Whomever kisses the ring with the most enthusiasm. You think DJT cares about track record, policies, or orthodoxy?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It appears Kethledge may be the best hope for the democrats.

Barrett is backed by social conservatives who want to overturn roe v wade.

Kavanaugh is backed by Breitbart and Ann Coulter.

That leaves only Kethledge as a somewhat sane choice?

Kavanaugh or Barrett seem the likely choices

Both Catholic and Barrett is also a female and part of the wacky cult and her track record is pretty thin, which is good for hearings, but bad as a way to see just how much of a true believer she really is. Remember Pence has been interviewing the candidates too. Surely he didn’t meet with Barrett alone. Mother would not approve.

Kethledge will be the pick, but expect a major headfake soon. Trump wants some drama before the big reveal.

Anonymous wrote:It appears Kethledge may be the best hope for the democrats.

Barrett is backed by social conservatives who want to overturn roe v wade.

Kavanaugh is backed by Breitbart and Ann Coulter.

That leaves only Kethledge as a somewhat sane choice?

Kavanaugh or Barrett seem the likely choices

It appears Kethledge may be the best hope for the democrats.

Barrett is backed by social conservatives who want to overturn roe v wade.

Kavanaugh is backed by Breitbart and Ann Coulter.

That leaves only Kethledge as a somewhat sane choice?

Anonymous wrote:The Democrats will oppose anyone who Trump nominates. If he nominated a clone of Kennedy, they would oppose him.

Given it will likely be proven that Kennedy was a tainted justice from Citizens United onward, no, I will pass on a clone. Pre 2010 Kennedy? Sure.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
It matters.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/04/trump-supreme-court-pick-family-optics-694788

How sad that it matters.

It isn't just trump. I mean do you see zaftig heifers in high power jobs in top tier cities?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-01-09/the-high-end-workouts-women-are-signing-up-for-to-become-the-boss

Anonymous wrote:
It matters.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/04/trump-supreme-court-pick-family-optics-694788

How sad that it matters.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She is on the final 5 according to today's news. Trump needs to expand his list a little bit. Too few Ivy leaguers.

Is that because ivy leaguers represent every day Americans? She is a bright, experienced, cute, and a mother of 7. None of those on the Court. We need some diversity. Go Barrett.

Really? Really? I can't even come up with the words to respond to this.

Someone else step in please.

It matters.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/04/trump-supreme-court-pick-family-optics-694788

Anonymous wrote:Supposedly she bombed her interview and it is down to the two K men.

If you bomb your interview when the interviewer is Trump, you have a lot of homework to catch up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She is on the final 5 according to today's news. Trump needs to expand his list a little bit. Too few Ivy leaguers.

Is that because ivy leaguers represent every day Americans? She is a bright, experienced, cute, and a mother of 7. None of those on the Court. We need some diversity. Go Barrett.

Really? Really? I can't even come up with the words to respond to this.

Someone else step in please.

Supposedly she bombed her interview and it is down to the two K men.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I highly doubt Trump is going with a Catholic, much less a female one from a second rate law school. Trump wants a justice from central casting that looks the part, has a gilded degree, is male, Protestant, and loyal to him.

Troll

Not trolling. Just stating what I think Trump will do.

Anonymous wrote:So, is it right to have an atheist on the court? Are they going to quiz him/her about how he will treat suits involving churches?

Did the atheist write published articles saying that atheists should recuse themselves from those cases?

Anonymous wrote:So, is it right to have an atheist on the court? Are they going to quiz him/her about how he will treat suits involving churches?

Go ahead. I fail to see the issue.

So, is it right to have an atheist on the court? Are they going to quiz him/her about how he will treat suits involving churches?