Was this the start of a US Presidential campaign

[jonu]

From Giuliani’s 35 year old daughter :

“Thanks to the extremist Supreme Court he stacked, Trump would take office with full immunity: no checks on his power whatsoever.

If the president isn’t going to be subject to the law like every other citizen, which remains incomprehensible to me, then our president had better have a moral compass.

A 34-time convicted felon who’s been found liable for sexual abuse, tries to steal elections, and demeans people based on their race, sexuality, disability status, and gender falls remarkably short of the bar we must set for ourselves as a country.

Fortunately, we have another choice in this election: a life-long public servant who has spent her career upholding justice and fighting for those who cannot fight for themselves.”

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/stor...-kamala-harris

Trump did not stack the Supreme Court. He did as was his right and nominated Justices as positions became available. If anything Justice Ginsberg, who declined to retire while Obama was still in office, is the "culprit" from a Democrat POV.

The Democrats have made noises about "stacking" the Court by increasing the number of Justices to 13 while in power. Ginsberg herself was against this, and Biden did not appear to make it a priority either.

[Balance]

Trump did not stack the Supreme Court. He did as was his right and nominated Justices as positions became available. If anything Justice Ginsberg, who declined to retire while Obama was still in office, is the "culprit" from a Democrat POV.

The Democrats have made noises about "stacking" the Court by increasing the number of Justices to 13 while in power. Ginsberg herself was against this, and Biden did not appear to make it a priority either.

It is his right indeed of course to nominate whoever he wanted when the vacancies arose and he stacked with far right extremists.

D

[jonu]

It is his right indeed of course to nominate whoever he wanted when the vacancies arose and he stacked with far right extremists.

D

Goodness me Balance, you're beginning to sound like one of your regular jousters on the left. To be Conservative is not "far right extremist". To call them so is not to recognise how far the left has lurched over the last 15 years or so.

Remember when even lefties knew what a woman was? How it was unthinkable for a man to have a husband? Or a woman a wife? When pronouns weren't a requirement on your electronic signature, having to declare that you are her/she or he/him. Such things will pass, and our descendants will look back at this time of denial of objective truth with bewildered amusement and be educated on the causes of collapse of empire.

[Balance]

Goodness me Balance, you're beginning to sound like one of your regular jousters on the left. To be Conservative is not "far right extremist". To call them so is not to recognise how far the left has lurched over the last 15 years or so.

Remember when even lefties knew what a woman was? How it was unthinkable for a man to have a husband? Or a woman a wife? When pronouns weren't a requirement on your electronic signature, having to declare that you are her/she or he/him. Such things will pass, and our descendants will look back at this time of denial of objective truth with bewildered amusement and be educated on the causes of collapse of empire.

I have as much time for woke as I have for the Fornicator.

But back to the Supreme Court - Roe vs Wade and Trump's immunity from criminal acts carried out as President define just how stacked the Court has become.

[jonu]

I have as much time for woke as I have for the Fornicator.

But back to the Supreme Court - Roe vs Wade and Trump's immunity from criminal acts carried out as President define just how stacked the Court has become.

What was legally incorrect with the reversal of Roe vs Wade? It has long been an argument that it should have been a State by State decision.

The immunity thing on the face of it is bonkers in my view....but it doesn't only apply to Trump. I guess they justify it to stop the "lawfare" that the Democrats are currently accused of.

[davflaws]

Trump did not stack the Supreme Court.

Technically, you are probably right. It would be more accurate to say that the Republicans stacked the Supreme Court. The Republican controlled Senare refused to bring Obama's nominee (Garland) to a vote in March on the grounds that it was too close to an election, so Trump got to nominate Gorsuch as a replacement for Scalia. Then he nominated Kavanagh to replace Kennedy in the middle of his term. But when Ginsberg died the Republicans changed their tune. They insisted on nominating Coney-Barrat in September - two months before the election.
Trump has repeatedly boasted of stacking SCOTUS in order to overturn Roe v Wade.

[Panda-NZ-]

What was legally incorrect with the reversal of Roe vs Wade? It has long been an argument that it should have been a State by State decision.

Unless the US Senate passes legislation.

Federal law > state law.

Hopefully that's a priority in the dem term, even if it creates duplication.

[Panda-NZ-]

Apparently it needs 60 votes too.. not a majority like in most countries.

There's a rigged process right there !

[Bjauck]

Technically, you are probably right. It would be more accurate to say that the Republicans stacked the Supreme Court. The Republican controlled Senare refused to bring Obama's nominee (Garland) to a vote in March on the grounds that it was too close to an election, so Trump got to nominate Gorsuch as a replacement for Scalia. Then he nominated Kavanagh to replace Kennedy in the middle of his term. But when Ginsberg died the Republicans changed their tune. They insisted on nominating Coney-Barrat in September - two months before the election.
Trump has repeatedly boasted of stacking SCOTUS in order to overturn Roe v Wade.

Trump consistently had little regard for the US constitution or constitutional conventions. He is only a traditionalist provided it gives him control.

[Bjauck]

Goodness me Balance, you're beginning to sound like one of your regular jousters on the left. To be Conservative is not "far right extremist". To call them so is not to recognise how far the left has lurched over the last 15 years or so.

Remember when even lefties knew what a woman was? How it was unthinkable for a man to have a husband? Or a woman a wife? When pronouns weren't a requirement on your electronic signature, having to declare that you are her/she or he/him. Such things will pass, and our descendants will look back at this time of denial of objective truth with bewildered amusement and be educated on the causes of collapse of empire.

Even lefties back in the days were aghast that women should have access to contraceptives, the vote, be educated, not be the property of their husband or father. How far back should we take the social time machine? To a time when conformity was enforced by the lash and stocks? Chemical castration and electroconvulsive therapy? If two adults want to get married, it is up to them.