Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 198 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Gary Robbins 🚫 Banned
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    EHerring (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I predict that if an appointment is filled by Trump and confirmed by the Senate, the Dems will take the Senate majority, will break the legislative filibuster, and will expand the Supreme Court to 11 justices. Losing the legislative filibuster will lead to much greater mischief, starting with the admission of DC and Puerto Rico as states. This whole came up before in 1968, and Republicans blocked a nomination given the coming election.

    We shall see what happens next.

    Then I predict this. Cheers.

    So you are predicting that the USA will split apart?  And what happens when West U,S.A. puts a tariff on goods going across their soil?  This happened under the Articles of Confederation, you really think that it won’t happen again?

    • #91
  2. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    I predict that if an appointment is filled by Trump and confirmed by the Senate, the Dems will take the Senate majority, will break the legislative filibuster, and will expand the Supreme Court to 11 justices. Losing the legislative filibuster will lead to much greater mischief, starting with the admission of DC and Puerto Rico as states.

    All with your help, it seems.

    • #92
  3. William Laing Inactive
    William Laing
    @user_680378

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    She will be surprised that Hell is real.

    You can’t know the fate of any soul after death. Only God does. 

    • #93
  4. Clifford A. Brown Inactive
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    The Trump campaign immediately turned President Trump’s initial comment on RBG’s passing turned into a tribute video with Elton John music track:

    She just died? Wow. I didn’t know that, you’re telling me now for the first time. <pause>

    She led an amazing life. What else can you say. She was an amazing woman. Whether you agreed or not, she was an amazing woman, who led an amazing life. I am actually sad to hear that, I am sad to hear that.

    • #94
  5. Randy Webster Inactive
    Randy Webster
    @RandyWebster

    EJHill (View Comment):
    Have you read my latest book? In Defense of Justice Yoo…

    Maybe he’d rule that McDonald’s had to sell McRibs all the time.

    • #95
  6. Sisyphus Member
    Sisyphus
    @Sisyphus

    Randy Webster (View Comment):

    EJHill (View Comment):
    Have you read my latest book? In Defense of Justice Yoo…

    Maybe he’d rule that McDonald’s had to sell McRibs all the time.

    It’s good to be king.

    • #96
  7. Kozak Member
    Kozak
    @Kozak

    Stad (View Comment):

    Oh my …………..

    these weeks leading up to the election are going to be extremely interesting. I hope Trump and Mitch McConnell get the supreme court nominee on the bench before the election.

    Considering the probability that legal cases are going to fly after the election, there is an excellent chance the SCOTUS is going to pick the next president.

    • #97
  8. Instugator Thatcher
    Instugator
    @Instugator

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    She will be surprised that Hell is real.

    It is in poor form to denigrate someone of the day of their death. Can you wait until after her funeral?

    Why is it in poor form? It is not like she hasn’t already found out.

    Before you bow up on that one, I don’t know how she found out, just that she did.

    So please explain the “poor form” thing.

    • #98
  9. Brian Watt Inactive
    Brian Watt
    @BrianWatt

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio&hellip; (View Comment):

    Brian Watt (View Comment):

    Current Senate: 51 Republicans / 49 Democrats

    Republican Senators likely to abstain from voting for a nominee prior to the outcome of the election:

    Murkowski

    Collins

    Romney

    Grassley

    If the election result is contested and goes up to the Supreme Court, then it’s a possible deadlock. Chief Justice Roberts can go either way…but definitely not the conservative we assumed he was when W. nominated him.

    This is not correct. The Senate is 53-45-2, with the two independents being effectively Democrats.

    You are correct. I quickly snagged the first result that popped up on my internet search from Real Clear Politics which clearly was wrong. 

    If the 4 senators alluded to above abstain that cuts the count down to 49 vs 47. All it would take is 3 more squishy Republican senators to halt the process. But given the timeframe, a vote isn’t likely to happen before Election Day…which is the problematic part, because if the Dems (or even the Republicans) contest the election – the Dems claiming voter suppression of (fraudulent) ballots; the Republicans claiming massive election theft because of fraudulent ballots – then a case would likely go to the remaining 8 Supreme Court justices and they could deadlock.

    • #99
  10. Kozak Member
    Kozak
    @Kozak

    James Lileks (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I predict that if an appointment is filled by Trump and confirmed by the Senate, the Dems will take the Senate majority, will break the legislative filibuster, and will expand the Supreme Court to 11 justices. Losing the legislative filibuster will lead to much greater mischief, starting with the admission of DC and Puerto Rico as states. This whole came up before in 1968, and Republicans blocked a nomination given the coming election.

    We shall see what happens next.

    They’ll do that anyway. This reminds me of the 80s, when the Ds always admonished the Rs for being “confrontational” towards the USSR whenever Reagan advanced American interests. As if the Russians would, with weary regret, respond by being more extreme than they otherwise might have been.

    The only thing I wonder about is whether the Ds in the Senate will curse “the bastards!” when they know they would absolutely push through a SCOTUS nom in the same situation. Oh but that’s different, because For Great Justice.

    Yeah. if the shoe was on the other foot it would be buried deeply in the GOP’s posterior.  

    Garrick would be on the SCOTUS if they had controlled the Senate in 2016.   

    They know this is for real and not some country club game….

    • #100
  11. Charlotte Inactive
    Charlotte
    @Charlotte

    Hoo-boy.

    2020: Hold my beer.

    • #101
  12. Kozak Member
    Kozak
    @Kozak

    Instugator (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    She will be surprised that Hell is real.

    It is in poor form to denigrate someone of the day of their death. Can you wait until after her funeral?

    Why is it in poor form? It is not like she hasn’t already found out.

    Before you bow up on that one, I don’t know how she found out, just that she did.

    So please explain the “poor form” thing.

    Also, is it “poor form” to lie about her medical condition as she and the Left have been doing for a number of years?  Seems like only yesterday we were assured she was “cured” of her cancer and in good health.  I caught a huge clue in the Spring when she had that fever that was attributed to a “stent”.  That screamed to me she had metastatic cancer.  She should have been off the court years ago due to her terminal illness.   But Trump was president so they lied and dragged the dying woman along… 

    • #102
  13. prairiedoc Inactive
    prairiedoc
    @prairiedoc

    Trump nominates Barrett, the Senate starts the advice and consent process, the Trump campaign makes SCOTUS the issue in the campaign, win or lose after the election, the Senate votes to confirm. I think this is a winner for republicans. 

    • #103
  14. EODmom Coolidge
    EODmom
    @EODmom

    prairiedoc (View Comment):

    Trump nominates Barrett, the Senate starts the advice and consent process, the Trump campaign makes SCOTUS the issue in the campaign, win or lose after the election, the Senate votes to confirm. I think this is a winner for republicans.

    One prays. 

    • #104
  15. EODmom Coolidge
    EODmom
    @EODmom

    Kozak (View Comment):

    Instugator (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    She will be surprised that Hell is real.

    It is in poor form to denigrate someone of the day of their death. Can you wait until after her funeral?

    Why is it in poor form? It is not like she hasn’t already found out.

    Before you bow up on that one, I don’t know how she found out, just that she did.

    So please explain the “poor form” thing.

    Also, is it “poor form” to lie about her medical condition as she and the Left have been doing for a number of years? Seems like only yesterday we were assured she was “cured” of her cancer and in good health. I caught a huge clue in the Spring when she had that fever that was attributed to a “stent”. That screamed to me she had metastatic cancer. She should have been off the court years ago due to her terminal illness. But Trump was president so they lied and dragged the dying woman along…

    Aside from poor form of grave dancing – I’ve long believed that Justice Ginsburg would never have willingly resigned for any reason, regardless of the administration. She apparently believed she had a calling to be on the Court. She fought to live, as most do. 

    • #105
  16. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I predict that if an appointment is filled by Trump and confirmed by the Senate, the Dems will take the Senate majority, will break the legislative filibuster, and will expand the Supreme Court to 11 justices. Losing the legislative filibuster will lead to much greater mischief, starting with the admission of DC and Puerto Rico as states. This whole came up before in 1968, and Republicans blocked a nomination given the coming election.

    We shall see what happens next.

    All of which you will cheer on, Gary. You must be so excited the lefts base will be energized,  and the total control by the Democrats you desperately want is nigh.

     

    • #106
  17. EHerring Coolidge
    EHerring
    @EHerring

    Manny (View Comment):

    By the way, there was some discussion to pick a replacement immediately. I can’t see how the Senate could confirm anyone in six weeks. It won’t happen. Perhaps Trump can announce his pick, if he think it tactically wise. Either way, the left will get motivated because of this, whether Trump picks someone or not.

    Actually, 45 days should be all they are allowed. 

    • #107
  18. EHerring Coolidge
    EHerring
    @EHerring

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    EHerring (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I predict that if an appointment is filled by Trump and confirmed by the Senate, the Dems will take the Senate majority, will break the legislative filibuster, and will expand the Supreme Court to 11 justices. Losing the legislative filibuster will lead to much greater mischief, starting with the admission of DC and Puerto Rico as states. This whole came up before in 1968, and Republicans blocked a nomination given the coming election.

    We shall see what happens next.

    Then I predict this. Cheers.

    So you are predicting that the USA will split apart? And what happens when West U,S.A. puts a tariff on goods going across their soil? This happened under the Articles of Confederation, you really think that it won’t happen again?

    If they want electricity, they won’t do it. If they want to eat, they won’t do it.

    • #108
  19. EHerring Coolidge
    EHerring
    @EHerring

    EODmom (View Comment):

    Kozak (View Comment):

    Instugator (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    She will be surprised that Hell is real.

    It is in poor form to denigrate someone of the day of their death. Can you wait until after her funeral?

    Why is it in poor form? It is not like she hasn’t already found out.

    Before you bow up on that one, I don’t know how she found out, just that she did.

    So please explain the “poor form” thing.

    Also, is it “poor form” to lie about her medical condition as she and the Left have been doing for a number of years? Seems like only yesterday we were assured she was “cured” of her cancer and in good health. I caught a huge clue in the Spring when she had that fever that was attributed to a “stent”. That screamed to me she had metastatic cancer. She should have been off the court years ago due to her terminal illness. But Trump was president so they lied and dragged the dying woman along…

    Aside from poor form of grave dancing – I’ve long believed that Justice Ginsburg would never have willingly resigned for any reason, regardless of the administration. She apparently believed she had a calling to be on the Court. She fought to live, as most do.

    And would have died quickly had she not had the court to keep her active. She went out as she wished…we all should have that right.

    • #109
  20. EHerring Coolidge
    EHerring
    @EHerring

    prairiedoc (View Comment):

    Trump nominates Barrett, the Senate starts the advice and consent process, the Trump campaign makes SCOTUS the issue in the campaign, win or lose after the election, the Senate votes to confirm. I think this is a winner for republicans.

    There is nothing to be gained by waiting. Repubs who claim they want to see the results of the election, to let voters choose, will not vote to confirm if the Dem fixes give them the win. If Trump wins and Dems retake the Senate, Dems and RINOs will say wait until the new Senate is seated. If Dems think they can flip the Senate, even more money and trickery will go to close races. The election will be dirtier and meaner if they hold out hope of delaying until after the election. Pull the band aid off quickly and get on with life.

    • #110
  21. philo Member
    philo
    @philo

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    She will be surprised that Hell is real.

    It is in poor form to denigrate someone of the day of their death. Can you wait until after her funeral?

    Starting the day with lectures on “poor form” from the resident troll. How rich.

    • #111
  22. Skyler Coolidge
    Skyler
    @Skyler

    I’m honestly shocked that her family and supporters didn’t opt to keep her alive until Trump leaves office in four years.  Just keep pumping blood through her corpse like they did for Hirohito.  They must have decided that her death would help Biden.

    • #112
  23. Skyler Coolidge
    Skyler
    @Skyler

    EJHill (View Comment):

    Have you read my latest book? In Defense of Justice Yoo…

    Can you imagine a Supreme Court justice Yoo?  He would be arguing that water boarding isn’t cruel and unusual punishment and that it should be used to investigate loosies.

    • #113
  24. OccupantCDN Coolidge
    OccupantCDN
    @OccupantCDN

    EODmom (View Comment):

    prairiedoc (View Comment):

    Trump nominates Barrett, the Senate starts the advice and consent process, the Trump campaign makes SCOTUS the issue in the campaign, win or lose after the election, the Senate votes to confirm. I think this is a winner for republicans.

    One prays.

    I think it would be unwise to wait until after the election. This election is going to be disputed – no matter the outcome. The court should be fully staffed so that it can render a decisive judgement on any disputes that may arise.

    • #114
  25. Chris Gregerson Member
    Chris Gregerson
    @ChrisGregerson

    I would like to see Condoleezza Rice in The supremes 

    • #115
  26. Sisyphus Member
    Sisyphus
    @Sisyphus

    Chris Gregerson (View Comment):

    I would like to see Condoleezza Rice in The supremes

    Why?

    • #116
  27. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Chris Gregerson (View Comment):

    I would like to see Condoleezza Rice in The supremes

    I don’t believe she’s a lawyer. That would seem important for a position on the SCOTUS. 

    • #117
  28. EHerring Coolidge
    EHerring
    @EHerring

    Skyler (View Comment):

    EJHill (View Comment):

    Have you read my latest book? In Defense of Justice Yoo…

    Can you imagine a Supreme Court justice Yoo? He would be arguing that water boarding isn’t cruel and unusual punishment and that it should be used to investigate loosies.

    They didn’t waterboard lawful combatants. We do waterboard our own military as part of training.

    • #118
  29. OccupantCDN Coolidge
    OccupantCDN
    @OccupantCDN

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Chris Gregerson (View Comment):

    I would like to see Condoleezza Rice in The supremes

    I don’t believe she’s a lawyer. That would seem important for a position on the SCOTUS.

    Yup. Not a lawyer.

    I think we can all get behind Amy Coney Barrett. You remember? “The dogma lives loudly in you” … The greatest compliment Babs Boxer accidentally gave anyone…I’d love for the unglued reaction Amy Coney Barrett would cause.

     

     

    • #119
  30. EHerring Coolidge
    EHerring
    @EHerring

    Sisyphus (View Comment):

    Chris Gregerson (View Comment):

    I would like to see Condoleezza Rice in The supremes

    Why?

    Would prefer to see in charge of the NFL before it is toast.

    • #120
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.