President Trump Now Saying the Next Supreme Court Pick Will ‘Most Likely’ Be a Woman…

Many reasons present themselves as to why the Senate should seat President Trump’s nominee to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg as quickly as possible.  Heading into an election season without the full complement of justices could prove to be a nightmare scenario.  Nobody wants a split decision on the Supreme Court with the election in the balance. 

Fox News – “It will be a woman. A very talented, very brilliant woman.” Trump said. “I think it should be a woman. I actually like women much more than I like men.”

The commander-in-chief opened his rally in Fayetteville, N.C., by paying tribute to the late justice, saying “you may disagree with her, but she was a tremendous inspiration to a number of people, I say all Americans.”

Trump told reporters before boarding Air Force One to North Carolina that his pick would likely be announced next week.

Trump said the current situation is different than in February 2016 when a seat was vacated by late Justice Antonin Scalia. “That’s called the consequences of losing an election,” the president said.

He noted her close relationship with late Justice Antonin Scalia, which he called a “powerful reminder we can disagree on fundamental issues while treating each other with decency and respect.”

Trump also asserted his right to nominate a new justice before the election. “Article II of the Constitution says the president shall nominate justices of the Supreme Court. I don’t think it can be any more clear, can it?”

A chant broke out among the crowd multiple times throughout the night: “Fill that seat, fill that seat.”

“It says the president, we’re supposed to fill the seat. That’s what we’re going to do.”

Trump also told the crowd he would now consider his rallies protests. “This isn’t a rally. From now on it’s called a protest,” he said. “Protest against stupidity.”

Trump said that a Supreme Court seat was vacated during an election year or prior to inauguration 29 times throughout history. “Every sitting president made a nomination,” he said.

President Obama nominated Merrick Garland for the seat, but Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., in 2016 used his caucus’ numbers to hold the seat open until after the election.  …MORE…

About Ad rem

Millions of little gray cells wrapped in fur.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

658 Responses to President Trump Now Saying the Next Supreme Court Pick Will ‘Most Likely’ Be a Woman…

  1. Sentient says:

    How about we get the most conservative, credibly originalist judge under the age of 55 and put them on the court without regard to their sex or race?

    Liked by 28 people

    • Perot Conservative says:

      This is high-stakes politics:

      1. Replacing RGB.
      2. POTUS shoring up the female & suburban vote.
      3. POTUS affirming he’s not a sexist.

      BTW, Barrett graduated #1 at Notre Dame Law School.

      Robert Barnes argues the upside w Barrett is bigger w suburban Moms due to their having 7 children (2 adopted from Haiti, and 1 special needs).

      Liked by 8 people

      • I hope it helps with suburban women, but you might be surprised how many women think having 7 children is weird or even irresponsible. I think it’s great, but seems so many women today are all in on protecting Planned Parenthood and abortion.

        Liked by 2 people

        • coastermomohio, The women I know think if you have that much love for 7 children and can afford it then of course do it. And the only women I know pro planned parenthood and abortion are libs.

          Liked by 1 person

          • coastermomohio says:

            Hopefully there are more of us conservative women than lib/progressive women. I was prochoice when I was younger and didn’t know any better. But I always wanted children and when I had mine, that’s when I realized how evil abortion is. It’s the ones who are fooled by the whole “women’s lib” thing that worries me.

            Liked by 1 person

            • mac says:

              CMO,
              Last week I saw a meme that hit me really hard. It was a picture of a newly born baby, just out of the womb, with arms outstretched and crying (why not? it’s cold and very unexpectedly bright out there!). The caption was, “Please don’t abort me. I promise I’ll be a good baby!”

              It suddenly got very dusty in that room.

              Liked by 2 people

            • Super Elite says:

              The most evil of all is the emotional states of the women are left in after an abortion. I know a couple of loose cannons who got abortions when they were young and/or during their college days. These old gals are in a sad state of mind & body. Still trying to justify the murder of their unborn. A crying shame. If you hurt someone else you hurt yourself much, much more.

              Like

              • Exactly right. I knew many who regretted their abortions, but usually took many years to realize what they had done. I believe in the maternal instinct, and when a woman goes against that it destroys something in her soul. But I have seen God bring them peace and promise them reconciliation with the child they grieve for – if they are able to accept His grace. I pray for the mothers as well as the babies. They are both victims of this awful practice.

                Liked by 1 person

        • joseywalesandtenbearsbarandgrill says:

          Only irresponsible when you don’t love, protect, and provide for them. I believe her salary will get the wallet portion completed.

          Liked by 2 people

      • Leroy says:

        Barrett seems to be a good choice, but I bet he goes with an Hispanic woman to shore up the Hispanic vote. Imagine the spectre of the Democrats trashing an HIspanic woman judge.

        Liked by 1 person

        • fionnagh says:

          Try to find time to watch Lagoa’s confirmation acceptance speech. She strikes me as a non-nonsense type of judge who won’t cave to the progressives. Just my two cents which in the end don’t count at all:)

          Liked by 1 person

          • Super Elite says:

            Well 2-cents is more than two mites which Jesus said when the poor widow cast that much into the offering plate was MORE than all the other offerings. And it did turn out to be more because down through the years many people have offered what they had — even two mites which is worth 2/3 of 1-cent.

            Like

        • rayvandune says:

          Maybe we’d get a Latina who is actually wise?

          Like

      • lambgraham says:

        A fast approval by the Senate takes the issue off the table before the election and totally demoralizes the Democrats.

        Liked by 3 people

        • mac says:

          Very true. Now the question is whether or not Mitch McConnell has enough dirt on Romney, Murkowski and Collins to force them to toe the party line. I suspect Romney is a lost cause.

          Liked by 2 people

        • Contrarymary says:

          But their decisions, for life, can demoralize us and our country. Just look at the Obamacare decision, gay marriage decision and the transgender decision

          Like

    • jay says:

      It matters because RATS base everything on race and gender. If Trump fails to choose wisely it will be Justice K part II. There is no time for side shows, rape allegations, or victim parades. I say go with Lagoa.

      Woman. Cuban. 13 years as a jurist. Family. Let them go after Lagoa for being anti-communist. If they attempt to attack political ideology they dig their own hole. They country is being burnt to the ground by communists. And they threaten to burn it down more!

      Kagan has zippo experience when she was placed on the bench. Merit is of paramount importance – but explain that to Joe B and the Dems who selected black female Kamala based on skin color and genitalia.

      My guess- she would be an asset, So FL will fight for Trump, and come any election turmoil we have a conservative Justice on the bench. We are fighting for survival of the nation. The time for playing ‘nice’ with RATS ended long ago.

      Liked by 18 people

    • Blind no Longer says:

      Liked by 6 people

      • dallasdan says:

        Can someone please authoritatively confirm or refute Ingraham’s claim (quoted several times here yesterday) that Judge Barrett would recuse herself from cases associated with her Catholic faith, such as right-to-life? I don’t believe it.

        Liked by 6 people

      • A new Scalia would be a good thing. But, is that what she really is? Anymore, I am skeptical about EVERY recommendation given to President Trump.

        Liked by 10 people

      • Janus says:

        I’m indifferent on Trump’s choice. I’ll defer to his wisdom on the pick. I’m MUCH more attuned to the politics of nominating BEFORE the election.

        Already, Collins and Murkowski have come out and said they won’t vote BEFORE the election? Why? Well, in Collins case, it just makes her re-election effort that much more intense. For Murkowski (and for many other Republican Senators) they would much prefer to vote on a Biden pick than a Trump pick.

        You see, although McConnell ostensibly is focused on putting conservative jurists on the bench (not so sure I really believe that, but we’ll go it for the moment), many in his caucus could care less. So long as they stay employed as US Senators, the makeup of SCOTUS makes no difference to them. And voting for a Trump nominee causes them job insecurity–or at so they think.

        Let us pray that Trump gets his nominee confirmed BEFORE November 3rd because if not, should the election madness become so convoluted that it winds up in the Supreme Court, I fear Roberts will shiv this nation (and President Trump) a second time.

        Liked by 5 people

        • readyandable1 says:

          Roberts will 100% vote in any way, in any context , the way he determines will best help to get President Trump out of office. There is no guessing here. We ALL, myself included, need to stop listening to people’s words or some pundits logic. The only thing that matters is past actions. Period.

          That’s for all players in all things political.

          Liked by 3 people

    • Kay123 says:

      Sentient….
      Amen. Values… loyal to the Constitution, upstanding
      character, and honesty, more important than gender or race.
      We need people our youth can admire… learn from.

      There are so many crooks and low-lifes in government already…
      let’s get some “traditional conservatives” who are willing to
      put God…”we the people” and THIS COUNTRY first.

      Those that want something else…. need to pack their bags and
      go to another country to find some he!!hole they want to live
      in.

      With 100 countries invading the US every year…. Nobody
      is happy? Then why come here?

      Are all of them terrorists? Yes, I will ask the hard
      questions everyone else is afraid to ask.

      Liked by 1 person

    • dufrst says:

      Because it’s way too close to an election to prolong the process and give RINOs an excuse to gum up the works.

      No, select a minority woman who’s conservative and force the RINOs into a vote they can’t defy. That will be the fastest way to confirmation and a powerful win for our side.

      I understand ideally what you say would be best, but unfortunately, we are in the thicket of a critical election. We have to be smart with the moves made a this juncture to get Trump over the finish line.

      Liked by 7 people

    • lambgraham says:

      In a perfect world you are correct. In addition to the qualities you mentioned the candidate has to have ability to deal with the filth the Press and Democrats will throw at him . A guy like Robert Bork possessed the qualities you stated but was unable to seal the deal. Trump needs a quick approval. A woman cannot be attacked like a man and it may cause Collins and Murkowski to rethink their decision.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Dutchman says:

        lambgraham,
        The Dems/Uniparty have NO problem with hypocrisy, and the Dems will have absolutely NO problem attempting to eviscerate a women nominee, on live tv.

        Like attacking Clarence Thomas, they will de-legitimise her first. Instead of “Uncle Tom” they will say SHE doesn’t ‘represent women’ therefore justifying their attacks on her.

        We SHOULD recognise by now, in the ‘age of Trump’ all previously recognised standards of behavior and Social norms have not simply been tossed out the window, they have been set on fire, as has the building they were tossed out of.

        “By ANY means neccesary” really IS their credo. Expect an unremitting, unrelenting shameless, baseless attack on the nominee.

        Just as,WE see this as the most important election in our History, so do they.

        Liked by 3 people

  2. Kitty-Kat says:

    President Trump should read this thread before deciding; it raises a great many factors that need to be considered.

    Liked by 4 people

  3. Sentient says:

    If Cocaine Mitch can’t get Collins, Murkowski and Wimpy Willard to vote “yes” on confirmation, maybe he could at least get them to not vote “no”. Abstaining would be better than voting “no”.

    Liked by 7 people

    • dallasdan says:

      You make an excellent point. I have carefully noticed that both Murkowski and Collins said they “would not vote” on a nominee prior to the election. If true, literally, they would not cast “No” votes.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Dee Paul Deje says:

      Collins said she “does not believe their should be a vote for the SCOTUS nominee prior to the November 3rd election.” Does not believe they should hold the vote is not the same thing as not voting or voting no. You would think she would not concede anything to these bastards after her speech during the Kavanagh fiasco.

      Liked by 2 people

      • amjean says:

        I suspect she is trying to play both sides politically.

        Liked by 4 people

        • old deplorable owl says:

          Collins appears, to me at least, to vote from a set of principles, whatever they may be. Wet-finger Murkowski is a different animal altogether!
          Cocaine Mitch WILL do what he thinks is best for Mitch, period! That bastrich has no principles or ideology except power and control.

          Like

    • Dutchman says:

      Personally, I think if McConnell told the three, or anyone else in the caucus to squat and sh*t on the Capitol steps, at noon with the press corps watching and filming, they would do it.

      McConnells worst nightmare would be a 63 vote majority, as he USES the odious fillibuster rule, and the squishies, to manipulate votes and perceptions.

      So, individual votes don’t matter, its TOTALS that matter, and Mitch controls the totals. Lets see what he does.

      Liked by 3 people

  4. NJF says:

    I still can’t believe this is happening. It’s the center square on the 2020 bingo card. Sounds like Lady G & the Turtle are on board.

    Liked by 4 people

  5. formerdem says:

    I got a text message from Winred saying there was an announcement about this choice… but as usual with Winred I cannot get any further until I identify six fiddly tiny pictures on my phone screen, and I always get it wrong. This is why I never donate. And I do not know the choice. SO exasperating. This happens with Winred ALL the time.

    Liked by 2 people

    • formerdem says:

      You cannot donate until you have passed this so called security check. I am not surprised Winred are being out=raised. Are the Democrats putting up this barrier before you can give money? I doubt it. Somebody should be fired. There are twelve fiddly pictures and unless I pick out which are motorcycles versus which are bicycles, I cannot give money. WTF. Fire somebody.

      Liked by 1 person

    • itsspiritual says:

      Content deleted. This kind of attack will get you moderated.

      Like

      • itsspiritual says:

        Conservative treehouse deletes posts that proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ and encourages everyone to read the Word of God the Bible.
        Because I dared to actually share historical truth about the murder and torture of Christians that refused to bow to the Vatican? Anyone reading this, do some research on the inquisition and the pure evil of it all. You can know by whom you’re controlled pretty easily if you open your eyes.

        Salvation is through Jesus Christ alone.

        Like

  6. Ocelot says:

    Judge Lagoa’s speech:

    Cursor to 4:50 for DeSantis’ announcement about Judge Lagoa’s appointment to the Florida Supreme Court and then she delivers an “acceptance speech.” Quite a family story.

    Liked by 12 people

  7. grlangworth says:

    Well…as long as ‘the powers that would be’ choose ad hominem engagement, I feel the ammunition of gender — especially one that we all cherish and wholeheartedly accept — is plentiful and appropriate.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Patience says:

    Fill that seat!

    No Justice
    no peace
    ~>Get it?

    Liked by 14 people

  9. Sherri Young says:

    I would not count out Allison Jones Rushing.

    Near the end of his speech tonight, Trump remarked twice that if he wins North Carolina, he wins re-election. Allison Jones Rushing is from North Carolina. Mark Meadows has Trump’s ear.

    Liked by 5 people

  10. Carrie says:

    I really like Barrett and Larson. Both clerked for Scalia and helped write his decisions. They would know how he thought- and it would be great to get a Scalia thinker onboard. Especially after Roberts has been so dreadful.

    Liked by 3 people

    • readyandable1 says:

      All I see with Barrett is danger, danger,danger.

      In fact, she’s the quintessential archetype to dupe conservatives and screw us again like Roberts and Gorsuch and Kennedy.

      Liked by 3 people

  11. RedBallExpress says:

    Unplug/turn off the phone – let the “robo” calls begin!

    Liked by 1 person

  12. TreeClimber says:

    Thanks for keeping us up to date while Sundance is busy, Ad Rem! Much appreciated!

    Liked by 14 people

  13. Alex1689 says:

    Well, here we go with the ACB playbook . . . Politico already smearing her with the label that she belongs to the “Catholic cult” that inspired the Handmaid’s Tale. After years of crazy unhinged far left women dressing up in red dresses when they weren’t playing dress up in pink pussy hats, that’s a direct bypass of any critical thinking skills for a good portion of the Democratic base. Effective, unfortunately. Plus, they really hate anyone having “too many” kids. Definitely high on the leftist sin hierarchy.

    So sorry to see the smears. These people are sick.

    Not surprised though.

    Liked by 2 people

  14. The Gipper Lives says:

    All this hysteria is an admission that Democrats cannot get their unpopular agenda passed by normal democratic means. Otherwise, this would not assume the status of a silver stake in broad daylight to a Party of vampires.

    “If you do this, everything is on the table,” they snarl.

    The threats aren’t really threats at all. They plan to eliminate the filibuster, pack the Court, dissolve the Electoral College, create new Democrat states and senators and control every election in America from the Swamp EVEN IF PRESIDENT TRUMP NOMINATES HILLARY CLINTON TO THE COURT.

    So they’re not really threats at all. They’re simply telling us what they will do if they are ever given power again. They will never relinquish it again.

    They are already bailing out arsonists, rioters and murderers to attack citizens. Defunding and kneecapping police departments. They’re using COVID to seize dictatorial powers and hurt the economy. They’re teaming with Big Tech to end Free Speech–except for themselves. Hell, they’re burning down their own cities. They impeached Donald Trump because Joe Biden took bribes. They have already committed nuclear treason with Iran. And used a CIA/FBI/DOJ Police State to wiretap, frame and then attempt the overthrow of President Trump. And each vile new accusation only tells us what they themselves are doing.

    “Everything is on the table”?

    Yeah–we noticed. It has been for some time. Lunatics.

    If the nominee is Judge Amy Coney Barrett, the hearings will showcase the Democrats’ disgusting anti-Catholic bigotry, which they displayed at her previous hearing. Good. Americans need to see the Party of the Klan–and Klantifa–in all their revolting glory.

    Liked by 15 people

    • Perot Conservative says:

      And maybe Yrump 2.0 counters with this:

      1. Bans China from WTO
      2. Repatriates 50% of pharma drug production to America
      3. Another SCJ passes or retires. (#4)
      4. SJC Thomas, seeing RGB, retires to allow DJT to replace him w a 50-year-old conservative. (#5)
      5. Trade deals w the UK & Europe.
      6. How can we prevent them from packing? Should DJT pre-emptively add 2 seats?
      7. HUNDREDS of additional Conservative judges.
      8. FIRE WRAY & Brandon Van Grack and all 50-100+ FBI leakers & bribe takers.
      9. Impeach Pelosi & deBlasio.

      That’s a start.

      Liked by 14 people

    • Zabadak says:

      Gipper, great post.

      Liked by 5 people

    • lotbusyexec says:

      Spot on – ACB all the way! MAGA Landslide 🎉

      Like

    • Winston says:

      Silver stakes are not effective according to this. Must be wood. Some specifically specify oak:

      https://www.gods-and-monsters.com/how-to-kill-a-vampire.html

      Democrats Warn GOP: Fill Ginsburg’s Supreme Court Seat And We’ll Nix The Filibuster
      20 Sep 2020

      https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/ruth-bader-ginsburg-filibuster-035120638.html

      Democrats and progressive activists vowed to eliminate the filibuster and possibly even expand the Supreme Court if Republicans fill the seat of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died Friday from complications of cancer.

      Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has made it clear he would move to confirm a replacement for the liberal icon despite blocking former President Barack Obama’s nominee, Judge Merrick Garland, in a presidential election year in 2016.

      Like

      • Dutchman says:

        Like a 3 y.o., throwing a tantrum and threatening to hold their breath, they continue to behave like children.

        Actually, the ‘fillibuster threat’, that is a threat to remove the fillibuster is at least somewhat justified; PDJT (in 2016) posted a # of tweets, IMPLORING Mitch to drop the rule, so PDJT could get his legislative agenda through.

        Still, since they have PREVIOUSLY expressed their intention to nix the fillibuster rule and pack the court,…saying they will do it now “if” RBG’s seat is filled, makes it an empty threat.

        People make empty threats when they feel powerless to affect events. Translation: they know their is probably not a D*MN thing they can do to prevent PDJT from filling the seat,….hence empty threats and tantrums.

        And given their history recently, they will only trigger MORE #walkaways, just before the election.

        Thanks, RGB! GREAT timing, which admittedly has never been your strong suit.

        Liked by 1 person

  15. Barrett won’t have to recuse on open borders, capital punishment or abortion. The current heretical pope, Bergoglio, nor any Pope, does not set Catholic teaching based on his personal adherence to socialism or any other political ideology. The only teachings binding on Catholics are those made ex cathedra, a formal process that is strictly limited to faith and morals, made in an explicit fashion following Tradition and dogma. The idiotic, personal predictions of this apostate pope or any pope, not acting ex cathedra, are not binding as the Magesterium.

    Liked by 5 people

    • “Predelictions” not predictions.

      Liked by 1 person

    • itsspiritual says:

      How about we just follow the Word of God the Bible. Is Gods Word insufficient? Tell me how the communist pope representing an institution that was responsible for the inquisition ( killed and tortured Christians), is above criticism and merely mentioning the documented historical truth gets you moderated. This site is no better than Big tech by removing Christian posts. Contest and debate but why remove? Sad

      Like

      • You need to educate yourself about the Inquisition. The Inquisition was in fact organized by the State, most notably Spain, under the cover of religion to punish enemies of various monarchies. It was an abuse of the one True Faith for purposes of secular ends. Similarly Leftist (alleged) Bible Christians are infiltrating and undermining BIBLE Christian sects to promote Leftist secular ends.

        Like

        • itsspiritual says:

          Completely unfounded and untrue. Satan is the father of lies and truth is not found in him. The Vatican carried out the torture and killing of Christians that refused to swear allegiance to the satanic pope. Because Catholicism isn’t Christianity. Praying to Mary and saints is blasphemy. It’s an abomination, Mary is not God. She does not hear your prayers.
          Jesus Christ is the only way to the Father. Praise be to the lamb of God . Anen

          Like

  16. Deplorable Canuck says:

    Personally I think President Trump will knock both the SCOTUS seat and the election, way out of the Park. The man seems to thrive in complex situations. He will master this like no one else can!

    Liked by 10 people

  17. the5thranchhand says:

    Please, let’s just have the very, very best, most constitutionally qualified person for our next Supreme Court Justice.

    Liked by 8 people

    • Sherri Young says:

      Amen. As a female, I am sick of all of the pandering to females. It makes me feel like I must not have ever been competitive or worthy. I should learn to be defined by my withering ovaries.

      Very irritating. I’d rather compete and come in second rather than have anything handed to me.

      What I have earned is not a consolation prize.

      Liked by 17 people

      • Ocelot says:

        Sherri–Don’t reject it. Take a bow.

        Women are appx 1/2 of the human race and deserve at least 2 positions on SCOTUS. Obama’s choice of Judge Sotomaier might have been a gender/political lefty nomination or not but P Trump’s choices will be picked due also to his female candidates proven abilities, experience, qualifications and other relevant factors.

        Women and men have reached the top levels of most professions by working hard and most women have proven they belong there while some men haven’t. In my biased opinion, Conservative women are the best examples of deserved opportunities and success.

        I’m a male and I genuinely feel sad when I look back at the extremely limited opportunities my mother and other women had only decades ago. 2 female seats out of 9 is hardly an abuse of gender politics. Trump’s choice whoever it will be, has worked hard and succeeded in their profession to even make the list. They are not being handed a “consolation prize.”

        Liked by 9 people

      • amjean says:

        The subject of “female” only comes up because RBG was female.

        Like

      • NC Nana says:

        Sherri, I was fascinated by your comments. Although I understand your comments, to some extent I think they were in part generational in your reaction. I was working during the start of Affirmative Action. As you recall “sex” was added as a criteria in 1967. Historically, it is part of my thinking on a well rounded work force. President Trump is a very successful business man from my generation. At least in some nook of his mind, Affirmative Action is probably part of his thinking.

        To demonstrate generational thinking I will use my middle school grandson as an example. This summer we watched the first season of Perry Mason. It was made in 1957. Since it was the first time my grandson had ever seen the program he was sorting out the characters in his mind:

        When Paul Drake (the Investigator) came into the office he said “Hi beautiful” to Della Street (the Secretary).

        My grandson said. Is she his wife??

        My grandson wasn’t offended in anyway, but to his way of thinking (his generation) to say something so personal, Della must be his wife. He just wanted to confirm his thinking on their relationship. In his generation, professional women are treated professionally. Therefore you don’t make personal comments to them.

        Women worked for men primarily when I started working. Not terribly long after AA, men worked for me. It was a change in that time. Whether I worked for a man or a man worked for me I had the same level of skill, integrity, and drive. AA just made me more competitive. Because I was more competitive I never thought I had to bring less to the job.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Sherri Young says:

          For the most part, I don’t like affirmative action. It is a systemic hobble used against our most competitive white males. In theory, affirmative action should level the field. Instead, especially at this late date, AA tilts the field.

          Liked by 1 person

          • old deplorable owl says:

            Sherri – I agree with your assesment, but one thing you can’t accuse PDJT of is “pandering”. He makes his decisions based on his criteria, often opaque to us, but eventually revealed as part of a larger plan.
            Currently the left, and most importantly their media mouthpieces, are uppermost in his plans. We both know if he nominates a guy, “they” already have a cadre of trained and scripted “victims” (Ballsy-Ford) ready to bring forth a litany of false accusations to drag this thing out for months, if necessary.
            A well-qualified female is not going to be hit with those accusations, at least. And PDJT can’t be accused of “changing the make-up” of the court. The best the left can do is scream “Nazi” against a ‘conservative’, and that’s not working anymore.
            IM(NS)HO, the best tack to take would be a steady “I’ll follow the Constitution as written”. Don’t get led off into hypotheticals and what-ifs. The Lawfare-advised leftist senators will have a thousand booby-trapped questions. Don’t take the bait!

            Liked by 1 person

        • President Nixon originally envisioned affirmative action as affirmative outreach. It was supposed to identify minority candidates so they could qualify for under represented positions. This laudable goal quickly degenerated into quotas and timetables within the bureaucracies and courts. A policy of merit became a policy of color and status based outcomes. It helped poison the racial and sexual environment.

          Liked by 2 people

          • Sherri Young says:

            Black or Hispanic females used to be referred to as “two-fers”. That would be as in HR being able to tick off two boxes with one hire.

            Like

    • Blind no Longer says:

      AMEN!!!! And one who values our Constitutional freedoms above all else.
      AND most of all, one who wants America to remain America!!!!!

      Liked by 4 people

  18. tax2much says:

    So Judge Sullivan is not on the short list? I guess he is still too busy trying to screw Flynn.

    Liked by 4 people

  19. windbag says:

    All the talk seems to be about Barrett and Lagoa. Barrett just went through confirmation, so the hypocrisy of the left will be in full display when they suddenly declare her to be the spawn of Satan. Lagoa would be a wise Latina to balance out the foolish Latina currently serving.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. Do stop thinking about tomorrow says:

    If he only had a Cuban Jurist that had recently been confirmed with 80 votes to the 11 Circuit?

    Liked by 7 people

  21. Blind no Longer says:

    Liked by 5 people

  22. Drogers says:

    President Trump has got to be the worst sexist and misogynist ever.

    Liked by 2 people

  23. MustangBlues says:

    President Trump did not mention a ”gender”; he said he would nominate a ”woman”. And he said he liked ”women” more than ”men”.

    Biology of sex organs, womb/vagina = female, a woman; penis/testicles = male, a man.

    This basic sexual biological distinction has been specific since time immemorial and is current the basic definition throughout the world in all tribes and cultures, except the deluded Western Progressive Communist Elitists.

    Surgeries, hormones and self identity mean nothing to Mother Nature, no matter how Post Modern Critical Cult Theories spin it.

    Liked by 4 people

  24. ohnoyoudonot says:

    Liked by 6 people

  25. dogsmaw says:

    Liked by 4 people

  26. MustangBlues says:

    No one believes that adopting third world ethnic black children by white people is a good idea, except progressive communist cult females;

    It is a common elite academic neurosis, the death wish for their good fortune at being a pampered idolized White female in a White Patriarchy,

    Sepuku, kill your self with the misery of others–Punishment for the Sin of Whiteness.

    Liked by 1 person

  27. Peoria Jones says:

    Nicely put together – a solid piece, with substantive backing. Thanks for this article, which makes everything clear.

    Liked by 1 person

  28. If due to an unlikely situation that sees democrats win the senate and the WH, then PDJT will spend the rest of his life in jail along with his kids and acquaintances. The words “his kind must never rise again” will ring true. Therefore, the most reliably conservative nominee must be presented to the senate regardless of gender. And someone who has already been vetted. I’m leaning towards Hawley or Cruz.

    Like

  29. lavenderblue says:

    Can’t go wrong w Barrett or Lagoa

    Like

    • readyandable1 says:

      We can and will go wrong with weirdo Barrett. And has nothing to do with her being catholic. I’m a practicing Catholic, Alito is too and the greatest two justices of this past generation Scalia and Thomas.

      Barrett doesn’t pass the “lives a normal life test.” She’s eccentric in her life choices (just like Roberts and Gorsuch), and that’s both telling and a risk we certainly don’t need to take.

      Liked by 1 person

      • old deplorable owl says:

        While you and I are normally pretty much in synch, I have to question your assumption here, regarding Barrett. She (and hubby) have no need that I can fathom for ‘virtue signalling’. They’re accomplished, respected people. They’ve been open and up front about adopting, unlike one of your examples. (no blackmail potential!)
        There are millions of kids looking to be adopted, what is wrong with choosing some who stand little chance of grabbing the ring? Especially when you can provide anything needed for their success.
        Barring contrary evidence, I lean toward praise, not brickbats.
        And as I’ve never seen you hurl epithets, I’ll welcome your response or rebuttal…..
        Best!

        Like

        • readyandable1 says:

          Fair enough, here goes.

          You make a sound philosophical argument regarding the adoption; and one I agree with. What I have trouble with and find to be “weird” as I put it, is the foreign nature of the folks who you’ve described as having “little chance of grabbing the ring” that shes sought out. Foreign being the key; not race or ethnicity.

          If I were one who had the means to (As she apparently does) extend that opportunity via adoption to such persons, it would be from the many, many Americans who are in that low-opportunity group, lets call it. Whether black from the inner-city, or white from Appalachia, or Indian from a western reservation, etc. there are plenty of Americans who deserve that chance in equal measure. I find it a core principle or citizens (I use that word for a reason) to help your fellow countrymen first. I find it strange to go out of your way to select someone from a foreign culture, with all that that attends. Being a practicing Catholic who keeps up with the Catholic “system” from Vatican on down, I am acutely aware of some of the programs and umm, let’s call it “factions” within our Church that follow and push for this type of thing.

          In general, those factions are suspect to me and are usually, though not exclusively also ones that participate in other activities under the guise of what they think is Catholicism I find to be “anti-American”/anti-nationalist.

          Secondly, and you may give me heat for this but I have no reservation in making this statement: With a job like hers the time must be demanding, and her husband’s job is also high-profile, big time (former USAttorney I believe and current big-shot firm partner?)….I have long days in my mid-level executive corporate job. I’m sure theirs are both certainly longer. I find it “weird” that people with such high-time commitment and demanding jobs would opt to have 7 children, both of their own making and adopting more. Money isn’t everything…I question if they are really giving the parenting effort I would expect given their professional time commitments, to each one of those children. With the good living them make, I’m sure they have the $ to farm it out, and I suspect (though again just suspect) that is what they do. That is weird to me.

          Finally, one might counter that she follow her Catholic dogma in the most strict sense and does not engage in birth-control of any type thus the high number of children. OKAY- absolutely nothing wrong with that and I personally find that admirable. However, again, if you are one who makes that choice, then I question also making the choice to pursue such a time-demanding career for yourself, AND seek a partner who also has such a time-demanding career. The two lifestyles just don’t jive to me. Thus, I find those decisions made in tandem to be weird. Personally, I think children deserve a lot of time, love and effort from their parents while being raised, when at all possible. I know it is my priority, and my wife’s, and most other middle and upper-middle class parents and families I know both up north and here in the south, and out west. (I’ve lived in all but the mid-west region- though I can’t imagine it is much different there).

          I used the term weirdo for a reason. None of this passes the “normal American life” test for me; and as I’ve outlined, even if grant that she has superlative morality and financial means, the choices still don’t reconcile for me. I’m not saying shes a bad person, or whatever. I just think we need more public servants who represent the mean of American lifestyle.

          Liked by 1 person

          • readyandable1 says:

            Edit for clarity: Where I say “I find it a core principle or citizens (I use that word for a reason) to help your fellow countrymen first. ”

            I meant “I find it a core principle OF citizens….”

            Like

          • old deplorable owl says:

            Can’t argue with what you say, need to ruminate a bit on it. My only quibble would be regarding the time thing – it’s not as demanding as people think, in reality. I ran around for years with a lot of lawyers and judges, and for the most part 5:00 was coktail time!
            My biggest worry is, as you say, the extent the church would influence her thinking. I’m non-den ominational, and it really does appear that there are easily half a dozen Catholic churches extant today. Where is she?
            Thanks for the reply, things to think about……

            Liked by 1 person

  30. Jimmy R says:

    As for the “pick the best candidate, without regard to sex or ethnicity” argument, I assume every conservative completely agrees with that in spirit. The problem is that if PT loses the election, the country is finished. It is very close, and the Dems will use thousands of fake mail-in ballots in battleground states. This SCOTUS pick can help PT win by manipulating the identity politics of many voters.

    You play the hand you’re dealt. You make decisions in the world you live in, not in the world as it should be. You live to fight another day. Pick your old shibboleth.

    The candidate need only be arguably in the same league as the best candidate on PT’s shortlist, no more. It’s sad, but it’s true.

    This is a difficult counterargument to make, though, because very often sacrificing one’s principles for practical reasons turns out later to have been a mistake. (For example, PT could lose a few votes from conservatives by playing identity politics on this pick. And the pick could turn out to be a closet liberal years later. Etc.) But I don’t think this is one of those times.

    Liked by 1 person

  31. M33 says:

    AD REM!
    You posting an article!
    Coolness. Always love the Cat with the Hat 😁

    Liked by 4 people

  32. Joshua says:

    Nice post Ad Rem

    You are a natural it seems.

    As are both/either of the jurists.
    They are so good I would choose the younger
    So that I could choose the other next time (4 women on the court = half within error)

    Liked by 1 person

    • Joshua says:

      I meant “choose the elder” — obviously — got verclempt for a minute thinking we might here more from you and the others.

      Like

    • Joshua says:

      I meant “choose the elder” — obviously — got verclempt for a minute thinking we might here more from you and the others.

      Like

    • Joshua says:

      Wow, that’s the first time a double post happened to me.
      I guess it really does happen.

      Would it not be easy to check for HTML:POST transmissions that have the same content but differ only in time by 1 second ? (That was kinda what the POST method was for I think IIRC)

      Like

  33. lavender blue says:

    Just read an article abt Lagoa on Alliance for Justice afj.com that strongly opposes her as a SCOTUS pick…immigration

    Like

    • M33 says:

      Do you have a link to that article?

      Like

    • rharkonen says:

      Well, Alliance for Justice is a leftist organization dedicated to aleftists judiciary. Their take on the list of candidates is here:

      https://www.afj.org/our-work/judicial-nominations/trumps-scotus-short-list/

      For Lagoa, they say:

      “As a judge on the 11th Circuit Court, Lagoa sided with businesses challenging Miami Beach’s decision to raise the minimum wage and made it harder for homeowners to defend themselves against banks that were improperly trying to foreclose upon their homes. On the Eleventh Circuit, she failed to recuse herself from a case involving the disenfranchisement of thousands in Florida and took the lead defending the state’s efforts to prevent eligible Floridians from voting.”

      More: https://www.afj.org/nominee/barbara-lagoa/

      For Barret, they say:

      “Amy Coney Barrett fought to undermine health care for millions in her attack on the Affordable Care Act. She also fought efforts to ensure that all women have access to contraceptives. Barrett has been critical of Roe v. Wade, stating that the framework of Roe essentially permitted abortion on demand. As a judge, Barrett sided against an African American worker who had been transferred to another store because of a company’s policy of segregating their employees, finding that the company’s “separate-but-equal arrangement is permissible.

      More: https://www.afj.org/nominee/amy-coney-barrett/

      Liked by 1 person

  34. Hoss says:

    Check out his tweet from August of 2016:

    Reminder: It’s the Senate’s job to fairly consider Supreme Court nominees. #DoYourJob pic.twitter.com/xrkYcRsLNw

    — Barack Obama (@BarackObama) August 16, 2016
    “Reminder: It’s the Senate’s job to fairly consider Supreme Court nominees. #DoYourJob”,
    https://www.theepochtimes.com/trump-to-nominate-a-female-next-week-to-fill-ginsburgs-vacancy_3506634.html?ref=brief_News&utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb

    Liked by 1 person

  35. MVW says:


    Republicans, grow a spine or borrow one from Nancy Pelosi.

    Like

  36. Joshua says:

    I hope Obama keeps spouting off;

    Like no other dignified president has ever done post leaving office.

    Can’t he put Mr. Community Organizer, with nothing to show for, to bed… Michelle? Little help ?

    It would seem not. He is determined to drive a stake in his own legacy. My heavens the cringe;

    Keep talking; please

    Like

    • Maquis says:

      He has a coup to run. A Commie’s work is never done.

      Liked by 4 people

      • MVW says:

        Not enough death and misery from Communism yet. Humanity has not suffered enough from the stupidity of Socialism. Eventually mankind will side with freedom over serfdom, just more blood and treasure will need to be sacrificed to bridge the gap in working brains and character.

        Liked by 1 person

  37. Misha Berra says:

    Robert Barnes argues the upside w Barrett is bigger w suburban Moms due to their having 7 children (2 adopted from Haiti, and 1 special needs) –

    PLEASE – before any woman is selected – as we are learning – can someone at least check what all these 7 children are saying on social media – their texts etc,. has any child come into new found money, are they on the board of Burisma holdings – is their trash being picked up by a private company etc. Not that this is even possible …….

    Liked by 3 people

  38. Paprika says:

    Well now, I have no idea who will be President Trump’s nomination for the SC. I also have no idea when and how the vote to confirm in the Senate will go. But I don’t mind making some guesses based on current political winds.

    My guess for Senate timing based on the past spinelessness of Senate Republicans and Democrat gas-lighting would be that they will hold contentious Judiciary Committee hearings that are prolonged by grandstanding, speechifying, and procedural objections along with the usual nasty insults and insinuations by Democrats. Anything to draw it out as Miss Lindsey says we have to get this done while allowing it to go on and on.

    If we are lucky the Nominee will pass out of committee by a margin of 1 vote. But best bet for the feckless Senators would be to stop it there so the whole Senate would not be exposed by having to actually vote.

    If it goes to the floor of the Senate it will drag out beyond the election. Why? Because that is the safest route for the feckless, spineless Senators. They can all have lots of heartfelt speechifying on both sides while waiting to see who wins the election. If PT wins then they’ll vote “yea” because he will have the political power. If Harris/Biden cheat their way in, they will vote “no” or just sit on the nomination.

    That is the worst scenario for America and the American People, but the “easiest” way for Senators to claim all credit for “their sides” while taking no firm or actual leadership stand/responsibility–you know, being their usual irresponsible selves.

    Like

  39. Here we go again. Somehow a vagina and melanin are the 2 prime qualifiers of a senior jurist.

    Liked by 1 person

  40. lambgraham says:

    Joe Manchin will be the key. Republicans will lose Collins, Murkowski, and Romney. Not sure about the corrupt Burr. It’s amazing how Democrats stick together and Republicans don’t.

    Liked by 1 person

  41. dbobway says:

    Lots of good advice and incite here.
    Here is mine.
    President Trump ‘has’ to be the President for 4 more years.
    Look what Congress did to Kavanaugh, and he is a moderate.
    I think PDJT picked his judge before he sent the list.
    He has mentioned a woman would be the pick, more than once.
    I think he’ll go that way. Right now, every activist Democrat in the country, is vetting all the women judges on the list.
    My guess they’ll all more qualified than Judge Kagan.
    To confirm a woman in 40+ days, to the Supreme Court.
    She needs sound Constitutional principles, and her work and her life, shows those principles.
    Equal to that, she must be smart, tough, articulate, and prepared.
    If she has all those attributes, her appointment hearings will layout a vision of our country,
    as it is, under the laws of our Republic.
    We can’t ask for any more than that.
    Whoever she or he is, they will not change the minds of one abortion, for or against, litmus test voter.
    Let he or she be the smartest lawyer on the Senate floor.
    That won’t be to hard.

    Liked by 4 people

  42. patrioticimmigrant4maga says:

    Ever curious where are the SCOTUS judges stand in a relative scale over time? Here’s a interesting graph.

    Liked by 1 person

  43. patrioticimmigrant4maga says:

    Ever curious where are the SCOTUS judges stand in a relative scale over time? Here’s a interesting graph.

    Like

  44. patrioticimmigrant4maga says:

    Ever curious where are the SCOTUS judges stand in a relative scale over time? Here’s a interesting graph.

    Like

  45. patrioticimmigrant4maga says:

    Ever curious where are the SCOTUS judges stand in a relative scale over time? Here’s a interesting graph.

    Like

    • DefenderOfTroyDonahue says:

      Patriot, please post this one more time. I haven’t quite gotten the hang of it yet.

      Liked by 5 people

      • Eagle Driver says:

        WordPress is acting kinda “WONKY” today for some reason…Are there too many posters on? Betcha’ Ad-Rem and the others are working over-time…

        Like

      • Rockindubya says:

        Dual posts have happened to me a couple of times. I think it was due to the time lag between clicking “Post” and the time it actually took to post. So, I clicked it again. I have no idea what happens on a smart-phone. I’m on a PC, and I see the little wheel turning on the top of the tab until it posts. Nothing else.

        Like

  46. Publius2016 says:

    45 is VSZg! release 2nd list 10 days ago and puts more areas in play!!

    Personally, Barrett seems too “perfect” with the Haitian Adoption…

    how can a sitting Federal Judge find the time to raise her own biological children and then add two from Haiti?? Plus shes from Indiana so not in play…

    North Carolina or Michigan would be my pick…

    Like Lagoa but needs another three years on Federal Bench…most likely next Justice…

    Liked by 1 person

  47. Publius2016 says:

    45 is VSG!

    release 2nd list 10 days ago and puts more areas in play!!

    Personally, Barrett seems too “perfect” with the Haitian Adoption…

    how can a sitting Federal Judge find the time to raise her own biological children and then add two from Haiti?? Plus shes from Indiana so not in play…

    North Carolina or Michigan would be my pick…

    Like Lagoa but needs another three years on Federal Bench…most likely next Justice…

    Like

    • thedoc00 says:

      “Experience” on the Federal Bench, yeah like that “experience” made a difference with most of those already sitting on the bench today from Supreme Court to Local Courts. One is either a jurist per the constitution or not, out of law school. Experience has zero to do with that characteristic.

      I’ll take a fresh law school graduate over 6 of the current justices, if that graduate rules by the law and does not plan to create law.

      Liked by 3 people

  48. flatlandgoober says:

    On the basis of race, gender, demographics.
    Will there be any consideration given to THE RULE OF LAW?
    HOW ABOUT TO HONORING THE CONSTITITION?

    Liked by 2 people

    • Publius2016 says:

      the ones on the list were all rated by Heritage…

      Liked by 1 person

      • hopespringseternal2020 says:

        Did you see Tucker’s episode about Heritage?

        https://www.newsweek.com/tucker-carlsons-rebuke-conservative-think-tank-heritage-foundation-smashes-friday-ratings-draws-1478944

        Ignore the source…I couldn’t find the video but the description in the article is accurate.

        Like

        • hopespringseternal2020 says:

          Also ..

          Tucker on President of Heritage who Called America racist.

          I am with the poster who sadly doesn’t fully trust anyone on the list.

          Like

        • hopespringseternal2020 says:

          https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/12/21/tucker_carlson_kochs_donate_to_big_tech_companies_that_silence_conservatives_to_do_their_bidding.html

          “And then there’s the Heritage Foundation, maybe the biggest and best-funded think tank in Washington. Half the conservatives in the city seem to have worked there at one time or another. Almost thirty years ago, I did. To this day, there are a lot nice and well-meaning people at the Heritage Foundation. As as an organization, Heritage no longer represents the interest of conservatives, at least on the question of tech. A recent paper by Heritage, entitled “Free Enterprise Is the Best Remedy For Online Bias Concerns,” defends the special privileges congress has given to leftwing Silicon Valley monopolies. If conservatives don’t like it, Heritage says, they can start their own Google. The paper could have been written by tech lobbyists, and in fact may have been. A trade association that represents Silicon Valley called the liability exemption Google enjoys, quote, “the most important law in tech.” Heritage’s paper repeats that line, verbatim, word for word, along with many others.

          It’s embarrassing. But Heritage isn’t embarrassed. None of the so-called “conservative” nonprofits in Wasington are. They make deals with people who hate you, secretly sell out your interests, then beg you to tithe like it’s the medieval church. That’s the system we’ve had for decades. Maybe that’s why, no matter how much money you send, nothing gets more conservative. You wonder how much longer this can continue.”

          Like

  49. Badger says:

    RBG said, “Fill that seat.”

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s