Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Paladin

(32,354 posts)

33. Thanks For Demonstating The Last Sentence Of My Post. (nt)

Reply to onenote (Reply #20)

Mon Jul 2, 2012, 09:20 PM

Jul 2012

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

35 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Will Scalia's mental confusion lead a parade of 4 out the door? [View all] CK_John Jul 2012 OP

Im not following, disclosure? Firebrand Gary Jul 2012 #1

Don't bother trying to follow. The OP is nonsense. onenote Jul 2012 #11

There's precedence to impeach Scalia for his stupid ass'd rant. If the DNC was like the GOP uponit7771 Jul 2012 #2

what's the precedence? What other justice was impeached due to a ranting opinion? WI_DEM Jul 2012 #3

A Short History of Impeachment bemildred Jul 2012 #6

Thanks, so Samuel Chase in 1804 was the only SC Justice impeached and he was... WI_DEM Jul 2012 #8

You are welcome. bemildred Jul 2012 #9

There is no precedent for impeaching a SCOTUS justice because of a "rant" onenote Jul 2012 #10

You can impeach anybody for anything. bemildred Jul 2012 #12

Sure. But the post I responded to suggested there was precedent for impeaching a SCOTUS Justice onenote Jul 2012 #13

Right, and I made the point that anybody can be impeached for anything. bemildred Jul 2012 #17

And how well did that turn out? onenote Jul 2012 #21

I'm just saying it can happen, not predicting success. nt bemildred Jul 2012 #29

A happy thought. bemildred Jul 2012 #4

but a lot of grumpy old men have served on the US Supreme Court and many WI_DEM Jul 2012 #5

And that's good? You think that's good? nt bemildred Jul 2012 #7

With age comes wisdom pscot Jul 2012 #14

I'm 67, with age comes feebleness. nt bemildred Jul 2012 #18

Maybe so, but feebleness is not grounds for forcing someone off the court onenote Jul 2012 #22

Please see post #17. nt bemildred Jul 2012 #30

I'm 65, still teaching at a University, and just published my most important book. skip fox Jul 2012 #24

DITTO! elleng Jul 2012 #28

LOL. bemildred Jul 2012 #31

& with alleged drug problems (REHNQUIST). & with abhorrent personal philosophies. n/t UTUSN Jul 2012 #15

"Impeach Earl Warren" Paladin Jul 2012 #16

+1. nt bemildred Jul 2012 #19

And how well did that turn out? onenote Jul 2012 #20

Who said anything about impeachment. I thing the CJ will use behind CK_John Jul 2012 #25

Don't dare TOUCH Justice Ginsburg! elleng Jul 2012 #27

The post I was responding to said something about impeachment. onenote Jul 2012 #34

Thanks For Demonstating The Last Sentence Of My Post. (nt) Paladin Jul 2012 #33

No. GoCubsGo Jul 2012 #23

While I don't think scalia's mental whatever had ANYTHING to do with Roberts' decision, elleng Jul 2012 #26

Are you talking about the fact Scalia wears no clothes under his robe and likes to wander the halls aint_no_life_nowhere Jul 2012 #32

That there's some funny shit... cherokeeprogressive Jul 2012 #35