Ruth Bader Ginsburg Rails Against Trump.....

yer asking to get reamed dude. want that?

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

That's not really a "threat " to assup piggy mamboolah. Since Mr.DOTY 4 Times is EKIM'S mentor, HE prolly showed EKIM how to " ASSume " the position when EKIM went into the gloryhole bidness ! And it's a position he STILL ASSumes him / her self at HIS Austin gloryholes and after the reach around crew meetings !

She's feeble. Needs to retire and die.

In the long run this has nothing to do with right or left, this has to do with the tradition of justices staying out of politics, the legality of Ginsberg now expected to recuse herself if a case involving either Hillary or Trump comes before the court (remember 2000), and the ethics of three SEPARATE branches of government.

On a side note; today I heard Allen Colmes make the claim that the SCOTUS is Conservative. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

LOL, everyone of the decisions the court makes is political. It is why now there is usually a 4-4 split.

One thing I disagree with many of the "pundits" concerning this is the issue of "recusing" herself from cases.

That's bullshit. Once a Supreme Court Justice is sworn in, they can vote any way they want to on any issue they want to.

Historically, Thurgood Marshal would never show up for Death Penalty cases. His premis was, it made no difference what the circumstances or how terrible the crime was, or how well the attorneys argued it, or for that matter, anything.He was anti death penalty. Period. He voted in that manner.

Of course, the Constitution offers a remedy. If Congress does not like the way a Justice is acting, the House can vote to impeach, a trial will be held in the Senate, and a verdict will be reached.

Other than that, a Supreme Court Justice can say what they want to say, and vote any way they wish for no other reason than......."just because". They are not bound by precedent, how another court voted, the phases of the moon, or political pressure.

That is why the confirmation process is so important. You better find out this shit BEFORE they take that oath.

Uh, Jackie... You should check canon #5...

http://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judge...-states-judges

"Canon 5: A Judge Should Refrain from Political Activity

(A) General Prohibitions. A judge should not:

(2) make speeches for a political organization or candidate, or publicly endorse or oppose a candidate for public office;"

She's feeble. Needs to retire and die. Originally Posted by TheDaliLama

if she retires, obama will at least have his pick

yer asking to get reamed dude. want that?

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

That's not really a "threat " to assup piggy mamboolah. Since Mr.DOTY 4 Times is EKIM'S mentor, HE prolly showed EKIM how to " ASSume " the position when EKIM went into the gloryhole bidness ! And it's a position he STILL ASSumes him / her self at HIS Austin gloryholes and after the reach around crew meetings ! Originally Posted by Rey Lengua

what's considered a threat?

what's considered a threat? Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

Damn, gay rey loves showing him getting his ass pounded. He must be trolling for more hard cock.

Uh, Jackie... You should check canon #5...

http://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judge...-states-judges

"Canon 5: A Judge Should Refrain from Political Activity

(A) General Prohibitions. A judge should not:

(2) make speeches for a political organization or candidate, or publicly endorse or oppose a candidate for public office;" Originally Posted by gfejunkie

The problem with this "code" is it does not trump the Constitution.

The ONLY recourse against a sitting Justice is impeachment. He or she can do anything they damned well please and still sit on the Court if Congress does not have the will to impeach and convict. For instance, if a Justice is caught driving under the influence, they can be arrested, jailed, and prosecuted, but until impeached and convicted as prescribed by the Constitution, they are still a Supreme Court Justice.

That Code of Conduct is not Law. It is merely a guide as to what agregious acts would warrant removal if Congress should decide to take that course.If Congress does not follow through, there is nothing you, I, or anybody else can do.

All the more reason for recusement.

If she had any integrity she'd resign.

If she had any integrity she'd resign. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

In her mind, she has no issues with integrity.

That's because she defines "integrity" based on the Socialist/Progressive/Democrat mantra that puts Party and Idealology before Country, and even the Law.

I expect her to retire after HRC is inaugurated.

this is a first

although I haven't read or heard her exact words and therefore this may be withdrawn

but I heard ruth bader ginsberg actually apologized for her remarks

that, any sort of apology except some lame, "im sorry that you are offended", is very unleftist like, therefore I am amazed

what's considered a threat? Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

" what's considered a threat ? " Anyone with an IQ above 2 is a threat , anyone that disagrees with EKIM'S positions that he spews in these threads is a threat, any of the truck stop owners that don't approve of EKIM'S " therapeutic spas" at their establishments and threaten to close him down or have him arrested for trespassing is a threat, and when his local government run clinic won't provide him with any more Depends or preparation H lip balm for his " therapeutic spas " !