Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Schumer says Trump pick must divulge thoughts on Roe v. Wade
The Washington Times ^ | July 9, 2018 | Stephen Dinan

Posted on 07/09/2018 12:47:18 PM PDT by jazusamo

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-90 next last
To: jazusamo
Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer launched a preemptive attack Monday on President Trump’s looming Supreme Court pick, saying the nominee must “share their personal views” on abortion in order to be confirmed.

Hey Putzhead:

You're not my supervisor...

To borrow an apt appellation along with a well-known meme...

61 posted on 07/09/2018 1:27:32 PM PDT by Zeppo ("Happy Pony is on - and I'm NOT missing Happy Pony")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

No, he must not tip his hand on how he would rule.

Or she.


62 posted on 07/09/2018 1:32:30 PM PDT by Not A Snowbird (I work for DHS. Not ashamed of it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Clinton’s pick would be nothing short of black robed tyrant that would be handpicked by NARAL.


63 posted on 07/09/2018 1:32:37 PM PDT by shanover (...To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.-S.Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo; All

From related threads ...

In stark contrast to the rights that the Founding States expressly protected in the Bill of Rights for example, post-17th Amendment (17A) ratification Sen. Schumer’s major constitutional problem with wasting the Senate’s time defending RvW is this.

There is no constitutionally enumerated right to have an abortion that Schumer can use to defend the politically correct right to murder unborn children, the phony “constitutional right” to have an abortion wrongly legislated from the bench by likewise post-17A ratification activist Supreme Court justices imo.

But the bottom line reason that we’re forced to listen to Schumer defend unconstitutional RvW is this imo. Regardless that the uniparty Congress has the constitutional authority to impeach and remove state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices from the bench, corrupt Congress has a track record for not lifting a finger to do so.

That’s why patriots need to give Pres. Trump as much of a new, state sovereignty-respecting, Trump supporting Congress as they can in the 2018 midterm elections.

In fact, and hypothetically speaking, even if Pres. Trump is able to fill the Court with state sovereinty-respecting justices, it remains that the Court can eventually swing back to liberal activism as long as we have the loose-cannon 17A.

The 17th Amendment needs to disappear, the 16th Amendment along with it.


64 posted on 07/09/2018 1:35:49 PM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Best election evah.

5.56mm


65 posted on 07/09/2018 1:38:07 PM PDT by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

All your base are belong to you Chuck. That’s the only people you are talking to.


66 posted on 07/09/2018 1:40:50 PM PDT by DungeonMaster (...the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Yeah, we’ll knack to you on that Chuck.


67 posted on 07/09/2018 1:43:45 PM PDT by skimbell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

...otherwise Chuck the Schmuck won’t vote for Trump’s pick.


68 posted on 07/09/2018 1:44:58 PM PDT by gogeo (No justice, no peace.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

Didn’t RBG tell a bunch of them to pound sand over this very issue during her hearing?


69 posted on 07/09/2018 1:48:00 PM PDT by skimbell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Hey Chuck, why not propose legislation making abortion legal at the federal level? Wouldn’t that be easier than holding a litmus test for a judge? Oh wait, it would never pass so no, no it’s not easier. But that should tell you something right there, shouldn’t it?


70 posted on 07/09/2018 1:54:23 PM PDT by pepsi_junkie (Russians couldnt have done a better job destroying sacred American institutions than Democrats have)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Chuck you Schmucky.


71 posted on 07/09/2018 1:58:22 PM PDT by beethovenfan (I always try to maximize my carbon footprint.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
Funny coming from Chuck the Schmuck considering Liberal Activist Judges are ruled by their Personal and Political Opinions, not the Rule of Law and Allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America..
72 posted on 07/09/2018 2:03:02 PM PDT by Kickass Conservative (The way Liberals carry on about Deportation, you would think "Mexico" was Spanish for "Auschwitz".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kiryandil

Carrying out liberal tactics? We’re
stronger than this.


73 posted on 07/09/2018 2:07:04 PM PDT by Lean-Right (Eat More Moose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Schmucky just can’t refrain from acting like he’s the Emperor of the USA with all his absolute pronouncements.


74 posted on 07/09/2018 2:07:38 PM PDT by Will88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

When was Chuck of junk Schummer become emperor?


75 posted on 07/09/2018 2:14:41 PM PDT by Retvet (Retvet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

NOPE....Chuckie you showed and even taught us how to play the game........ain’t going to happen, no way.........the democratic SCOTUS never did :) Thanks


76 posted on 07/09/2018 2:27:21 PM PDT by blueyon (The U. S. Constitution - read it and weep)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill
You can’t ask judges for a decision with no case in front of them. And you can’t hold them to a philosophy if you demand that they state one.

And asking for their personal views is immaterial. Chuckie is a dope. A good SCJ has to ignore their personal views and apply the constitution to the issues brought forth.

77 posted on 07/09/2018 2:37:07 PM PDT by Go Gordon (I gave my dog Grady a last name - Trump - because he loves tweets.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
The nominee should tell whoever raises the issue: "I'll render my opinion when you tell me: WHO represents the rights of the BABY??!!
78 posted on 07/09/2018 2:45:13 PM PDT by Thom Pain (The purpose of the U.S. Constitution is to protect us from our Government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Can’t she lie? David Souter lied through his hole hearing.


79 posted on 07/09/2018 3:14:36 PM PDT by kempster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

How about you shut the f up, chuckie?


80 posted on 07/09/2018 3:45:57 PM PDT by I want the USA back (Liberalism, like insanity, is the denial of reality.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-90 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson