Post: #226

(12-21-2018 02:13 PM)MrLemon Wrote:  

(12-21-2018 01:05 PM)redpillage Wrote:  

(12-21-2018 12:38 PM)Canopus Wrote:  

Any chance the tumor could take over for her? Couldn't be much worse than this old dried out raisin. Bitch really thought she could outlive Trump's first term :-))

One of the things I've learned now that I'm old is this: you don't really owe old people shit, unless you respect them. Don't bother bowing and scraping.

Sure, in the old days, men were compelled by honor to treat old folk gently, because they were often poor and powerless. However in the US today, that rule no longer applies. It's the old fucking bitches like RBG who have ALL the money and ALL the power, they are fucking over the young folk big, big time.

Old baby boomer scumbags unwilling to admit that they are long out of touch with the modern world, unwilling step aside and let the young take their roles. When you confront them on their selfishness, they get all "woe is me, I'm a senior citizen and you should respect me..."

RBG is the classic example of this. So I say: fuck that old shithead. I owe her no respect and neither do any of you. She isn't helping anybody, she's just leaving more ruin and wreckage in her wake. Too puffed up with fake old feminist ego, which is really just asshole narcissism, to see the reality of what she is doing.

Just like Neville Chamberlain in Britain WW2, they finally had to force the old fuck out: "''You have sat too long here for any good you have been doing. In the name of God, go!''

Chamberlain was a British patriot, Churchill was the traitor/Rothschild shabbos goy who destroyed the British Empire, Germany and much of Europe at the behest of the globalists.

Pat Buchanan's book on the subject is a good start:





Yeah and screw that witch Buzzie, retire to Florida already.

Post: #227

(12-21-2018 09:11 PM)Emancipator Wrote:  

Post: #228

I read a comment to the effect that RBG had been speculating about retiring in January. Great article in DailyCaller by a physician, saying that most likely her lung nodes indicate she has stage IV cancer.

https://dailycaller.com/2018/12/27/ginsb...paign=push

Quote:She had colon cancer in 1999 and pancreatic cancer in 2009, both of which are known to spread to the lungs. The lungs are a common site for metastatic cancer as the entire blood supply flows through the lungs, carrying cancer cells from distant parts of the body.

If these nodules were not metastatic, then she would have primary lung cancer. While possible, having three different types of cancer is unusual. Ginsburg was not a smoker, which makes lung cancer less likely. Occam’s Razor suggests metastatic cancer.

January may be an exciting month.

Post: #229

^^

Everybody needs to stock up on wine as the REEEING will be off the hook. Since I don't drink I personally will be feasting on crab legs. RBG clearly isn't healthy and I'm sad to say she will be replaced by President Trump. I'm not saying it out of spite, but it will happen. I don't remember where I read it but there were rumors along the lines that the Supreme Court had a special room for her to stay in since she's too frail to travel.

Post: #230

RBG is someone who falls down and is so fragile that when she does she breaks bones. She now has some of her lungs removed. That is the best case. Worse case is her cancer has sread. Her odds of surviving a second Trump term are less than 10%. I don't know about January but I would say its likely Trump gets to appoint her replacement before the end of his first term.

Post: #231

"Reminiscing about how insane Leftists got over Kavanaugh replacing Kennedy, they'll collapse into themselves like a black hole if President Trump replaces RBG with a conservative, America loving, Constitutionalist justice.

Can't wait!"

While no expert, the feeling I got about Kavanaugh in the context of the other members of Trumps short list was that he appeared to be the mist conservative candidate who was "safe"; that is, he had a well established record, little apparent baggage, and was completely defensible in the upcoming hearings. . . until Christine Ford appeared out of nowhere.

If Trump gets to nominate RBG's successor he should, and very well might, just say " fuck it!". It doesn't matter who he nominates, the Democrats will do anything they think they can get away with to discredit the person and shame a couple of GOP senators into voting against them.

Amy Coney Bennet seems a bit "safer" than before given that she would be replacing another woman. However, they tried to hammer her on her Catholic faith when she was confirmed to the court of appeals. She got 3 Democrat votes in the senate that time around. This time, probably not but who cares as long as the 51 GOP senators follow party lines.

How much traction could the Democrats really get by invoking the Catholic bogeyman? And really, how much dirt can you fling at a married mother of 7 (including two Haitian adoptees and a special needs child) before drawing a backlash that would outdo the "Kavanaugh Effect"? At a minimum, you won't have bogus allegations of her being a gang rapist.

Post: #232

Hopefully Trump appoints someone as extreme as RBG.

Post: #233

I just looked it up, and there is no way to remove her due to health problems. There have been cases where insane and medically incapacitated supreme court justices stayed on the court for many years in which they weren't able to serve at all. The only way to remove a justice is by impeachment, which works the same as presidential impeachment. It's pretty much certain this will never happen to any SCOTUS justice for health reasons. She could go in a nursing home and be kept alive by extraordinary measures for the next two years, and there's nothing to prevent it.

That being said, with this latest round of cancer, I would be very surprised if they can keep her alive that long.

Post: #234

Yeah, with the president I think it's the 25th amendment provides an additional avenue for removing him for incapacity. That does not apply to federal judges who are appointed for life per the Constitution. it's basically unprecedented, but probably the most Trump could get away with would be to appoint an alternate for when Ginsberg is unable to serve.

there is nothing in the Constitution that limits the court to nine members, and it's had more or less members at different times. FDR famously tried to pack the court to get his legislation approved, and while he never increased the size of the Court he did have some success politically as a result of his stunt. He had mixed success, but you can make the case that he had more success because of his threat to pack the court with justices that were sympathetic to his legislation

Post: #235

Let's assume that by the time Trump leaves office solid Rs are 6-3.

I have no doubt, a democract, if elected, will say "the court should look more America"

They will expand to 15 judges, and one of them will be a Muslim woman.

Post: #236

(12-27-2018 04:42 PM)Hypno Wrote:  RBG is someone who falls down and is so fragile that when she does she breaks bones. She now has some of her lungs removed. That is the best case. Worse case is her cancer has sread. Her odds of surviving a second Trump term are less than 10%. I don't know about January but I would say its likely Trump gets to appoint her replacement before the end of his first term.

Seems likely. Though I think the democrats may encase her in bubble wrap to ensure she gets through the next two years!

Post: #237

(12-29-2018 12:01 AM)The Father Wrote:  Seems likely. Though I think the democrats may encase her in bubble wrap to ensure she gets through the next two years!

Post: #238

Democrats: "Supreme Court? Mine goes to eleven. No wait. . . may be 13 or 15 to make sure we can get the votes."

Has anyone ever thought about amending the constitution to set the court size at 9, or whatever?

Post: #239

They would have to pass such a law through Congress. I guess the Dems could get a majority in the house, senate and win the presidency and then just go crazy and set the number of Supreme Court justices to 50 and add 41 libtards.

Post: #240

(12-30-2018 12:05 PM)eradicator Wrote:  They would have to pass such a law through Congress. I guess the Dems could get a majority in the house, senate and win the presidency and then just go crazy and set the number of Supreme Court justices to 50 and add 41 libtards.

This is not even a question any more. They have abandoned all sense of reality. They would do this in a second, and totally ignore any long term or even medium term repurcussions.

It was Obama who started all this BTW. He abandoned any sense of being limited by checks and balances. His last 2 years just did everything by executive order, just started governing by proclamation like the dictators of africa or south america, who are his role models. Once they got a taste of those dictatorial powers, the left wing will never again be content with mere governance. they will never be trustworthy. That's why the Democratic party must be destroyed.

Post: #241

(12-27-2018 05:04 PM)66Scorpio Wrote:  How much traction could the Democrats really get by invoking the Catholic bogeyman? And really, how much dirt can you fling at a married mother of 7 (including two Haitian adoptees and a special needs child) before drawing a backlash that would outdo the "Kavanaugh Effect"? At a minimum, you won't have bogus allegations of her being a gang rapist.

They'll try to destroy her personally. Guys coming out of the woodwork saying they banged her while she was married, claiming her biological kids are theirs and not her husband's, etc. Won't be true of course, but as we saw with Kavanaugh that won't stop them.

As the allegations will be of personal misconduct and not illegal activity they'll probably do it slowly, drip by drip in order to pressure her into not accepting the nomination. And they'll do the same with any other woman Trump nominates. Then if he nominates a man, it's back to the rape allegations.

Wash rinse repeat. It'll all be purely fabricated of course but 40% of the country will swallow it without thinking.

Post: #242

The needs of the many of America outweigh the needs of Ginsburg clinging on 3 years.

Post: #243

Post: #244

Project 'Weekend At Ruth's' is officially in effect:

   

Quote:Ginsburg To Unexpectedly Miss Supreme Court Arguments For First Time Ever

The 85-year-old Clinton appointee will work from home following the removal of two malignant cancerous growths from her left lung on Dec. 21 according to court spokeswoman Kathy Arberg. Ginsburg was released on Christmas day from a New York hospital.

The cancer was discovered one week after Ginsburg broke her ribs in a November 7 fall after doctors noticed growths on her lung.

The oldest Supreme Court Justice has battled cancer twice in the past, once in 1999 and then in 2009 when she underwent surgery for pancreatic cancer - neither of which kept her away from court.

During the heat of the 2016 US election, Ginsburg made shockwaves when she told the New York Times that should President Trump become President, it would be time to move to New Zealand, stating "I can’t imagine what the country would be with Donald Trump as our president," adding "For the country, it could be four years. For the court, it could be — I don’t even want to contemplate that."

The comments led many to suggest Ginsburg would need to recuse herself from any decisions involving Trump, with even the Washington Post noting that some "wondered what impact this might have on Ginsburg's decision to hear cases involving Trump. - If there's a redo of Bush v. Gore, how does Ginsburg not recuse herself, given her Trump comments?"

Trump fired back, telling The Times "I think it’s highly inappropriate that a United States Supreme Court judge gets involved in a political campaign, frankly."

He also tweeted: "Justice Ginsburg of the U.S. Supreme Court has embarrassed all by making very dumb political statements about me. Her mind is shot - resign!"

Instead of backing down, Ginsburg doubled down.

"He is a faker," she said of the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, going point by point, as if presenting a legal brief. "He has no consistency about him. He says whatever comes into his head at the moment. He really has an ego. ... How has he gotten away with not turning over his tax returns? The press seems to be very gentle with him on that."

"At first I thought it was funny," she said of Trump's early candidacy. "To think that there's a possibility that he could be president... " Her voice trailed off gloomily, seemingly shocked that there is a chance the majority of Americans may be revolting at the status quo.

"I think he has gotten so much free publicity," she added, drawing a contrast between what she believes is tougher media treatment of Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton and returning to an overriding complaint: "Every other presidential candidate has turned over tax returns."

Trump - who would pick Ginsberg's successor should she pass away during his term in office, was able to put aside their differences and wish her a "full and speedy recovery" in December.

Post: #245

(12-29-2018 06:40 AM)Hypno Wrote:  

(12-29-2018 12:01 AM)The Father Wrote:  Seems likely. Though I think the democrats may encase her in bubble wrap to ensure she gets through the next two years!

Shit I wish I had seen this one before I spent 20 minutes putting mine together. MUCH BETTER!

Post: #246

How can anyone label her absence as unexpected? She is an 85 year old with stage 3 or 4 cancer and some broken ribs who is recovering from surgery. At her age and with her medical history she should be thankful if she gets out of the hospital let alone return to work.

Repubs in Senate should hold hearings to ensure her vote is not outsourced to unconfirmed law clerks

Post: #247

I have to say this: Conservatives HAVE to get over their kid-glove treatment of situations like this. I think this woman needs a few protesters in front of her house or whatever, so that she and her family and aides see that people are angry. She needs to understand that there are real people, not just some cardboard cutout Orange Man, who are telling her to step the fuck down. And yeah, the Democrats will piss and moan about "not being dignified" but for the thousanth time, fuck them. They use these fake prissy rules when they want to escape the consequences of their actions, but they then are ruthless assholes when they want to fuck over other people.

Post: #248

What kind of morons want to replace Ginsberg with another woman? This is ridiculous.

Post: #249

(01-08-2019 03:46 PM)rpg Wrote:  What kind of morons want to replace Ginsberg with another woman? This is ridiculous.

Might be safest under the circumstances, based on how vulnerable all male candidates or for anything nowadays.

On the other hand, it would look repetitive to pull false accuser twice in a row, this might be our best chance to push another male through.

Post: #250

If she is not in court she should not get a vote. Her law clerk s we're not confirmed by the Senate