Democrats’ Armageddon Option

[LacesOut]

Just show me EVIDENCE, ANY EVIDENCE of ANYTHING being picked up.

That's all, how the fuck is this confusing. You keep making claims with absolutely no evidence that Page was in communication with the campaign and there was ANYTHING to 'pick up'



Yea, the guy who hides his tax returns by saying it will do irrevocable harm and goes to the Supreme Court to hide it is 'clean'.

You are the rube Trump University aimed for.

Wow you are so thick.
2 Hop Rule. Look it up. They bite on Page’s first connection. And then bite on any of those connections connections. Which leads you directly to Trump himself.

It doesn’t matter what they found.
We know what they didn’t find - any evidence of Trump-Russia collusion or any illegal activity. And why would they?

Coup plotters gotta plot.

 

[LacesOut]

This is fine if not for the fact that a wingnut conservative SC will undo every progressive change for the next 30 years, that cannot be allowed.

Why not?

 

[Cuddles]

Why not?

Because 70% of people should not be ruled by tyranny of the minority

 

[Wallet]

Because 70% of people should not be ruled by tyranny of the minority

Lol

 

[WeToddDid2]

conservative SC will undo every progressive change for the next 30 years

Sounds good!

 

[exGOPer]

Sounds good!

Agreed, court packing does sound good. No more 'Supreme Court' is sacred bullshit.

Why not?

If people want Roe V Wade and other moderate issues struck down then they could do it on the ballot but of course Cons know that their ideas are not popular beyond the vague slogans they shout out.

 

[kmgilroy89]

True, only 13% want it overturned according to a NPR poll in 2019:
https://www.npr.org/2019/06/07/7301...bortion-legal-but-they-also-want-restrictions

SCOTUS is supposed to take both precedent and yes, public opinion into account in their rulings (particularly on issues of gray areas, ie: how does the public view cruel and unusual punishment in terms of the death penalty).

 

[exGOPer]

True, only 13% want it overturned according to a NPR poll in 2019:
https://www.npr.org/2019/06/07/7301...bortion-legal-but-they-also-want-restrictions

SCOTUS is supposed to take both precedent and yes, public opinion into account in their rulings (particularly on issues of gray areas, ie: how does the public view cruel and unusual punishment in terms of the death penalty).

This morning, I dove into data from the 2016 Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES), a 50,000-plus person national survey conducted by YouGov. The survey measured voters' attitudes towards the abortion issue on a six-question scale. Specifically, it asked voters whether they support or oppose the following:

1. Always allow a woman to obtain an abortion as a matter of choice
2. Permit abortion only in cases of rape, incest or when the woman's life is in danger
3. Ban abortions after the 20th week of pregnancy
4. Allow employers to decline coverage of abortions in insurance plans
5. Prohibit the expenditure of funds authorized or appropriated by federal law for any abortion
6. Make abortion illegal in all circumstances

I rated anyone who chose the pro-choice or pro-life side on four, five or six of these questions as at least "leaning" towards that position, and labeled voters who split their answers evenly down the middle as having "mixed" views.

Not surprisingly, 74 percent of Clinton's voters at least leaned pro-choice, while only 15 percent leaned pro-life and 11 percent held mixed views. But only 65 percent of Trump's voters at least leaned pro-life, while a substantial 22 percent at least leaned pro-choice and 13 percent held mixed views. Among third party voters, views on abortion were almost evenly split.

Although Trump downplayed the abortion issue in 2016 in favor of more populist economic messages on trade and immigration, voters with mostly pro-choice attitudes made up more than a fifth of his support in plenty of battleground states: 25 percent in Iowa, 24 percent in Florida, Michigan and Pennsylvania, 21 percent in Arizona and 20 percent in Ohio and Wisconsin.

https://cookpolitical.com/analysis/...ding-scotus-fight-could-split-trump-coalition

 

[Wallet]

True, only 13% want it overturned according to a NPR poll in 2019:
https://www.npr.org/2019/06/07/7301...bortion-legal-but-they-also-want-restrictions

SCOTUS is supposed to take both precedent and yes, public opinion into account in their rulings (particularly on issues of gray areas, ie: how does the public view cruel and unusual punishment in terms of the death penalty).

Public opinion?

The Supreme Court’s function is to uphold the constitutionality of law and actions between the 3 legislative branches, period.

Public opinion, political agenda should have zero bearing in it’s decisions. The influence of public opinion should be seen via elections and not illegally legislated by Judiciary.

The Court's Jurisdiction
Article III, Section II of the Constitution establishes the jurisdiction (legal ability to hear a case) of the Supreme Court. The Court has original jurisdiction (a case is tried before the Court) over certain cases, e.g., suits between two or more states and/or cases involving ambassadors and other public ministers. The Court has appellate jurisdiction (the Court can hear the case on appeal) on almost any other case that involves a point of constitutional and/or federal law. Some examples include cases to which the United States is a party, cases involving Treaties, and cases involving ships on the high seas and navigable waterways (admiralty cases).

https://www.uscourts.gov/about-fede...educational-outreach/activity-resources/about

 

[exGOPer]

The Supreme Court’s function is to uphold the constitutionality of law and actions between the 3 legislative branches, period.

Right, judges appointed by political parties are not partisan at all, things are constitutional when you agree with them otherwise not.

Your comment is a joke. Period.