How is the Supreme Court confirmation going to go?

[Anonymous]

A substantial majority of the ABA rates ACB well qualified.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dear god...
Mike Lee is still going...
How many particles sprayed?

This is what Mike Lee said this morning.

He has a fever. Senator Lee is still contagious.

Since when is ten “the appropriate number of days”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A substantial majority of the ABA rates ACB well qualified.

Link?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A substantial majority of the ABA rates ACB well qualified.

Not unanimous as was the case with Kavanaugh (though they considered reevaluating due to his conduct during his confirmation hearing), Gorsuch, Garland, Sotomayor, or Kagan.

[Anonymous]

What are the huge pictures in the background? I can’t get a good look at them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What are the huge pictures in the background? I can’t get a good look at them.

Mostly constituents who will be unable to obtain health insurance if the ACA is struck down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A substantial majority of the ABA rates ACB well qualified.

Link?

I don’t know how to embed the Twitter link but it is a letter from the ABA to Feinstein and Graham.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dear god...
Mike Lee is still going...
How many particles sprayed?

This is what Mike Lee said this morning.

He has a fever. Senator Lee is still contagious.

Since when is ten “the appropriate number of days”?

He's been keeping his temp under control with tylenol and advil???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The dems are fear mongering again on pre-existing conditions. Yawn...

Where's the written guarantee from the GOP that they'll protect them???

The GOP is suing to get rid of protections for preexisting conditions as well as abolish the ACA, stripping millions of Americans of health insurance.

You may not fear that, but I sure do. I have preexisting conditions. I need health insurance to stay alive.

Yawn as much as you want. I hope a fly lands in your mouth and lays eggs, maggot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A substantial majority of the ABA rates ACB well qualified.

Link?

I don’t know how to embed the Twitter link but it is a letter from the ABA to Feinstein and Graham.

Here is the link.

https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2020.10.11%20Chair%20rating%20letter%20to%20Graham%20and%20Feinstein%20re%20nomination%20of%20Amy%20Coney%20Barrett_54996751_1.PDF

It is good to keep in mind that the ABA Standing Committee looks at legal ability. Skills only. No one really doubts that she has the intellectual horsepower to be a justice. The question is whether she will consistently place the Constitution of the United States of America over her personal views. There is a substantial question, given Barrett's own statements over time, whether she is able to do so. That is not a judgment about her ability. That is her choice. My view, is that she can adhere to both only by withdrawing her candidacy (though I see no reason why she need resign her seat from the 7th Circuit).

[Anonymous]

Intersting, the only members of the Senate Judiciary Committee who have mentioned religion in any form today are:

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA)
Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX)
Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE)
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO)

None of the democrats have done this. It is a literal strawman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A substantial majority of the ABA rates ACB well qualified.

Link?

I don’t know how to embed the Twitter link but it is a letter from the ABA to Feinstein and Graham.

Here is the link.

https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2020.10.11%20Chair%20rating%20letter%20to%20Graham%20and%20Feinstein%20re%20nomination%20of%20Amy%20Coney%20Barrett_54996751_1.PDF

It is good to keep in mind that the ABA Standing Committee looks at legal ability. Skills only. No one really doubts that she has the intellectual horsepower to be a justice. The question is whether she will consistently place the Constitution of the United States of America over her personal views. There is a substantial question, given Barrett's own statements over time, whether she is able to do so. That is not a judgment about her ability. That is her choice. My view, is that she can adhere to both only by withdrawing her candidacy (though I see no reason why she need resign her seat from the 7th Circuit).

She practiced litigation for 2 years. I am 31 and I have practiced in a courtroom longer than her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A substantial majority of the ABA rates ACB well qualified.

Link?

mc

No one doubts she’s smart. So is Ted Cruz, who went to Princeton and Harvard Law.

Neither one belongs on the SCOTUS.

There are many more qualified candidates. Merrick Garland comes to mind.

But she’s a right-wing judge who opposes abortion rights and the ACA as well as many conservative causes like guns.

These hearings are a sham. Wait for the next POTUS to place a new justice on the court.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Intersting, the only members of the Senate Judiciary Committee who have mentioned religion in any form today are:

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA)
Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX)
Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE)
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO)

None of the democrats have done this. It is a literal strawman.

I thought they were gaslighting to make it look like Dems were talking about it. They are doing a great job of gaslighting is there intent since we know Fox News won't show Dem sound bites.

From her eyes, she really looks like she knows she is wrong. I swear there os guilt there.