CBC Members Firmly Opposed to Trump SCOTUS Pick

Black Press USA ^ | September 14, 2018 | Stacy Brown

[Bonemaker]

“...marginalized communities...”

Self-marginalized.

[ZULU]

If the Congressional Black Carcass opposes hom, we KNOW he is the right choice!

[ReaganGeneration2]

“judge who so frequently questions key legal precedents endangers the legal framework that has benefited African Americans”

BK wrote hundreds of decisions. But...No examples. So no minds changed. These people are frauds.

[Caipirabob]

CBC is a racist organization, period. If they don't immediately open up their group to people of all persuasions they can all go to hell.

[Lent]

And in late-breaking news: the sun rises in the east and sets in the west.

[Beautiful_Gracious_Skies]

CBC collective IQ = 180

[BitWielder1]

Even if President Trump nominated a black far left radical, CBC would still be against him because of Trump.

[milagro]

Yup, think Clarence Thomas might agree with you on that!

[madison10]

I do not care. Their constituents are barely the law abiding anyway.

[trebb]

If the CBC was all for Kavanaugh, that would be news....;-}

[hanamizu]

Caucus members said they’ve spent more than a century fighting to achieve equal protection

---

“more than a century”...I had no idea that BC members were that old. Maybe it’s time for some fresh thinking.

[Bayan]

CBC opposition is great endorsement for rational people.

[leprechaun9]

Why does the Congress permit a group of racists to organize within the Constitutionally defined legislative branch. Their membership is based on the color of their skin. It is no wonder there is so much division in the country, when the congress is a collection of special interest groups rather than a single group that represents the interests of the entire country!

[butlerweave]

CBC members are against everything except making themselves Rich

[shanover]

CBC is a bunch of racist political hacks and malcontents.

[upchuck]

“Judge Kavanagh’s record as a federal judge gives every indication that he lacks respect for well-established precedents and would engage in aggressive judicial activism that could mean the reversal of important decisions that have afforded African Americans a measure of equal citizenship in a nation that has often stood in the way of its pursuit,” Richmond said.

Richmond states this as a matter of fact. It's a matter of bullhockey. Let's have some specific examples where Kavanagh, "... lacks respect for well-established precedents and would engage in aggressive judicial activism..." There are NONE! If there were, the LIBS would have brought it out in the hearings.

[gov_bean_ counter]

Have two words for all these in love with the the starry eyed deceased...

Dred Scott

[hal ogen]

I “firmly oppose” the always racist cbc.