President Trump has said he will announce his nominee for the supreme court tomorrow at 5:00pm. Chief of Staff Mark Meadows appears on Fox News this morning to discuss the anticipated announcement and the predictable political response from the leftists.
Does anyone here predict the democrats will launch a character assasination campaign against the nominee like they did Kavanaugh?
Pretty sure EVERYONE HERE KNOWS they will-
Go ahead punks, embarrass yourselves and make my day.
I hope Trump goes with Logoa on this. They had 4 years to dig up dirt on abc. Dont want another Falwell beta cuck situation
I don’t think that’s an important consideration. It doesn’t matter what’s in anyone’s past because they’ll make it up if it’s not there.
I like Lagoa also. My only thought is she might be needed on the Florida Supreme Court.
She is an excellent choice wherever she ends up.
I agree. Or that other dark horse candidate. My gut feeling in ACB just isn’t good.
Surely, this is a rhetorical question.
They should open the hearings by thanking her for coming, announce the general floor vote will happen in one hour, and close the hearing. No need for democrats to try to drag another nominee through the mud. We saw enough of that crap with Kavanaugh to last a lifetime. Fill the vacancy. Now.
I like it.
mallardcove:
With each passing year, it’s become more apparent that the Democrat Party feels obligated to ‘bloody up’ every Republican Supreme Court nominee. This ‘bull fight’ of a confirmation hearing (the nominee being the ‘bull’) also lacks any real judicial or constitutional justification in that no judge should ever prejudge the merits of any case, or even hint at possible future rulings; or the worst of the worst: to make promises to Senators that they will or will not give due consideration to some sanctimonious political doctrine or other from the Sacred Scriptures of Unholy Progressive Misconceptions.
Other hearing considerations off-limits are those privileges afforded by The Constitution itself regarding religious liberty, race, gender etc. leaving thus a very narrow window of inquiry on judicial temperament, philosophy, and general knowledge of the law: in other words, 4 to 5 hours at most (one single day of committee hearings).
However, if Dems want a carnival, adjourn the hearings immediately and schedule a day of floor speeches only in favor of or against the nominee, and vote the next day.
The move to confirm must come quickly. Let the left go into hysterics and embarrass themselves again. They are losing their minds already.
If Mitch screws this up he doesn’t get reelected. He knows that. Lindsey too. So their interests align with potus. They have to get elected to stay in the uniparty. If they weren’t up for reelection i am sure they would take a dive and sandbag the pick. Not this time. Collins needs to get the base out. Lisa will get defeated by palin if she is a no. Plus with a conservative women trump has boxed them. A solid performance and the pick is a lock.
They have already found mountains of dirt and corruption on the nominee. They are just waiting on the President to give the name of who dunnit.
You forgot to include the quotations mark. The Dimms have “found” dirt. It is just like with Kavanaugh, no real facts are necessary, just the accusation and accuser.
The accuser had C I A ties – both her father, her brother and the organization. She worked for. Total deep state set up.
I am hoping and praying that Lisa gets defeated by Palin no matter how she votes, but with the corrupt political system in Alaska nothing is guaranteed.
The problem with Palin is that she has a soap opera family and the rats will use that against her.
I had that thought as well, but after consideration, I know it wouldn’t affect my vote, especially with such a clear cut choice. It will be interesting to watch, for sure,
Everyone in America has a soap opera family – depending on whom you ask. There is nothing the communist dems can puke up and throw at Gov. Palin that has not already been used.
Sarah Palin would be an outstanding Senator.
As does murkowski…
Which is why both have said the process will change. Probably quicker. Gonna need the vote for Flynn case and mail in (fraudulent) ballot cases.
Has anybody seen ol’ lindsey lately? He is looking MIGHTY OLD!!! Along with McConnell of course!!!! Has anybody heard about Ron Paul and how he is doing?
The “process” had better have a hard goal of taking the Senate vote by about Oct 27th…..
I wish I trusted McConnell to actually hold a vote before the election.
No kidding.
Coonman Northrup and wife have the covid ( right)and is going to try to stop. PDJT s rally tonight.
Expect fireworks.
I was in and around Northern VA last week and their were no complaints about Coonman.
Likewise I don’t trust Willard and Lisa’s sudden ‘conversion’ to ‘hold hearings and vote’–I totally expect them to go through the motions and then ‘deeply regret they cannot vote to confirm’. GOOD GOD these THINGS are slimy-
Romney was never in question..he, like McConnell, has been 100$ with PDJT on judges, even while being critical at other times.
Lisa’s “conversion” is interesting. Wondering if it is because Sarah Palin has publicly been after her since her initial announcement.
More like she’s terrified that mean old bat DiFi is gonna beat her up in the hallway again like she did at Kav’s hearing-
https://nypost.com/2018/09/27/feinstein-and-murkowski-spotted-huddling-ahead-of-hearing/
..do not underestimate DIFI…she may squeeze Murkowski-little neck on cameras -….just make point…
That would be great television!
Politically, I think it would have been easier for them to vote against the hearings because of “principle”. I think it will be -very- hard for them to vote against a qualified conservative after supporting the hearing.
I think it would be fun for our side to just have about
10,000 people show up. No shouting, no screaming.
Just all holding up signs saying:
“Haven’t we seen enough of your shit, already???”
I don’t think he has a choice.. self preservation..
All these crooks think of themselves first.. that’s why they are corrupt..
I’ll place a Benji (also known as a $100.00 bill) on the Turtle getting the pick thru. Judges are his thing. ?
Agreed Magabear.
Credit where credit is due.
it will be done…. in lees than week !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
nominate Sat…..confirm Mon…Flynn walks Tues…what’s the holdup? Are We being held up by masked men/women ?
Flynn moves back to Intel and Sidney moves to FBI Dir.
And Chief Injustice Roberts resigns as his usefulness is gone.
??? Lefty heads explode.
How would they trash Lagoa without pissing off most Latinos and how can they go after the Catholic for being a Catholic without angering at least a good sized group of religious people? They’re treading a fine line here.
Seems to me that since Amy already went through the process that she’s a safer choice but possibly subject to more hate from the left than Lagoa.
who really care about their hate anymore…
Some people believe it – scroll down to the comment from someone who voted straight rat because she believed Kavanaugh was a serial rapist.
A birthday present for me. ??
Oops, that was to grasshopper.
I really like Mark … Great choice
What?
Meadows, PDJT’s Chief of Staff.
The Angelic ACB!!
Yeah listening to the non-stop ‘mansplaining’ from the Dem senators is gonna be great-they should simply say what RBG did at her hearings–“I don’t wish to answer that’–I believe it was HUNDREDS of times-
This is what is so infuriating: Even after that she was voted in by the right. No matter how bad they are the Republicans confirm the choice of a Democrat President. You never see pushback.
But Constitution-adhering judges are torn apart by the left and barely get confirmed.
I heard yesterday she was open borders and her rulings were not very conservative. It’s that true? Some twitter said that she ruled several times like democrats.
Barrett or Lagoa? To whom are you referring when you say “she” voted open borders?
“To whom are you referring when you say ‘she’…..” Want to see some real exploding lefty heads? The President nominates a man!
He already said that his nominee would be a woman…
It could be none of the ones on the list. The rats will explode.
POTUS sticks to his promises.
I worry that Amy Coney Barrett thinks that antipope Gomer is worth paying a moment’s attention to. If she doesn’t know that Gomer’s not the real pope, I question her intelligence.
Agreed! She is honestly NOT my preferred pick…
Nor mine. Here’s why:
Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905)
Am predicting a vaccine will be mandatory post-election. Hundreds of thousands of citizens will say no and probably have to sue individual states for the freedom to choose. If the suits go all the way to the SC, Barrett will say “yes.”
She already cited this archaic ruling in a decision regarding Covid lockdowns. Jacobson would work equally well with regard to vaccines.
I’m already trying to figure out how PT’s “Right to Try” law might be interpreted to the advantage of those who refuse vaccines. As in … the “right to try” alternatives.
The fact that vaccine manufacturers have immunity from suits is just as egregious as the Jacobson decision.
That’s very concerning… I really wanted Lagoa, for many reasons. I am afraid that Barrett is going to be a grave disappointment to true originalists and conservatives. I pray that I will be proven wrong!
Mark is coming into his own in this role. I think he was overwhelmed at first but he is really getting good.
Attention Mitch, Lindsey and all the rest of you Repub Senate squishes: your party owes the DemCongs nothing! Remember Kavanaugh! Should be your battle cry. No friggen hearings. No friggen last minute “witnesses” with beach friends dredged out of some smelly hole. Come out from hiding under your desks for once.VOTE…thats all you need to do.
Hear Hear!
Don’t come out for the cameras and give a MEALY-MOUTHED EXCUSE!!!! VOTE TO CONFIRM…that is all.
What I would like to see happen: Mitch calls to Senate to Session — THEN VOTES!!! Blind sides the dems…thus takes out the “circus” aspect of what is expected to be a farce by the dems!!!!
5:00pm Saturday. Considerate.
ESPN will be able to offer commentary during multiple halftime reports.
Hah! Yeah, I decided against an ESPN package a few years ago because of their politics and am so glad that I did. Now, I cannot even go to their website, because it is BLM 24/7.
Like Rush said: After what they pulled at Kav’s hearings and then with the faux-impeachment, Mitch should simply throw his weight around and simply VOTE to confirm-no games, no soundbites, no BS lawfare cartoon characters–JUST DO IT AND GET ON WITH IT!
That would take balls and we all know Nancy has his.
That would take MUCHO GRANDE EL BRASSOS BOLLOS!!! And Mitch doesn’t have those!!!
Absoleffenlutely, get it through quickly. The caterwauling will be less and over more quickly, than hearing after hearing.
Indeed Mitch could quote Chicago Jesus, who said ‘the election is over, we won’. AND “elections have consequences”. Yeah, DO IT-
I wish a Christian nominee would say something like this:
” Each of us has a belief system, a system of right and wrong, of acceptable behavior and unacceptable behavior. My belief system is based on thousands of years of Judeo-Christian philosophy, including the Ten Commandments. What is your belief system, and what is it based on?”
By the way, what is Progressivism based on, 100 years of New York Times editorial pages?
Or MoDo (Maureen Dowd) OpEd pieces . . .
Or the Oprah Winfrey show . . .
Its a veil for a 174-year-old philosophy called MARXISM. It was first introduced by Teddy himself and made massive inroads under Wilson. Progressive should more appropriately be called “regressive” because their policies would take civilization back to a simpler less capable era of history. Just as true love can only be derived from God, so too with liberty and wisdom. The Bible speaks of professing to be wise, they are fools. Could you find any greater example of this than the newspeak radicals we regularly see and hear from?
Our former Ambassador to the U.S, Joe Hockey is a regular on a programme here. He was talking to the host of the programme last week and he said even if Donald Trumps pick isn’t installed before the election, the President has the authority to install an interim Justice and it doesn’t even have to be a lawyer. So if that were to happen, wonder who he would pick.
Rick Grenell ? (Cheshire cat grin here)!
Or Ted Cruz…
Cruz would be awesome. I remember thinking when he ran for President that his intellect would prove of much better use on the Supreme Court.
It is called a “recess appointment.” It is only valid till the end of the current Congress and has not had the opportunity until maybe now. Mitch the “Turtle” has made sure to keep the Senate in pro forma (fake) session to prevent this. There is a scheduled formal recess for electioneering coming up on the 12 Oct.
There’s that word again…
“Installed”…instead of “confirmed”.
“Install”…instead of “appoint” an interim Justice…
Socialist/Communist “install”
I’m sure they’ve got a number of degenerates willing to testify to the nominee’s morals……..
The no good rat bastards.
In 2018, the repubs held the Senate, and it is reasonable to suppose that one reason is the voters did not like how Kavanaugh was treated.
So I am hoping this is a heads, we win, tails you lose situation: the dems either make it a circus (and still fail to stop the nomination, but irritate voters like in 2018) or they don’t, in which case the nomination sails through.
We’ll see how much weight Meadows has with PDJT on this selection. We know who he’s pushing for (good choice). ?
https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/business/article245947040.html
That’s my choice.
Create a commercial using the clips of what they did to Bork, Thomas, and Kavanaugh and then juxtapose that with how Repubs have treated the Dems nominees. Then explain this is why you won’t hold hearings. Most of the American people have no idea of how nasty the Dems are.
I would hire you as my campaign advisor elgato.
Who exactly is Barnes? He lives on the twitterverse, has a constant campaign against Barrett, always with the broad generalities. I seriously doubt he has gone through all her cases, or that he puts decisions in context. He had one post that was clearly shown a few days ago on CTH as being misleading and I saw a clearly anti-Catholic tweet from him, where he complained she would put her Catholic faith and listening to the Pope above the constitution.
Robert Pitchman has posted his twitter comments several times. Maybe he can enlighten us of Barnes credentials, other than that he is a lawyer with a constant twitter presence. (I had to block his stuff myself yesterday, he is on such a campaign.)
Personally, i will trust President Trump, with whoever he picks, over someone trying to fit their thoughts into 280 characters. I expect that the President and his staff have gone in detail through all her decisions, since she was also considered the last time for an open seat.
Actually, Barnes says he’s gone thru over 60 of her previous decisions/writings. One may not agree with his reasoning, but he lays out in detail his thoughts on her.
Who is Barnes choice? Anyone know?
Lagoa, at the moment. He likes Rushing the best, but thinks she may be too young. He really doesn’t like Barrett.
I know nothing about their decisions or the law but for whatever reason I’m rooting for Lagoa. I think her dad coming from Cuba likely gives her a strong sense of what could go wrong in the USA. Plus how can the rats trash her without trashing themselves? Just guessing.
Lagoa’s father-in-law, whom she is very close to, was appointed to the bench by Bill Clinton.
According to my recollection POTUS Trump retweeted at least once Robert Barnes. So POTUS Trump seems to respect Barnes. Also Alex Jones had him on about this ( https://2020electioncenter.com/watch?id=5f6d2de7ab9d44099a996102 )
I don’t know Mr. Barnes from Adam … but I have seen him as a guest on various YouTube video’s. For example, he appears on “The People’s Pundit” series every Monday:
In addition, he makes a regular appearance on David Freiheit’s daily law-commentary:
I don’t know the first thing about the law. But it seems like he does.
Please take some time to listen to Barnes’s informed and in-depth critique. He actually HAS read her decisions, while many people advocating for her have not.
Barrett voted to uphold the governor’s draconian lockdown in Illinois. Even worse, the decision embraced a terrible precedent in the Jacobson case, which justified mandatory vaccines. Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Alito, Thomas and Bill Barr have all criticized that very old decision. But Roberts recently cited which is extremely worrying and Barrett’s recent lockdown decision suggests she’d join him.
People are making excuses (like she didn’t write the decision, or she was just applying precedent), but Barnes’s point is that a courageous judge in PA applied a different set of jurisprudence to rule AGAINST the governor’s arbitrary draconian measures (in particular the crackdown on church attendance).
We can’t make the mistake of thinking that the Decepticons don’t get a grip of the SCOTUS pipeline and know how to line up authoritarians who send the right “bat signals” before confirmation. Barrett is being celebrated and pushed by the same people who got behind Fauci and Bolton. She’s a darling of DC intelligensia much like Roberts.
If she’s nominated, I hope all the GOOD indicators bear out as correct. But we can’t be blind and need to consider other candidates who have good traits and fewer red flags.
Amy Coney Barret is Mitch McConnell’s pick. I’d say that’s another giant red flag.
One thing that Barnes doesn’t mention is that Barrett was never on the bench before her appointment three years ago. She spent all of her legal life either in private practice or teaching.
Lagoa, by contrast, has been a judge since 2006.
Here’s an interview betw Alex Jones & Robt Barnes. Not too long, lays it out pretty plainly. Actually, he paints ACB is downright scary. (And I’m a traditional Catholic; not of the ‘Francis ilk’.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aoogf49_Nbs
Well, lot of informed responses here. I appreciate the attention to detail. CTH is always the best source for information.
But, Fox News is reporting the President’s selection will be ACB. If that is the case, time will show whether Barnes and those criticizing her are accurate or the President got it right. I will be curious to see if Barnes stays with his criticism during what will be a contentious process.
Not a word about these newly released documents!!
Sickening!!
Comment deleted by Admin…
?? !!! What is this garbage??? I’m no fan of Mitch outside of his effective judge confirmation record, but “traffic cocaine”??? What a load of Democrap propaganda and why is it on CTH????
It was actually a joke that Mitch himself has made and tweeted about.
Sorry everyone. I guess you all missed the joke:
https://observer.com/2018/05/mitch-mcconnell-explains-cocaine-mitch-tweet-midterm-image/
Cocaine Mitch! Sorry for the link to this terrible rag but the story is too good to pass up! https://www.huffpost.com/entry/mitch-mcconnell-cocaine-tweet_n_5af2722ae4b00a3224ee42e3
Speaking of trolls, it does no good to smear or denigrate the nominee, and to (purposefully?) fire up divisions and rancor within the base.
Is the goal to destroy the nomination? How is that a helpful goal?
If the nominee has flaws then they should be discussed. The goal is to have a really great nominee who will be confirmed as quickly as possible.
Discussing a nominee’s possible flaws is not smearing or denigrating them.
Agree. Especially if there is substantiation for any assertions of the nominee’s flaws.
Perhaps even the RINOs realize if they don’t stop the D-rat vote fraud by supporting President Trump, THEY will lose their place at the trough. Just sayin.,…..
This election tampering that the D-rats have pulled in key states must NOT stand!
Never realized how much humor Mr. Meadows.
?As chief of staff you know how many candidate PDJT has interviewed ?
That is a good question coming from a journalist, as a GOOD chief of staff I am not going to answer that????
So this is as good a place as any to ask the ACB advocates: Besides her confrontation with Feinstein at her previous confirmation hearing, what is your reasoning for wanting her to be the pick? What rulings of hers stand out as making her the choice? I’ve yet to hear a compelling case made for her but am open to hearing it.
I so wish this pick didn’t have to be a women. Judge Stickman, who wrote the opinion striking down Herr Wolf’s lockdown on gatherings was a thing of beauty.
I’m hoping for Rushing, expecting Lagoa and fearful of ACB.
Tweeted by Trump’s lawyer.
See, that article kind of sums up my above question. The article sites her education (all the people on PDJT’s list are tops in their class), her judicial philosophy (everyone on the list is there because they fit the philosophy PDJT wants) and a few cases that were really just slam dunks for any right of center judge. And then it mentions the flap with Feinstein.
I just fail to see what sets her apart from the others.
I agree with you. She joined a decision validating the Illinois Covid lockdown. To me, that’s disqualifying.
It’s perfectly reasonable that governors would need tools to address a pandemic. What we’ve seen this year is a travesty, and jurisprudence endorsing it should be swept into the dustbin of history, not elevated to the Supreme Court.
What is supposed to set her apart from the others is Abortion. She’s got five kids of her own and adopted two. Everyone (Left, Right, Center) expect her to toss Roe. I’m dubious. It is next to impossible to predict which way a justice will decide, though one can bet most of them drift Left over time (therefore Alito and Thomas stand out as true Rocks of Gibraltar, by not doing that).
My opinion is not worth anything, but I’d say pick Barbara Lagoa to secure Florida and as much as the Latino vote as possible. Then, after the President is re-elected and in control, “pack” the Court with two more justices, extremely secure ones who aren’t professional judges. (There are plenty of great conservative lawyers to choose from.) After all, the Court as been nine justices since the Civil War era. It makes sense to add a couple (not four or six, just two).
There’s the Illinois lockdown decision (negative) and the fact that she only has three years experience as a judge (negative.)
OANN interviewed Jenna recently on “the pick.” I have not watched it yet. Will schedule it in.
According to Ms. Powell –
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/supreme-court-nomination-should-be-sent-to-senate-without-a-hearing-sidney-powell/vi-BB19mtmY
Sidney is a great American. I agree, based on the Dems disgusting treatment of Kavanaugh, screw them. Pull the scab and just vote. They are going to be apoplectic either way. Why care what they say any more? Only idiots (and I know a lot of them) believe a word they say. Liars, cheats, power-hungry pieces of garbage. That includes the MSM.
The Kavenaugh hearings cost the dems millions of votes. Let’s give them another opportunity to dork it up again on the eve of the 2020 election.
I agree. Let’s let Kamala see how many women she can get pissed at her.
Didn’t Republicans lose the house a month after K’s confirmation?
Yes, think they did. I had a friend, never voted in her 60+ years of life but made a point of registering and voting Democrat for every candidate on the ballot because she was convinced that President Trump had just put a serial rapist on the Supreme Court, i.e., Kavanaugh.
She said a lot of friend did likewise, which is why I don’t believe ACB will be the nominee because that will bring every remaining non-registered, non-historical voting liberal out of the closet that the Dem. Party can find in order to save their precious baby-killing abortion game.
That’s giving into a threat, same as if POTUS held off making the pick because the Democrats threaten to burn the f**ker down if he does.
That’s no way to govern. And that’s no way for a political party that wants to govern should act.
I would go with Lagoa, simply for politics and experience.
To them, they weren’t giving in. In fact, they believe to this day they are defending the United States by voting against, even hating our President.
My hope is that neither ACB or Lagoa are the choice; but rather are distractions for the media while the real choice, one who is easily consented to by the full Republican led Senate can cast a quick and sure vote for.
Whoever it is needs to get in place before the elections. Both these lady Judges would most likely be excellent choices, but not if the Left has already begun ginning up the smear machines.
Not relevant.
The House has nothing to do with SCOTUS confirmations. The Senate has total control.
Pres Trump picked up 4 Senate seats in the 2018 election.
IMO, holding a hearing is Mitch’s leverage to be sure Trump picks the candidate he wants. He wants ACB, who I think is apt to turn out like Roberts. If Trump picks her, it’ll go smoothly. If not, Katie bar the door.
Think about it: Schumer, Feinstein and Pelosi have huffed and puffed but effectively already relented. Mittens has already assented. What is the natural inference? A Uniparty candidate. They all think it’s ACB and are ready to play their roles.
Could be, but I hope not. I don’t know what they would have to dig up to vote down Lagoa, for instance. The Senate confirmed her for the Court of Appeals less than a year ago by a vote of 80-15.
I agree, and poking around I found out the following:
1. No hearings were held before a SC appointment vote until 1916 (Brandeis). Brandeis did not attend the hearing. I have read the concern that he was Jewish.
2. No appointee even attended a hearing until 1939 (Frankfurter.) Frankfurter, like Brandeis, was a controversial appointment, especially for his defense of Sacco and Vanzetti during the ’20s, and he was Jewish. Frankfurter attended but took the position that his public record spoke for itself, and he wasn’t going to add to it.
3. The turning point was Potter Stewart’s nomination in 1959. By that time, southern Democrats were fully hostile to the Supreme Court because of its desegregation decisions, and conservative Republicans were worried about the Supreme Court over national security issues, and Stewart got a fair grilling. But like other nominees, he didn’t provide them any answers.
4. In the history of the Supreme Court, there have been 114 justices since 1789. Only ELEVEN have been rejected by a roll-call vote, and six of them were nominated again and confirmed to other seats on the court. Only TWO were rejected on roll-call vote in the past fifty years – Bork (Reagan) in 1987, and Carswell (Nixon) in 1970.
Doesn’t seem to me that the Judiciary Committee hearings accomplish much more than political grandstanding.
“Doesn’t seem to me that the Judiciary Committee hearings accomplish much more than political grandstanding.”
Exactly. Great reason to ditch the camera & mic-ready theatrics and get on with a vote.
How can you trust the Republicans when they just signed a bill with the dems to say they will go along with the peaceful transfer of power If Joe Biden Wins? How about some of these idiots just saying because of what the Dems and Obama and his goons did to the President, They would not sign anything until the election is over .. My gosh, Why do these people not stand up for the President He works his butt off to help them and this is what they do to him over and over again/
Mr.President – cnn is reporting that you lost based on the first hour’s polling. Will you resign now?
It’s the peaceful transition we promised NanXi, Sir. we must abdicate….resign..
I hate RINOs.
WHAT? The GOP got suckered into that???
Meadows is great!
Meadows is great!
Let’s really give those Schumer thugs a real fit … skip the hearings dog-and-pony show … do it like during the FDR years and go straight to a floor vote to confirm.
Dear Sen. Shumer:
Due to the worst virus ever to visit the USA (I mean, isn’t that what you and your fellow party members tell us every day?), the vote will be done on conference call. Safety first!
With warmest regards,
Mitch McConnell
?????
The dimms will b!tch, whine and moan then do nothing to delay this nomination. ?
..yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees…straight to a floor vote….past more than 3.5 yrs show theatrics of democrats party is over…
The US Supreme Court is currently comprised of:
5 Catholics,
2 Jews,
1 Protestant, an Episcopalian who was raised Catholic
This is totally out of whack. The US has twice as many Protestants as Catholics, and 20 times as many Protestants as Jews. The next FOUR picks should all be Protestant Christians and one should be Baptist. Catholics have taken over the Supreme Court. NO MORE CATHOLICS. And just to be clear, Muslims don’t even belong on the list.
Why are there so many Catholics and only one Protestant? Are all those on the short list also Catholic? Apparently, the two front-runners are.
Religious affiliation means little. First of all, legally, there’s specifically a no religious test clause in the Constitution (Article VI, Clause 3). Barrett should have slapped down Feinstein when the latter said, “The dogma lives loudly within you.” “Senator, you don’t know squat about the Constitution. Read Article VI, Clause 3. Educate yourself, you old trout.”
And then there are “Catholics” and there are “Catholics.” Thomas and Alito seem to be strong ones, Anthony Kennedy of the gay marriage vote was a bad one. Kavanagh, Kennedy’s chosen replacement, does a lot of social work/soup kitchen stuff, but seems a squish. Roberts is a scoundrel, pure and simple. Gorsuch, the Episcopalian, wrote an opinion that any man can claim to be a woman, thus legally negating the entire female sex. One of the Jews is a Lesbian and both Jews are very Left. So is Sotomayor, a Catholic.
Bottom Line: An Orthodox Jew or conservative Protestant or Trad Catholic would never get confirmed. Simple as that.
So ….. the last sentence of your argument, which you omitted, goes something like “so we have to nominate another Catholic.” No. I’m not buying it.
“An Orthodox Jew or conservative Protestant or Trad Catholic would never get confirmed. Simple as that.”
If it is impossible to confirm a practicing believing Protestant to the Supreme Court, then this country has a hell of a lot worse problems than we realize. There was a John Cleese skit about the various countries’ terrorist alert levels in which he stated that Scots had only two levels : “pissed off” and “let’s get the bastards.” Well, America’s Protestants have been cruising at the upper limit of “pissed off” for quite a while but we are too polite and self-controlled to let you see it.
This nominee should be NOT Catholic, Jew, Black or Latinx.
Your second to last paragraph is spot on, IMO. As an evangelical, I really do get tired of being treated like a step child by the people we do so much work for.
The left in Chicago is pushing for Barrett. That is not a positive.
We’ve had enough of Chicago lawyers.
The President will choose who he thinks is best politically and for the Court.
My favorite at the moment is Barbara Lagoa. Here’s why:
1. She was confirmed to the 11th Circuit Court with a vote of 80-15 in the Senate less than one year ago. Judiciary Committee vote 18-4. Barrett’s votes were 55-43 and 11-9. It will be harder for the Senate to reject Lagoa this time.
2. Lagoa is a Latina from a working class background. A Florida Cuban pick is good in an election year.
3. Lagoa has 14 years experience as a judge. Barrett only has 3 years.
4. Lagoa is also a conservative judge (and a Catholic) who will do well on the SC.
5. We need to get a quick confirmation, so that we have nine justices when the election related cases hit the court. Can’t risk a 4-4 tie on any of them. If there is a tie, the lower court decision will stand.
NO MORE CATHOLICS
See my comment above
I don’t pick candidates based upon their religion, but the ability to be confirmed. This is particularly important right now when we will have election-related cases hit the court.
PS: I am NOT a Catholic.
Agree.
PDJT can potentially gain more support with Lagoa.
And for all Stella’s reasons she should be far easier for McConnell & cronies to give the thumbs up..
No matter who is put forth tomorrow there is no good reason why the confirmation process has to last more than a week. No need to give the democRATS any more free television facetime to rant on and on with their lies and obfuscations about the state of the nation and orange man bad.
Put it on the fast track Mitch!
I just hope whoever is nominated that become the next Scalia!
For those cheering “straight to the floor” and uncritically gushing over ACB — need to let the (justified) euphoria wear off, drink some hot coffee and sober up.
The Uniparty remains the Uniparty. SSCI and leadership of both parties remains criminally compromised, and remember, there are TRILLIONS AT STAKE.
A SCOTUS pick is as important as AG or DNI or NSA. More important. To the extent the dems will DO ANYTHING to protect themselves, so will McConnell and the gaggle he controls.
Why hasn’t Mitch ALREADY set out a schedule — or better — declared it’s going straight to a floor vote? Leverage. He needs to make sure Trump picks the right person, and all signs indicate that person is ACB.
It’s a mistake to get reflexively protective of ACB. Bear in mind, all of the Beltway, cocktail party, think tank GOP is fawning over her. That’s a red flag. Honest, small government patriots are sounding the alarm on recent approval of Illinois lockdown, which validates the unconstitutional notion that a gov can declare an emergency and ignore the Constitution. That’s bad. She’s only been on the bench for a few short years, and prior to that is through-and-through gilded DC elite (clerk, corporate practice, academia). A lot like Roberts.
Watch what the Uniparty is doing: it’s positioning itself for an easy confirmation before the election. Dem leadership has already conceded its whacko options. Pelosi said no impeachment and ruled out holding the debt ceiling hostage. Feinstein crapped on the idea of ditching the filibuster as retribution. Those are reasonable things. But why are the DEMS being pre-emptively reasonable? Why are Mittens and Lamar Alexander already voicing support?
Taken together, the Uniparty has signaled an unimpeded path to confirmation. It’ll be ugly, sure, but unimpeded.
But notice that in an interview with Bartiromo, Meadows casually let slip that they look forward to a vote before OR SOON AFTER the election.
WTF???????
He’s giving away the game right there. McConnell is holding them hostage with process and votes. Mitch is keeping his options open on schedule, process and final votes to be sure Trump picks the right person, and that right person is ACB.
This election very well could hang in the balance of judicial decisions, meaning this Justice could decide the next President. Roberts is unreliable to say the least, meaning this seat could be the tie breaker. Does anyone think Mitch has lost sight of that? Does anyone think Mitch is thinking about what’s best for Trump or MAGA? There are trillions at stake, and criminality to protect.
An open SCOTUS seat is elating and a huge morale boost, but we’ve got to stay focused on the big picture.
You make some good points above, but I think Turtle, Meadows and others are deliberately being somewhat vague so as to keep the demonrats off balance as much as possible. Mitch is very good at playing that game with the dimms.
Yes …. but Mitch is good at playing this game with Trump, too. Think about impeachment. Mitch could have acted quickly while Pelosi was still mulling over when to actually send over the articles. He could have whipped his caucus to vote immediately once she finally did send over articles. He could have ensured Eric Ciaramella’s name made it to the public record. At each point or question, he interpreted norms and decorum AGAINST Trump’s interests, but didn’t have to. His decisions helped drag it out and helped keep key facts off the Congressional record.
Mitch may be toying with dems. But Trump is the one who’s a threat to Mitch’s interests, and process/votes are his leverage.
All in all, I think Mitch handled the whole shampeachment thing pretty well.
President Trump can nominate, but he can also withdraw that nomination at anytime.?
That does not sound practical with such a short window.
Before the election, even the squish repubs will stick together. But if e.g. Collins loses in Maine, and the other squishes decide the “voters have spoken”, any nomination that remains open after the Nov 3 election could fail. And if the POTUS loses (i.e. fraud carries the day) or the Senate flips, then no (decent) nomination will survive. Then you can say, Hello Merrick Garland (as a best case scenario).
Ok, it’s 8:20 am Saturday morning here in Oz, and yet the morning news is already saying that Pres. Trump has selected ACB. I went searching for this ‘breaking news’ and the only news article I could find was from … you guessed it … the NYT.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/25/us/politics/amy-coney-barrett-supreme-court.html
If it’s the NYT, it’s fake news. 24/7.
CNN is going with “Sources say it’ll be ACB”. Could also be a head fake. Hoping it’ll be Lagoa.
We’ll see what happens, but it does remind me back during the Roberts pick where everyone was sure it was going to be judge Michael Luttig to the point of saying he and his family were getting dressed to go to the announcement ceremony. ?
They also projected Thomas Dewey in 1948
I hope it’s Lagoa. ACB has been a judge for only 3 years and she already has several bad decisions like the forced vaccinations and pro-lockdown rullings. Also the establishment wants her, which is a bad sign. Lagoa has 14 years of experience and she has no bad decisions. Also she is Cuban, latina, and a Floridian so she will give an election boost. She is also easier to confirm than ACB. ACB could be a snake like Roberts. I also don’t like how ACB is in that handmaiden religious cult and I don’t like her writings about the pope, even if they are old.
Another good thing about Lagoa is that she was part of the decision affirming the fact that the felons in Florida have to pay their fines and court costs before they can vote, which will prevent many democrat votes in Florida. She is a true conservative and this presidential election could go to the SC. Lagoa will be in Trump’s corner if that happens. I can’t say for sure if ACB would.
Trump should trust his instincts. Go with Lagoa. Stop listening to the swamp with personnel decisions. That’s how he selected trash like Wray, Rosenstein, etc.
As for Mitch there is no way he leaves the SC seat open past election day because he is up for re-election himself and an open SC seat will increase dumbocrat voter turnout. He will get it filled even if Trump picks someone that he does not prefer.
If it is Amy she was just confirmed three years ago
I wonder how Mitch can leverage that to speed up the process?
It mau be Barrett……or maybe not. Anonymous sources…….where have we heard this before? ?
I think POTUS’ camp leaked that Barret is his pick and he’ll end up picking Lagoa