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. BV Conservative says:

    The Supreme Court decides a lot more than abortion cases. As with Gorsuch, all the signs are there that Barrett is a leftist. She’ll vote to invalidate the death penalty in all circumstances and for open borders. Her views appear to mirror those of the current communist Pope, which is not a good sign at all. Terrible choice. Was her husband on board with the Haitian adoption or did she order him to accept it, like Gorsuch’s wife ordered him to renounce his religion and convert to hers? Democrats always pick rock solid liberals for the courts, and it’s time for the GOP to start choosing judges who will uphold the Constitution and not leftist policies.

    Liked by 13 people

    • sDee says:

      The Constitutional issue I would like to see brought by just one of these candidates is – “at what point after the moment of conception does the Federal government’s responsibility to protect the life of of that citizen start?”

      Unborn Victims of Violence Act says that responsibility starts at the moment of conception, unless the person taking the life is an abortionist. Maybe its time the Supreme Court heard this one?

      Liked by 4 people

      • Deadbeat says:

        The real reason for the spike in abortions is promiscuity promoted by Feminism as “empowerment”. All you hear about is “woman power” and somehow it is “powerful” for women to sleep around with as many “partners” as possible. This is what results in “unwanted” and “unplanned” pregnancy and the Left wants us to empathize with female promiscuity. They are “if men can do it why can’t women”. This is a bogus argument because two wrongs don’t make a right and it defies anthropology of women being the arbiters of sexual engagement. If you really want to see a decline in abortion then the Cultural Marxist promotion of sexual promiscuity must be addressed.

        Liked by 3 people

        • Contrarymary says:

          They never tell you the emotional toll it takes on women, who are convinced by these feminists, that the baby is a clump ob cells. I have many friends who got abortions in the 70s and 80s. When they got married and had children, their thoughts were consumed by the children they aborted. They could now see that they were their real live children from whom they took their life. That rememberence never leaves them unless they are a hard, cold sociopath.

          Liked by 3 people

          • Raven says:

            My mother, who passed away almost 30 years ago now, got married at 18 to a man her mom told her to marry for his money. It took little time for my mom to realize she had made terrible decisions in both following her mother’s advice and in marrying someone she did not love.

            Her marriage was annulled (or the process started) before she realized she was pregnant, and with no one sane in her life to help her, she listened to the voices of her employers — an older wealthy couple with today’s radical leftist ideologies — and had an illegal backstreet abortion.

            I had known about the fact that my mom had been married once before marrying my dad, how that marriage had been a big mistake and how she had ended the life of my oldest sibling from an early age.

            And I remember well how my mom sorrowfully cried over the baby she had killed long after her five other children had children of their own.

            You are right, that remembrance never leaves them.

            Liked by 2 people

          • Liz says:

            I had the same experience with friends who got abortions young and had intentional children later. This is why so many approve elimination or restrictions on abortions now.

            Liked by 1 person

    • amjean says:

      What are the leftist signs? Specifics please. I have not heard
      that about her previously?

      Liked by 6 people

    • albertus magnus says:

      You are lying.

      Like

      • Ken Lawson says:

        I don’t think BV is lying. This article written by a Catholic conservative that attends the same church as Coney Barrett is very important as it shows things most have not heard: https://humanevents.com/2019/10/07/rejoinder-is-amy-coney-barrett-the-best-choice-for-scotus/

        Liked by 8 people

        • fionnagh says:

          And here is a link to how Lagoa ruled on various cases:
          https://www.afj.org/document/barbara-lagoa-background-report/

          At this point, am wishing the President had not gone with the “pick a woman” idea.

          Liked by 3 people

        • SanJac says:

          Anyone who puts their religion or their beliefs over law or the constitution should be removed from consideration.

          Liked by 5 people

          • Contrarymary says:

            As John Adams said “But should the people of America once become capable of that deep simulation towards one another, and towards foreign nations, which assumes the language of justice and moderation, while it is practising iniquity and extravagance, and displays in the most captivating manner the charming pictures of candour, frankness, and sincerity, while it is rioting in the rapine and insolence, this country will be the most miserable habitation in the world. Because we have no government armed with the power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

            This is made so clear in what we, as a nation are going through today. It’s a nation that has become unmoored from morality and our founding beliefs. That being said, I don’t want a Supreme Court justice taking orders from a priest or pope, but by the Word of God. You are also equating “law” with the constitution. There are many laws on the books that are unjust and just plain rights theft and crappy. I want a constitutional jurist on the bench to overturn those laws.

            Liked by 4 people

          • Amoral justice? That, SanJac is how we got in this mess to begin with. Our entire system of governance was based on the Biblical statutes. Property rights, sanctity of life, quiet enjoyment, personal (Popular) sovereignty, redress, assembly, family law- it’s all religion based: Christian Religion. Once the Moral Absolutes God established are removed we get what we have today- disaster.

            Your anti-religion is a religion. It’s called Humanism. Check out the Soviet Union for how that works out.

            Liked by 2 people

        • Ockham's Phaser says:

          Good read. My take away is whether she would rule based on the constitution or her Catholic faith. The Catholic church and the pope are against the death penalty and for unfettered immigration and open borders. Recusing is not an option. This is worrisome. Find somebody else.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Barrett is not a good choice. She is submissive to the Pope’s direction. We currently have a marxist Pope… She will recuse herself from tough cases or worse vote her Catholic dictates. (mycroft was raised in a Catholic Family)
            Her own words.

            https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/527/

            Catholic Judges in Capital Cases

            Amy Coney Barrett, Notre Dame Law School
            Follow

            John H. Garvey
            Document Type

            Article
            Publication Date

            1998
            Publication Information

            81 Marq. L. Rev. 303 (1997-1998)
            Abstract

            The Catholic Church’s opposition to the death penalty places Catholic judges in a moral and legal bind. While these judges are obliged by oath, professional commitment, and the demands of citizenship to enforce the death penalty, they are also obliged to adhere to their church’s teaching on moral matters. Although the legal system has a solution for this dilemma by allowing the recusal of judges whose convictions keep them from doing their job, Catholic judges will want to sit whenever possible without acting immorally. However, litigants and the general public are entitled to impartial justice, which may be something a judge who is heedful of ecclesiastical pronouncements cannot dispense. Therefore, the authors argue, we need to know whether judges are legally disqualified from hearing cases that their consciences would let them decide. While mere identification of a judge as Catholic is not sufficient reason for recusal under federal law, the authors suggest that the moral impossibility of enforcing capital punishment in such cases as sentencing, enforcing jury recommendations, and affirming are in fact reasons for not participating.
            Comments

            Reprinted with permission of Marquette Law Review.
            Recommended Citation

            Amy C. Barrett & John H. Garvey, Catholic Judges in Capital Cases, 81 Marq. L. Rev. 303 (1997-1998).
            Available at: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/527

            Like

            • DefenderOfTroyDonahue says:

              I wouldn’t worry too much about Catholic justices . . . not after Thomas, Scalia, and Alito. Those three Catholic boys turned out to be pretty good . . . din’t they?

              Like

              • Not talking about them now are we?
                Talking about Barrett. Her writings speak for her.

                Liked by 1 person

              • Henry says:

                I don’t know about Alito or Thomas, but Scalia was aware that he was defying the Catechism when it came to the death penalty. But he was committed to the Constitution AND he explicitly argued that the recent Church teaching was wrong and out of sync with traditional Church teachings on the issue. Some useful Catholic facts: the stance against the death penalty is new, is NOT dogma, and is NOT infallible papal teaching. Look up Scalia’s essay in First Things (early 00’s), and his exchanges with various theologians in the subsequent issues.

                It is obvious the Barrett has neither the same depth of understanding on this issue or the fortitude to say clearly “I think recent popes have been wrong about this.” Oh well. At least she will be much better than RBG.

                My real concern is with immigration.

                Liked by 2 people

                • jeff montanye says:

                  imo the death penalty is a red herring. not enough people are currently executed to matter to the wider system of justice and history globally is running against the death penalty.

                  the trade off between the rights of individual citizens and the rights of the government, in a world of the wars on drugs and terrorism and this covid lockdown madness, seems crucial and of nearly universal application.

                  Liked by 1 person

    • I think the Cuban judge would be a better choice…Cubans are very anti-communist….and she did not go to Harvard or Yale. KInd of tired of Catholic or Jewish Harvard or Yale graduates….they all belong to the same club.

      Liked by 8 people

    • devilman96 says:

      People should heed to conversation and open their brains. You are VERY correct when you state it is time we pick a rock solid conservative.

      I do wish people would pay closer attention to most everything in politics. The term Republican is more often than not widely misunderstood and very often wrongly given the champion lable of Conservatives. Republicans, the political class are not at all conservatives, their greedy nation building retards.

      People attempt to project their own wishful thinking on what they feel the Republican party should be and do all of the mental gymnastics one needs to do in order to live in denial. RINOs are just Republicans being honest about who they are, not evil holdouts and not Democrats masquerading as Republicans.

      I’d love to see Trump get elected and boot the party… I think it would be a very appropriate response to their lack of suppoting his american first policies.

      Like

    • buckturdgison says:

      7 kids .. then adopted two more … from Haiti? Really? I like kids and big families OK by me — but how could you spend any time with 7 kids with such a demanding career? Adopting kids from Haiti strikes me as extreme virtue signaling. Not from Detroit, not from Mexico, but Haiti (top that you virtuous virtue signalers!). Why adopt 2 more, why not from here in the US, etc? This is what Branjolinas of the world do and I’ve never seen a non-leftist go to this extreme. What are her views on immigration? More and more immigrants for the US at this point only brings lowered wages, more traffic, more pressure on water supplies, and not much good. We cannot afford another one-worlder globalist SC justice, ‘rock solid Constitutionalist’ or not. I’ve heard too much about her Sainthood and the inevitability of her skyrocketing awesome ultimate ascent that will decimate leftists and leftism. That pick cannot be reversed and slowing down the immigration flood is one of our nation’s most pressing problems. Let’s get someone else.

      Like

    • Jeffrey Coley says:

      Mark Levin, whatever you might think of him, is an outstanding legal mind and an authority on Constitutional matters. He called Gorsuch the “gold standard” conservative judge; he also said Kavanaugh is a “risky bet.”

      He calls Barrett a risky bet with only a very limited record to consider.

      Like

    • Robert Barnes, the conservative lawyer that took on the Covington/Nick Sandman case agrees with you – she (Barrett) hasn’t found a prosecutor she doesn’t side with, a corporation she doesn’t prefer, or a government action she doesn’t approve of. Bad rulings on takings, free speech, freedom of religion, freedom of association, discrimination, and misconduct.

      Like

  2. Publius2016 says:

    45 is VSG!

    announces at “protest against stupidity” he’ll nominate a woman!!

    takes air out of INSANITY BALLOON…like who can be against a woman….so any protest is really against JUDICIAL TEMPERAMENT IDEOLOGY RULINGS…45 knows…

    Liked by 3 people

    • mimbler says:

      Yeah, like who would vilify Sarah Palin when she ran for VP? Oh right, only the dems and the entire media! The libs won’t hesitate to savage a woman appointee IMO.

      Liked by 3 people

      • paper doll says:

        Indeed. Also the future the Never Trump crowd behind McCain , who were not slow to trash Sarah, some of the worse stuff came from them. The uniparty was in full force.

        Liked by 1 person

  3. TwoLaine says:

    Yes Mollie, thank you for explaining this to the Idiot DIMs yet again. What is this, the millionth time since 2016?

    Liked by 11 people

    • TwoLaine says:

      BTW, you can thank The Kenyan (and a whole lotta’ Do Nothing DIMs) for your loss of the House and the Senate during his illicit and ill begotten tenure. You can also blame it on your piece of trash illegal legislation called the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. A sad and illegal joke on the stupity of the American people. Thanks ZERO!

      Liked by 7 people

      • mac says:

        In an honest legal system, he, both Clintons, Holder, Jarrett, Comey, Brennan, Strzok, Page, Weissmann, McCabe and a host of other Dim criminals would be sitting in the Colorado Supermax, never to see another day of freedom again.

        Liked by 8 people

  4. TwoLaine says:

    Thank you Harmeet! Such an easy concept, isn’t it! Get yourself on the next list please!

    Liked by 17 people

  5. Harvey Lipschitz says:

    Tell Mollie no Supreme Court Justices should die or resign during election year.

    CC Schoomer.

    Liked by 4 people

  6. Charles Dodgson says:

    For all the “I just want the best person, I’m tired of hearing about their gender or race”.
    I think it’s pretty safe to assume that everyone on the short list has roughly similar qualifications, history, conservative credentials etc. It’s not like the discussion is pulling a random token minority/woman off the street, these are people that have already passed the preliminary vetting process.

    So all things being more or less equal, the “best person” is the one that gives the most political advantage in terms of confirmability and PDJT re-election.

    Liked by 4 people

    • amjean says:

      The best person is the one who will follow the constitution and
      the rule of law – no social justice or otherwise cretins.

      Liked by 12 people

      • WhiteBoard says:

        Life is politics. People are manipulatable.

        Have to live in the world we live in (to win).

        A woman will be chosen to offset the obvious ATTACKS the DEM playbook will utilize.

        Offsetting Attacks is the key. I have a feeling Roberts will step down shortly. Let his replacement be done by the correct way you mention. And we return this country to picking people based off of individual qualities and not group ones.

        I agree with you – just in this case, politics must be played.

        Like

      • Joshua2415 says:

        Agreed. But Antonin Scalia is dead, so we’ll have to make do.

        Like

    • albertus magnus says:

      Exactly right!

      Like

    • Leroy says:

      Not saying that I agree that is how it should be, but that is the political reality.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Magabear says:

      Politically speaking, that makes sense. But as has been pointed here, the top two women mentioned as being nominated have questionable legal opinions. This pick has to be a Scalia/Thomas/Alito judge, be it a woman or a man.

      Picking a female Roberts is not an option just so it might be helpful in the short term politically.

      Liked by 2 people

  7. beach lover says:

    If you haven’t heard him, Mark Levin had a very impassioned speech on F&F this AM. I hope Sundance will have it posted today, he was great as usual.

    Liked by 1 person

    • John Merrick says:

      I caught a small part …hope someone can post that. Levin summed up the current ugly reality, These 4 Republicans could undermine any vote…Mitt Romney of Utah, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine, and Cory Gardner of Colorado.

      Comrad Collins said no 9.19 Trump twitter slammed Murkowski 9.20. And Mittens is out.

      McConnell had better get busy.

      Like

      • Donzo says:

        Lagoa is the more likely confirmation. After that, given Schumer’s statement about packing the court, Trump should do just that if he gets Congress. 13 is a good number. A future Dem president would have to go to 19.

        Like

        • wvvet says:

          I have seen posts on other sites from Floridians that Lagoa is a Trojan horse. How can we trust any of them?

          Like

          • devilman96 says:

            I think that’s pretty easy. You toss out everything they “say” and spend the time looking at the historic of what they have done.

            No one is perfect… But everyone has a history and in the case of public office that history becomes incredibly valuable.

            Liked by 1 person

      • devilman96 says:

        The reality of the situation is this… All McConnell has to do is put the Senate into recess and Trump can make an appointment.

        It’s That simple… However as we should all know from Sundance’s tireless work, trillions and trillions of dollars are at stake here and I’m betting ole Mitch might be happier with a president Biden.

        Like

  8. Phil aka Felipe says:

    How about a Supreme Court nominee that understands the threat to Liberty and the U.S. Constitution presented by Marxism, Islam, and all other totalitarian, tyrannical ideologies including Globalism?

    Liked by 2 people

  9. allin4freedom says:

    I thing Trump will choose the second woman pictured – Justice Barbara Lagoa, 52, a Latina from the Eleventh circuit. She’s a late addition to his list. When Scalia passed “under unusual circumstances, Ginsberg said that eight was not a good number.

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/rbg-when-democrats-wanted-to-fill-scotus-seat-during-2016-election-year-eight-not-a-good-number.html

    Like

  10. George 1 says:

    The truth is either one of these women will move farther left on the USSC. Gorsuch and Kavanaugh have both went left on some decisions already. True Constitutional conservatives are rare in the higher layers of the justice apparatus. If one did exist that person would not be allowed to be confirmed to the USSC. Justice Thomas is almost a miracle in attaining a spot on the court.

    No. We might slow down the leftward move but we won’t stop it. Abortion will be allowed to go on and the destruction of the 2A and free speech will continue. The only answer that might allow for some freedom ultimately is a National divorce. The left cannot be dealt with. The are lost to Satan.

    The following is a message from a typical democrat:

    Liked by 1 person

    • John-Y128 says:

      That is the definitive results of a ‘liberal leftist’ indoctrination education, Sad.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Deplorable Canuck says:

      And here is the scary thought, there are tens of millions like her in America today! All brought to you by socialist educational systems put forward by socialist teachers who were trained in socialist universities. I teach in a university context and I can tell you now that even though we are nominally Christian, our education department is filled with Socialist PhDs most of whom are not even aware of their socialism. They think of it exclusively as social justice. Christianity has then been reduced to that idea. Nobody in our education department sees the socialism behind the idea of social justice.It is a perversion of Christian ideals in the extreme. And it produces nut-bars just like her! Incapable of sound rational thought. Full of rage!

      Liked by 1 person

    • Beau Geste says:

      why does she seem to be driving from the left side?
      Is she so “leftist” that she buys a leftist car?
      Or is she from another country?

      Like

    • Jeffrey Coley says:

      OK, but let’s admit … when Scalia died in 2016, we all felt exactly the same way. With no confidence the GOP Senate would do what it did.

      Like

  11. John-Y128 says:

    ‘Notorious RBG’ about to be replace by the ‘Virtuous ACB’.

    Like

  12. calfcreek says:

    I remember Sandra Day O’Conner. Picking a woman right now is a mistake, just like John Roberts was a mistake. You cannot look at judicial temperament and writings. You have to look at the person and their life, their friends, their hobbies and their business interests.
    We need a SCOTUS judge that isn’t averse to hanging a traitor.
    We need a SCOTUS judge that understands the threat that Marxism in all of its forms and Islam are to the American Founding.
    We need a SCOTUS judge that does NOT bow to the altar of Stare Decisis!
    Christopher Landau may be that man but I’m not even sure about him.

    Liked by 5 people

  13. Raised on Reagan says:

    Joe Biden released his top pick for SCOTUS this morning: Ruth Bader Gingsberg. 🙂

    Liked by 5 people

  14. This catastrophe was created by the arrogance of RBG. Rather than retire when BHO was president, she postponed and wished to retire under President Hillary with great pomp and circumstance. Didn’t work out so well, did it.

    Liked by 4 people

  15. Richie says:

    Trump hes been saying that for a long time. Nothing new

    Like

  16. Richie says:

    Trump has been saying that for a long time. Nothing new

    Like

  17. rayvandune says:

    “Nobody wants a split decision on the Supreme Court with the election in the balance.”

    Nobody except the Democrats… I predict we will see them trying to undo a Trump victory through the courts, while in the Senate, Dems and RINOs stonewall his nominee to preserve a 4-4 SCOTUS deadlock! Just watch!

    Ps. This is the nightmare scenario PDJT needs to present to the American people!

    Like

  18. Doppler says:

    Whoever PDJT picks will be attacked and vilified by a United Left. It will be the Kavanaugh hearing on steroids. Kavanaugh saved himself by his impassioned self-defense. There was no accountability for the many witnesses who, under oath, falsely defamed him.

    Going into thIs election, the hearings will be watched by many millions. Among the main judicial qualities used as a filter, President Trump should also consider how well the person will stand up under that onslaught. Will she inspire many to turn against the rabid Leftist mob, exposed by their own venom?

    Grace under fire. An ennobling story to contrast with DC’s blood sportsmanship. Righteous indignation to shame those who wrongly attack her.

    Those qualities in high DC drama could easily turn hundreds of thousands or even millions of votes. Particularly among women, and, if Lagoa gets the nod, Hispanics.

    I remain convinced that, if PDJT wins re-election, it will be with historic gains from among African American and Hispanic voters, which, if emphatic enough, has the potential to destroy or greatly undermine the influence identity politics – the new bigotry – has had on academia and the corporate C suite and HR departments. Greatly set back Marxism’s Long March through our Institutions.

    Like

  19. cattastrophe says:

    I don’t trust any of the nominees until we see how they vote after confirmed. That is about the saddest thing I can say about who we have as choices for the highest court.

    I hope Gorsuch doesn’t continue to be a disappointment. Sorry to say my personal opinion of him was he seemed rather arrogant an attention seeker. Hopefully I’ll be wrong as far as his judgements are concerned which is really the only important thing.

    I’m afraid our high hopes for a more Constitutional high court are about to be dashed.

    I seldom give in to negativity and even less often do I voice it but I’m bitterly disappointed in the judiciary overall in this country and I hope I’m totally wrong about the future of the high court.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. SanJac says:

    I didn’t know Harry Solomon from 3rd Rock from the sun had a sister.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Deplorable Canuck says:

    The situation this leaves the Democrap party in is just too good not to be divinely ordained! They are in a double jeopardy. If he nominates a Woman, then the Democraps will be attacking a significant portion of the women’s vote. If they are seen at all to be mistreating her it will come back to haunt them. If the woman happens to be a Latino, then it will be double indemnity for the Democraps!

    I see the finger-prints of God all over this situation. God knows what America needs and I believe that through President Trump, he is making it happen!

    Liked by 1 person

    • linderella says:

      Although don’t forget, we have the liberal media doing all the reporting on this, and “shaping” the news. Clarence Thomas was not given a pass for being black — the left just used a black woman to attack him. Remember, liberals are free to attack conservatives, even women and minorities, because they will find ways to demonize them by making up fake news, and using other women and minorities to do their dirty attack work.

      Liked by 3 people

      • mimbler says:

        Yes, the left will have no problem attacking a woman. Look how they attacked Sarah Palin in the most misogynist of ways and the MSM not only didn’t call them out but led the effort.

        Liked by 1 person

  22. TrumpPatriot says:

    I kind of hope he surprises us with an outside the box excellent choice no one sees coming. As to a woman. . . . . . I have been vastly disappointed by every woman appointed to SC. The two that are left right now. . . .. seem not to have a thought that isn’t tied to political doctrine.

    Liked by 4 people

  23. doofusdawg says:

    It needs to be Lagoa. The biggest issue facing the country is it’s existence. Free and fair elections and freedom of speech are the two linchpins. Lagoa is all too familiar with the risk our country faces and therefore she should be the nominee. And the dems are repugnant.

    Like

  24. Todd says:

    Question.. how conservative is the Cuban judge on immigration and universal mail in voting , abortion??

    Liked by 1 person

  25. YvonneMarie says:

    “Protests against Stupidity”
    So true.
    I love it.

    Liked by 1 person

  26. Tom McMahon says:

    Let me be clear…
    Twenty-nine (29) times in American history there has been an open Supreme Court vacancy in a presidential election year, or in a lame-duck session before the next presidential inauguration. The president made a nomination in all twenty-nine cases. George Washington did it three times. John Adams did it. Thomas Jefferson did it. Abraham Lincoln did it. Ulysses S. Grant did it. Franklin D. Roosevelt did it. Dwight Eisenhower did it. Barack Obama did it.

    Liked by 1 person

  27. minnesotamike55 says:

    If the majority party in the senate had a massive majority a purist justice could be moved forward. Given the barely a majority that exists now, politics are a major consideration when nominating, especially so in an election year. No candidate is perfect so go with the best ya got with the ability to help politically. No gettin around it.

    I think Trump may surprise us after some democrat trolling that gets him more campaign material. The left is in a serious bind right now with polling showing riots and looting hurting their chances. They can’t control the crazies no matter what they say. The only way they will stop the violence now is for blue states to implement a crackdown. Since they are incompetent, that will fail.

    I don’t see many options for the left but to push the whole process issue. Threats, violence, looting, and loud protests won’t work. How did they ever think that it would? In a totalitarian communist country it is needed, but in a democracy it does not work because there are many other options for change and the population gets to vote.

    Like

  28. Sportyclays says:

    Not impressed at all with Barrett’s jurisprudential thinking in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals decision in favor of Gov. Pritzker. I have a feeling if she weren’t stuck at the office from 9-5, she’d be out in her $100 Lululemon yoga pants taking a knee at a BLM rally on behalf of her brown children. Pass.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Magabear says:

      The fact that PDJT didn’t go with ACB to fill the last vacancy when so many “conservative” writers and commentators were pushing hard for her to be the nominee tells me that she won’t be the pick here either.

      Like

  29. Magabear says:

    BTW, I’m not sure why everyone is assuming it will come down to between ACB and Lagoa. There are some other very impressive women on PDJT’s list of potential SC picks.

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/additions-president-donald-j-trumps-supreme-court-list/

    Liked by 1 person

  30. Summer says:

    I will take a Protestant male every time.

    Male Catholic judge = bleeding heart Democrat-lite, female version = bleeding heart Democrat. Male Jewish judge = full-fledged Democrat, female version = raging leftist shrew.

    Sorry fellas, that’s my bigoted opinion and I am sticking to it. 🙃

    Seriously, though, genitals should not play any role in selection of Supreme Court Justices.

    However, everyone, even PDJT, plays identity politics these days which is a sad sign of decline. A female candidate will presumably have a better chance to be confirmed, and the soccer moms will have to be appeased and cajoled, that’s the only reason. Never mind there are probably more qualified men out there than a mother of 7 kids or a young inexperienced Latina.

    Liked by 3 people

    • petszmom says:

      i agree. I am a woman and would go to extreme lengths to stick to the men’s clubs. The most important thing to keep in mind is the Constitution, not how much more I can be LIKED so I can be assured of an election win. I have always thought Judge Andrew Hanen would have been a nice pick for the short list but I am partial to Texans.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Contrarymary says:

      Yup, so true, summer!!

      Like

    • hopespringseternal2020 says:

      You do realize that Scalia was a practicing Catholic, right? In fact, his son is a member of the clergy. We would be blessed to have another Scalia on the Court.

      Liked by 2 people

    • linderella says:

      There are different kinds of Catholics, just as there are different kinds of Protestants. (Or different kinds of Republicans, for that matter.) Some of it is a denominational thing, some of it is a generational thing. And gender isn’t a sure-fire guarantee of anything today. I would take a Catholic Scalia over a social justice warrior Protestant Millennial any time. And my dream pick would be to see Jay Sekulow on the bench.

      Liked by 2 people

  31. musings780 says:

    Doubtful it will come to a vote prior to the election. Takes too long. Too many procedural votes to overcome. Might get out of committee though. Maybe.

    Like

  32. Todd says:

    Judge Allison H. Eid

    Born 1965 in Seattle, WA

    Federal Judicial Service
    Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

    Nominated by Donald J. Trump on June 7, 2017, to a seat vacated by Neil M. Gorsuch.

    Confirmed by the Senate on November 2, 2017, and received commission on November 3, 2017.

    Education:
    Stanford University, A.B., 1987

    University of Chicago Law School, J.D., 1991

    Professional Career:
    Private practice, Denver, Colorado, 1991, 1992-1993, 1994-1998

    Law clerk, Hon. Jerry E. Smith, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 1991-1992

    Law clerk, Hon. Clarence Thomas, Supreme Court of the United States, 1993-1994

    University of Colorado School of Law, 1998-2009, 2011-2015; associate professor, 1998-2006; adjunct professor, 2007-2009, 2011-2015

    Solicitor general, State of Colorado, 2005-2006

    Justice, Colorado Supreme Court, 2006-2017

    Adjunct professor, Suffolk University Law School Summer Law Program, Lund, Sweden, 2007

    Visiting judicial teaching fellow, J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young University, 2010

    Like

  33. elderama says:

    I am opposed to these two women because I feel they do not possess the calibre of gorsuch or kavanaugh, and they are less qualified than Kagan or Sotomayor–nobody wants to be selected because they are female, gay, straight, native american, asian–it diminishes their respect–this is madness!!!! and I think tht in 2020, just like in 2016, Trump already has more support among suburban women than polls show, and I think picking these women will have no impact whatsoever on female vote —(women are in fact wondering how a lady with seven children can diligently hold a full-time job)–I am hoping our president will feel he can change his mind about picking a woman because she is a woman–pick somebody because they are respected jurists with track record–I am still in favor of paul clement even tho we are tired of choosing jurists from harvard law,— clement has enormous stature,–he has argued 100 cases before supreme court, is an expert at appellate law, would do far far better in senate hearings than coney barrett, and romney likes clement, and we need romneys support right now even tho romney is a spiteful ornery creature–we need a supreme court pick with proven positions on all conservative issues not just right to life

    Like

    • elderama says:

      for example, paul clement successfully represented little sisters of the poor before the supreme court–that remarkable success alone alone proves he can reliably support right to life issues and religious freedoms——and if clement were the pick, I think george bush would summon susan collins up to kennebunkport and demand she vote for clement, just like he demanded she support kavanaugh–so,I think that clement is the easiest fastest pick for the nomination, quick hearings and and vote betore end of october,– in my view, all problems are resolved by picking clement ASAP

      Like

  34. Deplorable_Vespucciland says:

    Content to watch the establishment uniparty ugly slugfest over the next six weeks as President Trump crisscrosses the nation campaigning for America’s future survival as a free nation. He will put forth a nomination later this week and then let Congress and the media fight it out. Let us focus on his re-election now and deal with the Supreme Court somewhere down the line. The democrats have already said that they will unleash their dogs of war if Biden loses so we should be preparing for that.

    ~~~~~~~ TRUMP 2020 ~~~~~~~

    Liked by 1 person

  35. msalicia56 says:

    Republicans need to play hardball on this one. It’s for sure Democrats would do it if the ball were in their court. Let the Dems rage. They are already raging and they have already threatened to pack the court, already threatened t riot and burn and loot. Don’t give in to them. Collins and Murkowski are living in another world that is gone with the wind.

    Like

  36. TrumpPatriot says:

    Let’s imagine for a minute he decides on a male, and let say it’s a male holding elected office. Would you pick Cotton. .. Hawley .. .. . .Cruz?

    Like

  37. jbrickley says:

    Sydney Powell for SCOTUS. She is one smart cookie and would absolutely destroy the Democrats during confirmation hearings.

    Like

  38. Liberty Forge says:

    Robert Barnes on Barrett. He’s evidently not a fan.

    Liked by 1 person

    • MAGADJT says:

      I was just coming here to post this. I trust Barnes opinion on the SCOTUS pick. That makes me think Lagoa is the better move, but I’ve read concerning commentary about her as well. Maybe POTUS will surprise us and come out of the woodwork with a name no one expects. Wasn’t impressed with the Kavanaugh pick, but I feel like that was a demand from Anthony Kennedy in exchange for retiring and letting Trump have the pick.

      Liked by 2 people

  39. arsumbris says:

    I’ve been praying all week that he has the sense to nominate Barrett. Lagoa would be another John Roberts: she the Bushes pick, the Feinsteins’ pick. Dear God in this our nation’s 11th hour, please give Donald Trump the wisdom to pick Barrett.

    Like

  40. John Drake says:

    President Trump will nominate whomever he chooses. The ACT of confirmation will be the show not the nomination…and the only thing the Democrats will have in their ‘quiver’ will be the ‘Pro Choice’ if the nominee is a Woman. It will be interesting to see what vile rubbish the Democrats heap on the nominee. After all the Democrats are evil character assassins.

    BCNU…

    Like

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