Will Trump nominate yet another swamp creature to SCOTUS?

[familydog]

Gorsuch was good on paper (although turned out not that great), but Kavanaugh was a deep state neocon swamp creature from the start.


Will Trump actually nominate a pro-Constitution nominee to the Supreme Court this time?

Kavanaugh has been reliably conservative. Much more so than I ever thought.

Gorsuch has been there for almost four years and with a handful of exceptions has also been reliable conservative.

I'm not sure what your problem with them is.

Long gone are the days of Ron Paul types on the courts.

 

[Anti Globalist]

If somebody can give me a list that summarizes all the good rulings Amy Coney Barrett has made, it would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

He should nominate someone before she's even put in the ground.

That would be one of the most savage things Trump's ever done.

What occurred to me right away was that they could delay Ginsberg's actual burial for weeks, to prevent Trump from naming a nominee. He could derail that by appointing someone now.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

https://twitter.com/USAB4L/status/1307384203508699148

 

[Krugminator2]

If he wants to lose reelection, then yeah.

I wrote that when I thought he would wait until after election and not have to worry about voters. I see the news he is going to something soon. Even though a pro-choice nominee would be smartest, hard to see him nominating one now.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Interesting point from Ted Cruz:

https://twitter.com/SenTedCruz/status/1307310787992719360

 

[RonZeplin]

Trump shortlist of 20 names

Jeb! trumpkins.

Two Florida judges among possible Trump nominees for U.S. Supreme Court

 

[Pauls' Revere]

What occurred to me right away was that they could delay Ginsberg's actual burial for weeks, to prevent Trump from naming a nominee. He could derail that by appointing someone now.

Why would a delayed burial hold up a nomination? Is that even legal? I mean, is there a law that says no Supreme Court Justice shall be nominated until a burial takes upon the death of a justice while in office?

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Why would a delayed burial hold up a nomination? Is that even legal? I mean, is there a law that says no Supreme Court Justice shall be nominated until a burial takes upon the death of a justice while in office?

It's not a law, just a courtesy. Many Democrats have already brought it up.

 

[Pauls' Revere]

It's not a law, just a courtesy. Many Democrats have already brought it up.

This won't change their impression of Trump or the GOP (they fall for it all the time) wish the GOP would stop placating the left. It won't make them like him any more. Go for broke, especially if your looking at a potential loss on 11/2.

 

[QFraud]

Long gone are the days of Ron Paul types on the courts.

When pray tell were those days???

 

[familydog]

When pray tell were those days???

While not perfect, the 19th Century was pretty good.

 

[eleganz]

Gorsuch was CFR member, how can you say that he was good on paper?

^^^
This is the exact reason why libertarians will never win, anything, ever.

Purity is also the same reason why BLM is hurting Democrats in the polls. They started off with extremely high approvals but couldn't exercise any self-control and made it about marxist ideology, joined with ANTIFA and destroyed their own movement. Libertarians shoot themselves in the foot in the same way, every single time.

Apparently the same so called libertarians are so pure in their beliefs that they also support the neocons in their full on 4 year war against someone who is consistently against war, MIC, deep state, in rhetoric and action

Kavanaugh has been reliably conservative. Much more so than I ever thought.

Gorsuch has been there for almost four years and with a handful of exceptions has also been reliable conservative.

Yeaaaa but they're not good enough so lets just attack them and complain about RBG being gone, seems like the better plan.

 

[Dr.3D]

Can't they just appoint a regular judge and add some sour cream?

 

[jon4liberty]

^^^
This is the exact reason why libertarians will never win, anything, ever.

Purity is also the same reason why BLM is hurting Democrats in the polls. They started off with extremely high approvals but couldn't exercise any self-control and made it about marxist ideology, joined with ANTIFA and destroyed their own movement. Libertarians shoot themselves in the foot in the same way, every single time.

Apparently the same so called libertarians are so pure in their beliefs that they also support the neocons in their full on 4 year war against someone who is consistently against war, MIC, deep state, in rhetoric and action



Yeaaaa but they're not good enough so lets just attack them and complain about RBG being gone, seems like the better plan.

This

 

[Brian4Liberty]

https://twitter.com/MaybeAmes/status/1307417940686450698

 

[Sonny Tufts]

Interesting point from Ted Cruz:

https://twitter.com/SenTedCruz/status/1307310787992719360

Uh huh. We had a 4-4 Court 9 months before the 2016 election but I don't recall Cruz demanding that Merrick Garland or any other nominee get a hearing, much less a vote. It appears McConnell isn't the only hypocrite in the Senate.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Uh huh. We had a 4-4 Court 9 months before the 2016 election but I don't recall Cruz demanding that Merrick Garland or any other nominee get a hearing, much less a vote. It appears McConnell isn't the only hypocrite in the Senate.

Politicians and pundits reverse positions with the greatest of ease.

 

[Anti Globalist]

https://twitter.com/MaybeAmes/status/1307417940686450698

Cruz most likely wants to run for president again, so I don't see him being picked as Trump nominee.

 

[Krugminator2]

Uh huh. We had a 4-4 Court 9 months before the 2016 election but I don't recall Cruz demanding that Merrick Garland or any other nominee get a hearing, much less a vote. It appears McConnell isn't the only hypocrite in the Senate.

Yeah. Every Democrat also is. No shortage of Democrat quotes talking about what a miscarriage it is to not confirm Garland. Same people don't want an appointment for Ginsberg.

Elections have consequences. Not confirming a Ginsberg replacement is probably more ridiculous than not confirming Garland. Ginsberg had no business being on the Supreme Court the last few years because of her declining physical and mental health. She shouldn't be rewarded for her bad behavior in not retiring. She thought Hillary was a lock to win. She made a bad bet and lost. Time for Trump to confirm someone.