US Election 2020

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pegasus said:
Yeah, these ones are some of the moderates

See the source image
Click to expand...
Lol no. That's the communist wing and they are losing badly.
 
rietrot said:
Lol no. That's the communist wing and they are losing badly.
Click to expand...

It's hard to tell who the moderates are in the Dems. They are as crazy as the republicans were when Obama was POTUS.
 
@greg0205
Viper87 said:
Apparently some in this country lack comprehension skills and the abilities to discern between context and tone.

One is calmly pointing out political biases bleeding through by some Justices (who are supposed to rule free of such prejudices) and shouldn't be judging particular cases if they are predisposed to a bias; while and the other is ranting and shouting like a lunatic on the streets that Justices will have unleashed fury and will pay the price and they won't know what hit them at just the mere thought that they may possibly threaten women's so-called "reproductive rights".

One is a criticism, the other is a threat.
One is lawful and the other is not.


If a citizen did what Schumer did, in that tone, they would be arrested without question.
If a lawyer did what Schumer did, they would be disbarred.
Click to expand...
 
Viper87 said:
Apparently some in this country lack comprehension skills and the abilities to discern between context and tone.

One is calmly pointing out political biases bleeding through by some Justices (who are supposed to rule free of such prejudices) and shouldn't be judging particular cases if they are predisposed to a bias; while and the other is ranting and shouting like a lunatic on the streets that Justices will have unleashed fury and will pay the price and they won't know what hit them at just the mere thought that they may possibly threaten women's so-called "reproductive rights".

One is a criticism, the other is a threat.
One is lawful and the other is not.


If a citizen did what Schumer did, in that tone, they would be arrested without question.
If a lawyer did what Schumer did, they would be disbarred.
Click to expand...
Absolute rubbish.

Just because Trump thinks there is bias, because the judge ruled against Trump's friend, does not give him any reason or course to criticise the Judge. That is the whole point of why the judiciary is separate.

Calling the 9th Circuit Court a disgrace for following well established principles in law is also unacceptable over reach by the president into the Judiciary. He then went further to ask that the court be dismantled. He cannot do that. Simple.
 
buka001 said:
Absolute rubbish.

Just because Trump thinks there is bias, because the judge ruled against Trump's friend, does not give him any reason or course to criticise the Judge. That is the whole point of why the judiciary is separate.

Calling the 9th Circuit Court a disgrace for following well established principles in law is also unacceptable over reach by the president into the Judiciary. He then went further to ask that the court be dismantled. He cannot do that. Simple.
Click to expand...

Where did Trump threaten judges?

Your attempted whataboutisms don't show that.

Or are you now saying that Trump criticised and Schumer threatened?
 
Peggie boy and viper, you guys woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning? Why so triggered?
 
Pegasus said:
Where did Trump threaten judges?

Your attempted whataboutisms don't show that.

Or are you now saying that Trump criticised and Schumer threatened?
Click to expand...
Your bike, or horse or what ever you rode in on is right over there ----->

Did I say Trump threatened?

Trump has attacked the judiciary and in his capacity as POTUS his attacks on the judiciary are an unacceptable breach of the separation of powers.

So try the whataboutism. Cool story. I am interested in Vipers hypocrisy as to how he is happy to apologise for Trumps unacceptable attacks on the judiciary, but by God if a Democrat also exceeds the bounds of the separation of powers then hang them from the rafters.

Yes, what Schumer did is worse, however what Trump has done and said about the judiciary is also unacceptable and requires condemnation and acknowledgement thereof.
 
buka001 said:
Your bike, or horse or what ever you rode in on is right over there ----->

Did I say Trump threatened?

Trump has attacked the judiciary and in his capacity as POTUS his attacks on the judiciary are an unacceptable breach of the separation of powers.

So try the whataboutism. Cool story. I am interested in Vipers hypocrisy as to how he is happy to apologise for Trumps unacceptable attacks on the judiciary, but by God if a Democrat also exceeds the bounds of the separation of powers then hang them from the rafters.

Yes, what Schumer did is worse, however what Trump has done and said about the judiciary is also unacceptable and requires condemnation and acknowledgement thereof.
Click to expand...

Yeah.

Let's do some condemnation.

 
buka001 said:
So try the whataboutism. Cool story. I am interested in Vipers hypocrisy as to how he is happy to apologise for Trumps unacceptable attacks on the judiciary, but by God if a Democrat also exceeds the bounds of the separation of powers then hang them from the rafters.

Yes, what Schumer did is worse, however what Trump has done and said about the judiciary is also unacceptable and requires condemnation and acknowledgement thereof.
Click to expand...

Justices are supposed to interpret the law, free of bias or favour. In the US, the constitution being the oldest law which always takes precedence over federal law and on down the list. Their responsibility is to hear, rule on matters and meet out fair and JUST justice in the eyes of the law.

With that being said, neither Judges nor Supreme Court Justices are deities or better than other mortal men and women simply because of their position. They are entitled to respect but not above criticism. Besides Supreme Court Justices, all the other judges'decisions can be reviewed and overruled by higher judicial bodies. They are human, made of flesh and blood with the same foibles as everybody else. Their decisions must be redheaded to unless otherwise overruled or overturned, but are by no means above criticism or challenge if one has constitutional or legal basis; or even precedent...in a PROFESSIONAL or otherwise RESPECTFUL manner.
Despite their position, some Supreme Court Judges...as well as countless lower court judges (the lower courts especially of late) have not ruled with the constitution in mind, made decisions weakening it and in the case of the lower courts, have overstepped their bounds and allowed their personal feelings & political biases to cloud their better judgement and overstep the bounds of their appointment.

Thank you for at least acknowledging what Schumer did was worse.
 
Viper87 said:
Justices are supposed to interpret the law, free of bias or favour. In the US, the constitution being the oldest law which always takes precedence over federal law and on down the list. Their responsibility is to hear, rule on matters and meet out fair and JUST justice in the eyes of the law.

With that being said, neither Judges nor Supreme Court Justices are deities or better than other mortal men and women simply because of their position. They are entitled to respect but not above criticism. Besides Supreme Court Justices, all the other judges'decisions can be reviewed and overruled by higher judicial bodies. They are human, made of flesh and blood with the same foibles as everybody else. Their decisions must be redheaded to unless otherwise overruled or overturned, but are by no means above criticism or challenge if one has constitutional or legal basis; or even precedent...in a PROFESSIONAL or otherwise RESPECTFUL manner.
Despite their position, some Supreme Court Judges...as well as countless lower court judges (the lower courts especially of late) have not ruled with the constitution in mind, made decisions weakening it and in the case of the lower courts, have overstepped their bounds and allowed their personal feelings & political biases to cloud their better judgement and overstep the bounds of their appointment.

Thank you for at least acknowledging what Schumer did was worse.
Click to expand...
Still Trump cannot accuse the Judge of bias. So keep apologising for Trumps unethical abuse of the separation of powers and influence and over reach on the judiciary.

Bias can only be proven once it has been formally investigated and proven as such.

Until then it is an authoritative abuse and erosion of the judiciary.

Keep those fingers in your ears and sing lalalala at Dear Leaders rampant abuse of the judiciary which you are so beholden to defend.
 
What about the time when Trump said, after a hispanic judge had ruled against him, that it was because the judge wad hispanic, that he had ruled against him?
 
lumeer said:
What about the time when Trump said, after a hispanic judge had ruled against him, that it was because the judge wad hispanic, that he had ruled against him?
Click to expand...

A more comprehensive list, in Donnie's own words:

www.brennancenter.org

In His Own Words: The President’s Attacks on the Courts

Donald Trump has displayed a troubling pattern of attacking judges and the courts for rulings he disagrees with.
www.brennancenter.org www.brennancenter.org

Includes Sonia Sotomayor, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Amy Berman Jackson, Gonzalo Curiel, asylum rulings, Bergdahl ruling, FISA, DACA, the Manhattan attack, immigration, sanctuary cities and more.
 
Viper87 said:
Justices are supposed to interpret the law, free of bias or favour. In the US, the constitution being the oldest law which always takes precedence over federal law and on down the list. Their responsibility is to hear, rule on matters and meet out fair and JUST justice in the eyes of the law.
Click to expand...

It would be wonderful if that were true. But given the rate the Turtle has been packing conservative justices into lifetime positions, nobody on the right actually believes it.
 
cerebus said:
It would be wonderful if that were true. But given the rate the Turtle has been packing conservative justices into lifetime positions, nobody on the right actually believes it.
Click to expand...
Was there condemnation for Trump's threat to a member of the US House of Representatives?

Or when he said to his supporters at a rally to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights against the Secretary of State?

www.theguardian.com

Donald Trump hints at assassination of Hillary Clinton by gun rights supporters

Republican presidential nominee says ‘second amendment people’ could stop Democrat choosing undesirable supreme court justices if she is elected
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
9582021bb6b03ceb9c82973160549ae8.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X