Skip to comments.'Take Away His Vote' Dem Rep Wants To Nullify Justice Thomas' Rulings With 'Retroactive Recusal'
Posted on 10/05/2011 5:34:50 AM PDT by Pacothecat
Separations of Powers Not: 'Take Away His Vote' Dem Congresswoman Wants To Nullify Justice Thomas' Rulings With 'Retroactive Recusal'
The lunatics are showing their fear and any MSM types that attempt to take them seriously will be dismissed.
Good idea. Let’s take away ALL SCOTUS decisions. Otherwise, this whole notion of going “back to the Constitution” is a pipe dream.
Ginsberg never recused herself in cases where she and her husband had financial ties. Didn’t hear anyone on the left complain about that. “Kevin James” Kagan was part of the healthcare bill process while at the White House. Don’t seem to hear Dems insist he/she bow out.
Louise Slaughter. ‘Nuff said.
I woulda guessed “Queen” Sheila Jackson Lee came up with this lunatic notion.
Buckle up, folks. 2012 is going to be a very wild ride.
She says 'There is such a thing as Retro-active Recusal. We are looking into that. It (Citizens United case) was decided 5-4. If we can take away his vote it would wipe that out. It would lose . How about that?"
She is talking about trying to get congress to over-rule Citizen's United case decision because of Justice Thomas's wife's activities. This decision really strikes Democrats nerves. Back in Bush's first term liberals on TV would make fun of conservatives complaining about the court's decisions, and claim it is destructive to question the decisions.
I think that what we are seeing the beginnings of a coup d’ etat. Think of what the RATs are doing: 1. Taking away a SC justice’s vote; 2. Gov. Perdue’s testing eliminating 2012 elections; 3. 0bambi’s usurpation of Congressional powers; 4. debasing the currency; 5. subjugation by unemployment; and 6. advertising how to hack into voting machines.
This is serious stuff. All this campaigning and polling may amount to nothing with an “October surprise” to disband Congress and the Supreme Court, and 0bambi declaring himself “President for Life”. And make no mistake, law enforcement and the military will NOT defend us. They will only follow orders as their counterparts did 73 years ago.
Prepare for the worst; better to be pleasantly surprised than to be enslaved through inaction.
I notice that the article coyly never mentioned her name in writing...
These attacks will ratchet up in the coming months. Why? There is a lot of solid evidence as to Kagan’s role in developing Obamacare. It will be hard for her NOT to recuse. Therefore, they will attempt to get one from our side, wither by forcing Thomas to recuse, and when that fails, use all the trumped up evidence against him as a basis for giving Kagan cover when she doesn’t bow out..
You’re right. These people are dangerously drunk with power. Anyone who thinks “it can’t happen here” is helping it to happen here.
She's a RAT from NY.
Not a chance. The left may have big plans, but it's not 1938, and we are not the Weimar Republic. We will not go quietly in to that goodnight, and by God's grace we will not go at all.
As usual, the RAT broads are the among the ugliest bitches on this planet, whereas most of the Republican women are good looking.
sorta reminds me of Dick Gephardt running for POTUS, shouting to the crowd that he’d “use executive orders to overturn any bad thing that the Supreme Court might do”.
“There is such a thing as Retro-active Recusal.”
Never heard of it Louise. Google thinks you just invented it.
This is worse than Arlen Specter’s “Scottish Law”. At least that exists, in Scotland.
Are the Democrats actually doing those things, or just talking about doing those things?
Is SHE idiotic enough not to understand that if this were to succeed, it would open the door to potentially reversing all close decisions since the founding of the country?
That is a good software trick. ;-) The image appeared quite well in FR editor’s “preview”...
These Nazi socialists actually believe they can get away with taking away a vote from a member of a separate, co-equal branch of the government. How about if the SC just votes to nullify every action of congress going back to the first congress.
How about we invalidate her votes.
What difference does it make? Even if they don’t have the guts to do it themselves, it gives encouragement to those who do.
Typical, nasty, pissed-off, angry, bitter, power-hungry, dykey, commie dem broad.
Our new eleciton slogan should be “Slaughter in 2012”...just to piss her off.
“...How about if the SC just votes to nullify every action of congress going back to the first congress...”
Or- even better - nullify ANY action that SHE personally was involved with/signed onto.
That would really stick it to this ugly-ass fascist witch, wouldn’t it?
One of my goals was to live to see Arlen SPhincter thrown out of office.
RE Slaughter: Another typical Dem fascist witch.
>>Are the Democrats actually doing those things, or just talking about doing those things?<<
In some cases (debasing the currency; 0bambis usurpation of Congressional powers; debasing the currency; subjugation by unemployment), they are ALREADY doing them. For others (taking away a SC justices vote; Gov. Perdues testing eliminating 2012 elections; 0bambis usurpation of Congressional powers; subjugation by unemployment; and advertising how to hack into voting machines; advertising how to hack into voting machines), they project their desires.
New York ping
” This is worse than Arlen Specters Scottish Law. At least that exists, in Scotland.”
The Scots are on our side.....my minister and best friend is from Glasgow.
Thanks for the ping.
You know the former leader of the Scottish Conservatives is Fieldmarshaldj's distant relative.
I've always wanted to try single Islay Scotch.
There is such a thing as Retro-active Recusal.
I think she’s getting it confused with
” Is SHE idiotic enough not to understand ..”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.