Posted on 01/04/2016 8:36:11 PM PST by Isara
Hyperbole aside there can be no doubt that Clinton would appoint Supreme Court justices who do not support the idea of limited government. And their decisions would reflect that.
I’d check the DNA on the panties hanging on that Christmas tree.
Anyhow, Donald didn’t praise squat, he accepted them as binding, which they legally are, because the Constitution has had an Achilles heel that we’ve known about since only about, er, Marbury v. Madison.
An establishment man could never be sold on rocking that boat; he’ll try to fix it in the customary way. Well pretty soon we’ll see what sheeply-dressed Senators are wolves.
Trump is a risk alright, but nobody’s been thinking about what a risk he poses to illiberal “liberals.” Being a good-idea guy he is potentially dangerous to anyone who isn’t thinking.
.
BS!
Trump praised all of the legislation from the bench!
.
Hyperbole aside there can be no doubt that Trump would appoint Supreme Court justices who do not support the idea of limited government.
Trump wants to be King, not president.
Right on, right on.
If she is elected it will happen.
They will first ban the sale and manufacture of guns. Then they will slowly confiscate existing guns. I'm sure that's their plan. Obama has mentioned his admiration for the Australian gun confiscation.
I doubt Trump has given any thought to the Supreme Court. But I agree with you that I don't see his picks being as conservative at Ted Cruz's picks would be.
LOL! Are you sure you're on the right forum?
“LOL! Are you sure you’re on the right forum?”
Yup! It’s called freedom of expression! Guess you haven’t heard of it!
You are good at BS all right. I await the citations so they can be critically appraised. You already have been weaseling away from your assertion anyhow in preparation for when I catch you, you can say you were saying that all the time and then act all super sophisticated again, in an attempt to pound in that aluminum-foil nail.
Boy you are transparent.
And you can hang that on Cruz’s Christmas tree and light it.
(Sotto voce: what a maroon of a persona, but I want to see just how illogical it gets and how hotly it defends the indefensible.)
Or you could admit the truth: that you (whoever is behind that persona) have been weaving the most amazing skein of BS just to get giggles out of it. If I play that game too long with someone, I might just inadvertently validate it rather than prove to be the reductio ad absurdam I hoped to be. So if you REALLY TRULY insist, you’ll “win.” What you’ll win, you’ve been warned about.
And doing it in the Lord’s name really isn’t all that marvelously clever. If you had chosen something lesser to blaspheme, you might have passed muster. But not this.
Trump = Giuliani II
Before they can be the oppositional party, they have to oppose something....
It needs to be pointed out that courts issue opinions, NOT legally binding diktates. The only way a court opinion can become law is if a legislature passes a LAW that agrees with that court opinion.
********************************************************************************
Ahh...tell that to police departments across this nation who issue Miranda warnings to the folks they arrest for crimes.
“Ahh...tell that to police departments across this nation who issue Miranda warnings to the folks they arrest for crimes.”
Sorry, I fail to see the connection.
.
You are deep in another psychotic crash.
Nothing you have posted has any relationship to me or anything I have posted at any time.
I am sick of living inside your head.
Frankly the place stinks to high heaven, and needs deep steam cleaning.
.
There is no connection.
There are lots of people posting things here that exist only in their own minds.
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.