Guest viewing limit reached
  • You have reached the maximum number of guest views allowed
  • Please register below to remove this limitation

Donald Trump running for president

guess what...with all their lockdowns and restrictions and with their economy in shambles compared to the US the european covid 19 death toll now tops 250,000.
 
dixonk said:
Look at all the experience:

Invalid Link Removed
Click to expand...

Oh, I was wrong about never practicing law. She practiced two years and can’t name three cases she worked on. She was a baby lawyer at Baker Botts. She spent two years in a basement reviewing documents for 80 hours a week. She’s still never tried a case to verdict or argued a case to an appellate judge. She’s never litigated in federal court. That’s not a lot of experience. She’s never actually practiced law. Her job is much more than abortion, 2A, and Republicancare. The rules of procedure and evidence come from SCOTUS.

It’s like she spent four years in the national guard out of high school, never saw active duty, but went on to study military history and then gets appointed as one of the highest military officers deciding US military strategies because she’s “qualified”.

She was clean and an easy nomination. She’s not experienced and has no business on the Court. She’s significantly less experienced than Kagan. There are far more qualified devout conservatives that have litigated a case and were passed over for a professor at a 2nd tier law school.
 
Woody said:
Such a shame. She has no business being on the Court. So many *actual* lawyers/judges got passed over for this chick that’s never argued a single motion.
Click to expand...

There is a long history of Supreme Court Justices who don't meet your qualifications. FDR's nominations would almost all be invalidated by your requirements.

I mean, James Byrnes was basically Joe Biden.
 
HIT4ME said:
There is a long history of Supreme Court Justices who don't meet your qualifications. FDR's nominations would almost all be invalidated by your requirements.

I mean, James Byrnes was basically Joe Biden.
Click to expand...

FDR isn’t exactly the poster boy for best president.
 
Woody said:
FDR isn’t exactly the poster boy for best president.
Click to expand...

I want to be more clear because I am not saying you are totally wrong. I am just saying it is valid but not cut and dry.

FDR is the poster boy for the democrats. Everything they stand on started with him. But we agree, he did damage to this country we still have not recovered from.

But there are president's from both parties that have nominated justices who have never been judges, had limited real world experience, etc. Your point is valid, but not the only factor.
 
And btw - James Byrnes held a lot of good beliefs. He didn't last long, he stepped down. He also did have some private practice but was never a judge and the bulk of his career was in politics. A lot like Joe Biden...who we can also agree isn't the poster boy for "good president".
 
HIT4ME said:
I want to be more clear because I am not saying you are totally wrong. I am just saying it is valid but not cut and dry.

FDR is the poster boy for the democrats. Everything they stand on started with him. But we agree, he did damage to this country we still have not recovered from.

But there are president's from both parties that have nominated justices who have never been judges, had limited real world experience, etc. Your point is valid, but not the only factor.
Click to expand...

I guess the liberals up north are different than Texas liberals. Most of them I know dislike FDR and aren’t big on socialism (including corporate socialism) or taking away guns. I am liberal for Texas, but am conservative for the liberals described ITT.

Kavanaugh wasn’t a judge when Bush nominated him for a federal circuit and it counted against him. He was, however, a practicing lawyer. I’m fine with someone who has argued a case and understands procedure and evidence in a real setting being nominated. They may have never written an opinion, but they’ve read a million of them and understand practical application of the law. And they’ve written a million motions and briefs. Trying a case to a jury within the confines of the rules of procedure and evidence is high level chess.

Reading/understanding the rules and applying them are two totally different things. You can’t make an intellectual decision on something if you’ve never had to actually do it. She’s qualified for half of her job - the constitutional issues. But not the other half. And half qualified on a lifetime appointment is a sham.
 
HIT4ME said:
There is a long history of Supreme Court Justices who don't meet your qualifications. FDR's nominations would almost all be invalidated by your requirements.

I mean, James Byrnes was basically Joe Biden.
Click to expand...

Well that didnt work out well!
 
how the hell did that moron obama become a two term president...he sounds like jim jone's reincarnated what a snake oil-i mean kool aid salesman. drink up democrats.
 
thebigt said:
how the hell did that moron obama become a two term president...he sounds like jim jone's reincarnated what a snake oil-i mean kool aid salesman. drink up democrats.
Click to expand...

I think sometimes you forget that approximately 95% of the global population are mouth breathing mongoloids.
 
Woody said:
I guess the liberals up north are different than Texas liberals. Most of them I know dislike FDR and aren’t big on socialism (including corporate socialism) or taking away guns. I am liberal for Texas, but am conservative for the liberals described ITT.

Kavanaugh wasn’t a judge when Bush nominated him for a federal circuit and it counted against him. He was, however, a practicing lawyer. I’m fine with someone who has argued a case and understands procedure and evidence in a real setting being nominated. They may have never written an opinion, but they’ve read a million of them and understand practical application of the law. And they’ve written a million motions and briefs. Trying a case to a jury within the confines of the rules of procedure and evidence is high level chess.

Reading/understanding the rules and applying them are two totally different things. You can’t make an intellectual decision on something if you’ve never had to actually do it. She’s qualified for half of her job - the constitutional issues. But not the other half. And half qualified on a lifetime appointment is a sham.
Click to expand...

The liberals in MA are definitely different than the liberals in TX. Our liberals are more like CA liberals. Insane, crazy, nuts. A woman in a town near me had her car rear ended on purpose and then was assaulted because she had a MAGA bumper sticker. You have to be pretty ballzy to put a Trump sign in your yard around here. And I live in one of the most conservative areas of MA.

You do realize that ACB has spent the last three years as a sitting judge, correct? I may be ignorant here because it's not my profession, I just play a lawyer on the internet - and I am seriously being humorous about myself here as I may just be ignorant.

Surely she could use some more practice in the law room, probably very few people could. But there are lots of Supreme Court Judges in history who have never been judges prior to their nomination, and at least she has that?

Your point is a valid point, I'm not totally blowing it off here...just saying it's not the only factor by a long shot, and there is historical precedent for this. It seems that pretty much everyone who has worked with her supported the nomination, which is probably a rarity among a few hundred attorneys that they could all agree on something or someone.
 
dixonk said:
I think sometimes you forget that approximately 95% of the global population are mouth breathing mongoloids.
Click to expand...

Why do you have to be SO DARNED negative all the time? I prefer to be much more positive.
















5% of the population is smarter than mouth breathing mongoloids.
 
liberals can cry all they want...FACT: amy coney barrett is now sitting justice of SCOTUS!!!
 
thebigt said:
liberals can cry all they want...FACT: amy coney barrett is now sitting justice of SCOTUS!!!
Click to expand...

You would think by now the little whiny bitches will have figured out that their temper tantrums accomplish nothing. I will thank them in advance for showing their asses though. The normal people will be voting here in a few days.
 
my county vigo county indiana is a bellwether county...we have picked the president going all the eay back to eisenhower---guess what demmys trump signs are everywhere, biden not so much, lol....go trump!!!!
 
dixonk said:
You would think by now the little whiny bitches will have figured out that their temper tantrums accomplish nothing. I will thank them in advance for showing their asses though. The normal people will be voting here in a few days.
Click to expand...
little whiny bitches never learn, they keep repeating same stupid stuff hoping for different result---einsteins definition of a moron.
 
thebigt said:
my county vigo county indiana is a bellwether county...we have picked the president going all the eay back to eisenhower---guess what demmys trump signs are everywhere, biden not so much, lol....go trump!!!!
Click to expand...

I had a few Biden signs. We had them at the range the other day. Let’s just say those signed are now unrecognizable. 12 gauge dumps at close range was pretty cool.
 
Remember all the kids screaming and crying at the store that the parents didn’t beat that ass on the spot? Well, they grew up...
 
I don’t think being a Supreme Court Judge requires much at all. It’s supposed to be a very simple job.

Invalid Link Removed
 
ax1 said:
I don’t think being a Supreme Court Judge requires much at all. It’s supposed to be a very simple job.

Invalid Link Removed
Click to expand...

Great minds think alike. The constitution is not a complicated document. It’s fairly plain English. Not sure what a career in law would offer to better understand it.
 
dixonk said:
Great minds think alike. The constitution is not a complicated document. It’s fairly plain English. Not sure what a career in law would offer to better understand it.
Click to expand...
what the democrats don't understand is that the scotus is there to interpret the law not make the law.
 
thebigt said:
what the democrats don't understand is that the scotus is there to interpret the law not make the law.
Click to expand...

They are desperately trying to turn out judicial into a legislative arm. My only hope is for this court to start undoing as much of the unconstitutional shenanigans as possible.
 
dixonk said:
Democrat motto: we have a law for that.
Click to expand...
wrong...
democrat motto-promise everything...deliver nothing!!!

i like how trump asked biden-well joe, you had 8 years why didn't you do any of this stuff then?
 
'philly braces for second night of violence'

the choice is easy---law and order or rioting, looting and violence going unchecked....30 cops hurt last night!!!

GOD BLESS THE BLUE
 
thebigt said:
wrong...
democrat motto-promise everything...deliver nothing!!!

i like how trump asked biden-well joe, you had 8 years why didn't you do any of this stuff then?
Click to expand...

Half a century, your slightly off lol
 
one of bidens supporters even ran over a police sgt with a pickup truck...waiting for biden to condemn this action-but not going to hold my breath, c'mon man!!!
 
hatred for police-obama built that
defund police-obama built that
antifa-obama built that
blm-obama built that

and biden was at his side!!!
 
'facebook apologizes for removing babylon bee satire mocking sen hirono'

facebook claimed hirono threatened to turn them into toads if they didn't remove the post.
 
'the great masses in a population will more easily fall victims to a big lie, than to a small one'

quote by adolph hitler and put in practice by barrack obama/joe biden and the democrat house of representatives!!!
 
Last edited:
'protesters raid shops, atm's after philadelphia police shooting'


just another 'peaceful protest'-eh demmies?
 
ex hunter biden business partner...'joe biden's denials of involvement in sons business deals 'a blatant lie'.


ok, here it is...tony bobulinski went on tv and in a interview with tucker carlson flat out said joe biden was LYING about not being involved in hunters business deals...

c'mon man--lets sue the man for libel-eh joe?


i've heard several right leaning investigative reporters say the fbi has been sitting on incriminating evidence against both bidens since 2019...they say both bidens are guilty of violating AACA-american anti-corruption act.
 
dixonk said:
BLM burning down the country again because a criminal got greased?
Click to expand...
just a excuse to loot and run rampant but most of all an excuse to attack police, the only ones standing in the way of their criminal activity.

democrats should think long and hard about what they are voting for-defunding police while at the same time taking away 2nd amendment rights is a guaranteed recipie for disaster.
 
maybe joe biden has a different definition of 'meeting with'....just like bill clinton had a different defintion of 'sex with'
 
i see where tucker carlson is going to finish october with largest primetime audience in cable news history!!!

go tucker!!!
 
Woody said:
I guess the liberals up north are different than Texas liberals. Most of them I know dislike FDR and aren’t big on socialism (including corporate socialism) or taking away guns. I am liberal for Texas, but am conservative for the liberals described ITT.

Kavanaugh wasn’t a judge when Bush nominated him for a federal circuit and it counted against him. He was, however, a practicing lawyer. I’m fine with someone who has argued a case and understands procedure and evidence in a real setting being nominated. They may have never written an opinion, but they’ve read a million of them and understand practical application of the law. And they’ve written a million motions and briefs. Trying a case to a jury within the confines of the rules of procedure and evidence is high level chess.

Reading/understanding the rules and applying them are two totally different things. You can’t make an intellectual decision on something if you’ve never had to actually do it. She’s qualified for half of her job - the constitutional issues. But not the other half. And half qualified on a lifetime appointment is a sham.
Click to expand...
I guess you missed the memo where being a judge or a lawyer is simple and requires no qualifications.
 
thebigt said:
are you saying amy coney barrett has no qualifications?
Click to expand...

They are saying that she doesn’t meet their agenda and that she poses a threat undoing all their libtarded unconstitutional bullshit that has been rammed down our throat for decades.
 
Ok, so I just saw the Dodgers win the World Series, players all over the place, camera men, mic men, journalists.....saw so many players not wearing a mask celebrating and hugging eachother with people all over the place....

Then I found out they pulled Justin Turner in the middle of the game because he tested positive for the CCP-Virus.

What in the blue hell is going on? Are you freaking kidding me???????

The shhhhooowwwwwwwwww mmmuusssttt go oooooooooooonnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn!!!!!!!!!

Different rules for different folks.
 
thebigt said:
are you saying amy coney barrett has no qualifications?
Click to expand...
No, it was more to do with the comment that anyone could practice law because it is so simple.

Anyone who deals with any aspect of law knows that every single word/ phrase is disputed in court, and only those who don't deal with law think its straightforward.
 
dixonk said:
They are saying that she doesn’t meet their agenda and that she poses a threat undoing all their libtarded unconstitutional bullshit that has been rammed down our throat for decades.
Click to expand...
Tbh I'm just surprised he nominated someone outside the Trump family
 
Jiigzz said:
No, it was more to do with the comment that anyone could practice law because it is so simple.

Anyone who deals with any aspect of law knows that every single word/ phrase is disputed in court, and only those who don't deal with law think its straightforward.
Click to expand...

The US Constitution is very straightforward. Any law written after that, if it isnt straightforward should be thrown in the trash.
 
dixonk said:
And while we are at it, let’s make stupid hurt again.
Click to expand...

I just dont get why so many people fall for the oldest political tricks in the book.

Contsitution: "Rights shall not be infringed....."

Politician: "Well, you see they didnt mean it that way, its not why you think. The "think tanks" say it means this. Let me put a 12,000 page bill explaining what it is to not have them infringed, who what where when why and if they can be infringed and we regulate it properly so you can all understand what it meant and we will start from there and tell you what it means and the amend the bill as we go along if there needs more clarification."

Sheep: “Yeeaahhh I think I get it now thanks for clarifying because I can’t think for myself!”
 
ax1 said:
I just dont get why so many people fall for the oldest political tricks in the book.

Contsitution: "Rights shall not be infringed....."

Politician: "Well, you see they didnt mean it that way, its not why you think. The "think tanks" say it means this. Let me put a 12,000 page bill explaining what it is to not have them infringed, who what where when why and if they can be infringed and we regulate it properly so you can all understand what it meant and we will start from there and tell you what it means and the amend the bill as we go along if there needs more clarification."

Sheep: “Yeeaahhh I think I get it now thanks for clarifying!”
Click to expand...

On this we are on the same exact page.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top