traitor's, U.S. crook's rolled up into 1 big bunch ! start with TDFG & work your way down ! No charge against Them is too small !
RocRizzo55
(980 posts)That is a crime. They need to be impeached from their positions.
Rebl2
(13,311 posts)GB_RN
(2,267 posts)These assclowns only said that they respected stare decisis or that Roe v. Wade was settled precedent. None of them ever said under oath that they would never vote to overturn it, under any circumstances whatsoever, nor did they say under oath that they would vote to uphold it.
Every statement they made regarding Roe was carefully made so as to do the *wink*wink* *nod*nod* for the opponents of Roe and make supporters think what they were hearing what we WANTED to hear. They knew what they were saying and were also likely coached about how to say it. There is no way they'd go in there and put themselves into a situation where they'd expose themselves to a perjury charge...with the exception of Justice Beerbong and his sexual assault testimony...but that's a different story.
I'm NOT defending them. I do NOT agree with this abomination of a decision. But trying to charge them with perjury and/or impeach them over this is worse than futile, for more than one reason.
ShazzieB
(15,958 posts)They didn't actually lie. They very cleverly avoided saying they would uphold Roe, while implying that they would. That's not against the law.
Is what they did wrong? Yes.
Does it constitute an impeachble offense? If only.
greenjar_01
(6,477 posts)Oh, they were lying about stare decisis! Oh, no! Take that, judges!
brush
(53,475 posts)Does it not matter to you?
Response to brush (Reply #31)
Post removed
brush
(53,475 posts)Response to brush (Reply #39)
Post removed
brush
(53,475 posts)because of this ruling. Do you know nothing of Rep. Pelosi's history?
Apparently not.
And what does this sentence mean? "Why are you celebrating it????"
Who do you think is celebrating?
Torchlight
(3,236 posts)"Let us now reveal ourselves, whether with intent or not."
greenjar_01
(6,477 posts)It would be utter and abject bullshit, of course, but at least you'd be displaying some courage.
Torchlight
(3,236 posts)Yelling at the rain to stop is often not the best use of time.
3825-87867
(827 posts)we could have had Garland...but... that and 2016...
When you cater to the right too much and try to meet unmeetable people halfway, this is the result of placating those on the right for 40 years while telling the left we're better than that and we'll go higher.
Shame.
Remember, we had almost 40 years to actually show a spine. Too bad too many "too-gooders" felt turning the other cheek was better.
This decision was made in 1981... not today.
brush
(53,475 posts)3825-87867
(827 posts)Big trend to conservative America.
The federalists started this back then. Grass roots elections of conservatives and evangelicals to local governments, school boards, police...etc.
Dems accepting and installing Thomas was a precurser.
We are now seeing the fruit of that movement with idiots banning books and more.
But some still can't see why we're here now. Nothing I can say will educate those who don't look back and ask why.
Mores the pity.
inthewind21
(4,616 posts)live love laugh
(13,009 posts)Commentator said thats their reasoning.
brush
(53,475 posts)they should've said during their confirmation hearings.
live love laugh
(13,009 posts)SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)But "respecting stare decisis" is not at all the same as always, 100% of the time, upholding precedent.
There have been some really shitty precedents that needed to be overturned.
brush
(53,475 posts)SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)brush
(53,475 posts)That doesn't negate their lie. If they believed that, that's what they should've said during their confirmation hearings.
Farmer-Rick
(10,072 posts)Remember back when Obama was president and Harry Reid was majority leader? Remember when Reid ran promising to change the filibuster rules? There was a short window when Harry and Obama could have done that but they didn't. They didn't change the rules and we now have no rights to control our own bodies in America.
The filibuster has never helped Dems. The GOPers have gotten all their little FU legislation thru but not so much the Dems.
It all started there ......
Now's the time Dems should throw it into the face of the Supremely Religious Court. They need to do something drastic in response or they will lose the next election cycle. Because Dems look very weak now.
And it doesn't have to be an attack on the Supremely Religious Court. It can be forgiving all student loans or stopping interest on student debt. Something that will make the GOPers yell. If they Don't, they are going to have another Trump who will steal their voters.
inthewind21
(4,616 posts)Harry Reid DID change the filibuster. in 2013
Farmer-Rick
(10,072 posts)Last edited Sun Jun 26, 2022, 10:08 AM - Edit history (1)
Dems need to go big.
Evolve Dammit
(16,632 posts)rockfordfile
(8,682 posts)lark
(23,003 posts)OK that won't happen. But I think there should be hearings on lying under oath, because they 100% did and it can easily be proven 100% with Handmaiden and Kavarape. Remove them~~
The SCOTUS NEEDS TO BE EXPANDED. COME ON BIDEN AND CONGRESS - RAISE IT TO 14, THE ACTUAL NUMBER OF DISTRICT COURTS.
I agree on expanding the court, but accusations of perjury and impeaching them are non-starters for more than one reason.
Dysfunctional
(452 posts)Vote only for Democrats, sure, but not enough. What is needed now is how do we make sure that women that want an abortion get one? Underground Railroad, pills, protests, boycotts against corporations that don't help their female employees get to states that allow abortions, women refusing to have sex unless their partner votes by mail and only vote Democratic, helping women that want to move to a blue state. Nothing violent.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Sending girls and women of childbearing age to prison was always seen as an atrocity by large majorities. And of course horror stories of deaths and serious damage to health, even if comparatively rare. Almost everyone has now grown up in a nation where those were just stories from a dark past.
dixiechiken1
(2,113 posts)Oppaloopa
(862 posts)Oppaloopa
(862 posts)Cha
(295,929 posts)dirty rugs.
💙💛
Response to brush (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed