President Trump pays tribute to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg at his rally in Fayetteville, NC. pic.twitter.com/Evg3PFhZ1B
— The Hill (@thehill) September 19, 2020
President Trump pays tribute to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg at his rally in Fayetteville, NC. pic.twitter.com/Evg3PFhZ1B
— The Hill (@thehill) September 19, 2020
19 comments:
President had flags lowered to half mast until she is interned and had a heartfelt statement when he was first told.
A class act.
Students For Trump
@TrumpStudents
Joe Biden could never.
VIDEO:
https://twitter.com/TrumpStudents/status/1307431649542578179
Did you hear Joe was able to get a 3 car "parade" ???
Ginsburg: she wrote a statement to be released after her death demanding that "her" seat not be filled until there is a new president. That statement illustrates her fundamental and overwhelming misunderstanding of The Constitution, the document which it was only her job to interpret. It's not, nor has it ever been "her" seat. The seat belongs to the People of The United States of America; she was only confirmed to sit in it until retirement or death. Death. No justice, party, or president has ever maintained control of a seat on the Supreme Court in perpetuity. The fact that she thought herself entitled to control it illustrates her absolute disdain for The Constitution as written and for all those who proceeded her, as well as for the citizenry who choose the person that names her successor. She is not a trailblazer; she was someone who had a complete desire to force us backwards into being controlled by a ruling class. I don't celebrate her death, but neither am I compelled to genuflect to someone who I firmly believe made us, by example, very much a lesser and much more selfish nation.
Now 36 hours after the heartbreaking death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, we must do exactly what she would do under these circumstances. She took us this far - farther than any of us thought possible. Now it’s up to us to finish her work — and protect her seat AND our Democracy. I have posted this morning a second RUMBLE episode on our Emergency Podcast System. I offer there a series of actions we must immediately take to prevent Trump and McConnell from poaching another Supreme Court seat, thus ensuring a right-wing court for many decades to come (aka, the rest of my life). These actions include:
Protests everywhere (especially in front of your local U.S. Senator’s office);
A tsunami presence by us on social media today and this week;
Melting down the Senate switchboard with calls to your Senators and the 7 Repubs who might be “persuaded” (202-225-3121);
Demanding the Dems in Congress not approve the government funding resolution - in other words, let the government shut down so that the Republicans can’t ram their right-wing judge through before Trump is defeated 6 weeks from this Tuesday;
And Schumer (Chuck OR Amy) must employ every tactic to block, stall and grind all Senate business to a halt so this crackpot nominee doesn’t go through — you know, just like what the Republicans did to Obama for 8 long years. Extreme obstruction. Let’s let them now experience a taste of their own filthy medicine.
You can hear this Episode #121 of RUMBLE — “We Must Now Be Ruthless” — for free on Apple podcasts and all other podcast platforms. We must all ACT today. We can win this! We can stop them! But it will take a Nation of Millions...
Apple: https://apple.co/rumble
Spotify: https://spoti.fi/3kyvJ9f
Radio Public: https://bit.ly/2FPBIaL
(Photo via @ny_indivisible )
Emerald Robinson
@EmeraldRobinson
How funny is this "RBG left instructions" nonsense?
She's supposed to be a public servant. She doesn't leave us instructions - we give them.
Isn't it obvious that some judges consider themselves a permanent ruling class?
and that comes from the party who now says the Supreme Court justices should have "term limits".
I guess they want the term to end way after they die.
It's bad enough that they make rulings out of thin air without proper legislation.
sheesh
Biden on the passing of RPG
https://youtu.be/knbwzRppZr0
I was asked in 2016 if a President should nominate a candidate and if the Senate should hold confirmation hearings if that opening comes up in an election year. This is how I answered.
“That’s their job. There is nothing in the Constitution that says the President stops being President in his last year.”
Trump has apparently decided to nominate a new justice quickly, rather than wait until after the election. That decision, like so much of his presidency, is risky and unconventional. Why risky? Because it instantly changes the focus of the campaign, away from the economy and law and order, which had been Trump’s strongest issues. It’s also risky because it could jeopardize Senate Republicans running in purple states, especially if Trump makes a controversial nomination. That would pose real problems for Sens. Martha McSally (Arizona), Cory Gardner (Colorado), Thom Tillis (North Carolina), and Susan Collins (Maine). If Trump tries to protect them, his nominee will be less conservative than he prefers. He may face another constraint because the Republicans’ Senate majority is so thin. To confirm a nominee, he needs votes from centrists like Collins, Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, and Utah Sen. Mitt Romney. Collins and Murkowski have already said they won’t go along and Romney’s mindset can be deduced by his vote to convict the president of impeachable offenses. There is a risk for Democrats, too, if they go over the top in opposing a qualified nominee and spew bilious, unsupported charges, as they did in the Kavanaugh hearings.
For Trump, the upside of moving quickly is that it forces Democrats to declare themselves and puts pressure on Joe Biden to say who he would nominate, or at least propose a list, something he has so far refused to do. Equally important, it forces Biden, vice presidential candidate Kamala Harris, and Chuck Schumer to say whether they will pack the Supreme Court with additional seats if they win the White House and Senate. Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey, faithfully representing the Democrats’ left wing, already declared his willingness to pack the court. The Constitution does not limit the court to nine justices. Long-standing norms do. So far, Schumer has not yet declared himself, but his veiled threat that “everything is on the table” is hard to ignore. Party leaders may try to duck the issue until the election, fearing Americans don’t want to see another constitutional norm shredded. Meanwhile, Trump and the Republicans will pound them on it anyway, hoping it helps them retain the Senate.
To pack the high court, Schumer would not only need a Democratic president, he would need to eliminate the Senate filibuster. Changing that rule would be a huge step -- and a very controversial one -- because it would permanently change the way Congress operates. Once the filibuster is gone, it will be gone forever. The Senate would then resemble the House, where the minority is powerless and the majority can ram through any bills it chooses. Such a change would significantly alter the Founders’ framework, which establishes multiple “veto points” on government action.
Without the Senate’s ability to pump the breaks with a filibuster, a Biden White House could swiftly pass major Democratic initiatives on tax rates, immigration laws, health care, the Green New Deal, and more. They could choose to add two new, presumably reliably Democratic states: the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, hoping to lock in their party’s control of the Senate for years to come. They could choose to pack the Supreme Court with additional justices. Their argument: The Republicans had acted illegitimately by replacing Ginsburg, so they are only offsetting that maneuver and “rebalancing” the court. (Of course, there would be nothing to prevent a future Republican president and Senate from adding still more justices.) In a country that is evenly split, the minority would have no say at all unless it controlled the presidency or one house of Congress.
Democrats would have no incentive to abolish the filibuster if Trump is reelected. But they could still force a constitutional crisis if they won the Senate and resolved to block Trump’s judicial and Cabinet nominees. As the new majority leader, Schumer and his Democratic colleagues would have to decide if they wish to go that far since it would incite a national crisis of confidence in government. The overriding question would be “Can Washington work at all?”
Whatever the election outcome, Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court will face vitriolic hearings and an up-or-down vote this year. The anger about the Supreme Court, urban policing, COVID closures, economic revival, and more could spill into the streets if the election is close and the loser doesn’t acknowledge a fair outcome. We are sailing in very dangerous waters and have been for several years. The death of Justice Ginsburg makes those waters even more treacherous.
--Charles Lipsom
Professor of Political Science Emeritus at the University of Chicago.
Marquette University released the survey results on Saturday that showed 67% of adults believed the Senate should hold a hearing if a vacancy occurred during 2020’s race, with only 32% opposition — and similar strong numbers across Republicans, Democrats, and independents, who supported holding confirmation hearings at 68-31%, 63-37%, and 71-28% respectively. The poll was completed three days before the death of Ginsburg, the 87-year-old liberal icon who was nominated by President Bill Clinton and confirmed in 1993. Ginsburg earned praise from Democrats and Republicans upon news of her death.
Large majorities of supporters of Trump and Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden told Marquette University’s pollsters the next Supreme Court appointment was somewhat or very important, with 85% of Trump supporters and 89% of Biden supporters saying so. Only 41% of adults said senators would be justified in voting against a qualified nominee “simply because of how they believe the Justice would decide cases on issues such as abortion, gun control or affirmative action,” while 58% said it wasn’t justified. A smaller number (21%) said a senator would be justified in voting against a nominee solely because of the president’s political party, while 78% said it wouldn’t be.
Take another poll now.
How funny is this "RBG left instructions" nonsense?
She's supposed to be a public servant. She doesn't leave us instructions - we give them.
it's amazing that this fundamental concept escapes a supposedly great jurist.
Florida and Texas Are Close
New CBS News polls:
Florida: Biden 48%, Trump 46%
Texas: Trump 48%, Biden 46%
____________
Biden Maintains Wide National Lead
A new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll finds Joe Biden leading Donald Trump nationally by 8 points, 51% to 43%.
Key finding: “The poll shows that close to 90 percent of voters have firmly made up their minds, and that seven-in-10 believe the upcoming debates aren’t that important in deciding their vote.”
Isn't it obvious that some judges consider themselves a permanent ruling class?
her arrogance and sense of entitlement got the best of her. had she truly cared that the seat remain reliably liberal, she should've retired under 0linsky.
These polls are getting worse. The CBS pill is an online, weighted pill. The NBC wsj poll has 63% of respondents voting for president for the first time. They're working hard to keep biden propped up.
Great jurists sometimes state their wishes even when upholding a law that goes against those wishes.
Ginsburg did NOT leave any "instructions" behind.
She only expressed what was her "most fervent WISH."
The polls are getting worse?
Then why isn't that showing up HERE?:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/2020_elections_electoral_college_map_no_toss_ups.html
Take another poll now.
The poll was conducted between Sept. 8 and Sept. 15 2020 with 1,523 adults nationwide interviewed online and a margin of error of plus or minus 3.6 percentage points.
That poll was from last week and it is consistent with the polling that showed the general public wanted Confirmation hearings on Merrick Garland. Wouldn't expect either Republicans or Independents to change their minds because it came to fruition.
This is what I said in 2016 and that thing, you know that thing that requires it didn't go away, because peanut butter pancake batter and the such was openly with the music video man.
"I would go forward with the confirmation process as chairman. Even a few months before a presidential election... just as the Constitution requires."
Post a Comment