Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 301 of 434 FirstFirst ... 201251291299300301302303311351401 ... LastLast
Results 4,501 to 4,515 of 6506
  1. #4501
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Mile High
    Posts
    18,044
    Quote Originally Posted by brett05 View Post
    So now Joe is packing the courts. Lovely. This administration is bucking to be known to as the one that destroyed America.
    Based on what LOL

    Republicans NEVER get to ***** about judges again, NEVER. After the stunt they pulled
    <><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
    <><><><><><><>
    <><><><>

  2. #4502
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    98,785
    I hope the Justice Department pursues charges and potentially locks her up if she is found guilty.

    https://www.dcreport.org/2021/04/02/...lp-her-family/

  3. #4503
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    3,396
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    I see Trump appointing and getting confirmed a justice that should have been Obama’s to do so and then working with Mitch to break the very rule that was used to allow him to confirm the first justice as court packing. Biden should have been able to confirm Ginsburg’s replacement as Obama should have Scalia’s.

    So your concern about court packing falls on deaf ears here.
    You want to change historical events to meet your view. Everything has been done as has historically been done.
    Now the Dems want to pack the courts which the Republicans have not done.

    Take your ball, go home, and cry to mommy is the way of the liberals.
    My Ignore List: bklynny67, nastynice, OhSoSlick, spliff(TONE), zmaster52

  4. #4504
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    3,396
    Quote Originally Posted by ewing View Post
    The used partisan politics to subvert the process so they could force themselves into the majority. Same thing different method. Both wrong IMO


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    1) Same historically as has always been done concerning late appointments.
    2) One is court packing and the other is not. That's the difference.
    My Ignore List: bklynny67, nastynice, OhSoSlick, spliff(TONE), zmaster52

  5. #4505
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    3,396
    Quote Originally Posted by rhino17 View Post
    Based on what LOL

    Republicans NEVER get to ***** about judges again, NEVER. After the stunt they pulled
    I see your political history is all of 2020-today.
    My Ignore List: bklynny67, nastynice, OhSoSlick, spliff(TONE), zmaster52

  6. #4506
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    3,396
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    I hope the Justice Department pursues charges and potentially locks her up if she is found guilty.

    https://www.dcreport.org/2021/04/02/...lp-her-family/
    As should be for any politician
    My Ignore List: bklynny67, nastynice, OhSoSlick, spliff(TONE), zmaster52

  7. #4507
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    98,785
    Quote Originally Posted by brett05 View Post
    You want to change historical events to meet your view. Everything has been done as has historically been done.
    Now the Dems want to pack the courts which the Republicans have not done.

    Take your ball, go home, and cry to mommy is the way of the liberals.
    The Republicans applied a norm they liked in 2016, then applied a different one in 2020. They are allowed to do that, and the Democrats are allowed to apply a different one in 2021. It's hopefully a case of Democrat finally deciding to tell Republicans to shove it. Maybe they're forming a spine.
    Let's get embedded tweets working again!

    https://forums.prosportsdaily.com/sh...5#post33780085

  8. #4508
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    3,396
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    The Republicans applied a norm they liked in 2016, then applied a different one in 2020. They are allowed to do that, and the Democrats are allowed to apply a different one in 2021. It's hopefully a case of Democrat finally deciding to tell Republicans to shove it. Maybe they're forming a spine.
    Let's ask the question that is being begged. Were the circumstances the same? (Hint: The answer has two letters in it)
    My Ignore List: bklynny67, nastynice, OhSoSlick, spliff(TONE), zmaster52

  9. #4509
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    98,785
    Quote Originally Posted by brett05 View Post
    Let's ask the question that is being begged. Were the circumstances the same? (Hint: The answer has two letters in it)
    In 2016, Mitch said that Obama couldn't have a Supreme Court nominee confirmed because there was an election coming up. In 2020, Mitch said that Trump could have a Supreme Court nominee despite there being an election coming up. The real standard that he applied was that whenever it was politically convenient someone can have a Supreme Court nominee. So I see no problem with Joe Biden deciding to do the same thing. It is politically expedient to add 2, 4, 6, however many liberal justices to the Supreme Court. I'm calling it the Mitch McConnell standard: "whatever is most politically expedient, can be done".
    Let's get embedded tweets working again!

    https://forums.prosportsdaily.com/sh...5#post33780085

  10. #4510
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    North Shore
    Posts
    12,399
    Quote Originally Posted by brett05 View Post
    Let's ask the question that is being begged. Were the circumstances the same? (Hint: The answer has two letters in it)
    Why do the circumstances have to be the same?

  11. #4511
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    3,396
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    In 2016, Mitch said that Obama couldn't have a Supreme Court nominee confirmed because there was an election coming up. In 2020, Mitch said that Trump could have a Supreme Court nominee despite there being an election coming up. The real standard that he applied was that whenever it was politically convenient someone can have a Supreme Court nominee. So I see no problem with Joe Biden deciding to do the same thing. It is politically expedient to add 2, 4, 6, however many liberal justices to the Supreme Court. I'm calling it the Mitch McConnell standard: "whatever is most politically expedient, can be done".
    You can call it whatever you like (liberals always do) however they are not the same. One had control of the Senate and the Presidency. The other there was not control of both. Two completely different scenarios.

    So with the Dems threatening court packing, this will be the destruction of America as it will have no end. You know it, everyone knows it, even if folks want to lie about it to others and themselves.
    My Ignore List: bklynny67, nastynice, OhSoSlick, spliff(TONE), zmaster52

  12. #4512
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    3,396
    Quote Originally Posted by Kenny Powders View Post
    Why do the circumstances have to be the same?
    Not sure if you are trolling or just asking to be educated.
    My Ignore List: bklynny67, nastynice, OhSoSlick, spliff(TONE), zmaster52

  13. #4513
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    98,785
    Quote Originally Posted by brett05 View Post
    You can call it whatever you like (liberals always do) however they are not the same. One had control of the Senate and the Presidency. The other there was not control of both. Two completely different scenarios.

    So with the Dems threatening court packing, this will be the destruction of America as it will have no end. You know it, everyone knows it, even if folks want to lie about it to others and themselves.
    I'm calling it the "do whatever feels right" standard.
    Let's get embedded tweets working again!

    https://forums.prosportsdaily.com/sh...5#post33780085

  14. #4514
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    North Shore
    Posts
    12,399
    Quote Originally Posted by brett05 View Post
    Not sure if you are trolling or just asking to be educated.
    Neither.

    Let me rephrase, would it be illegal if Biden added more justices?

  15. #4515
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    1,857
    Quote Originally Posted by ewing View Post
    https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1...525594115?s=21

    Dems up to there old tricks again


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    A pipeline that'll increase oil revenue at risk of destroying the earth.

    "BIDEN IS DESTRPYING ANERICAN JOBS"


    An infrastructure plan that'll employ thousands for decades.

    "**** YOU BIDEN!!!"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •