Ginsburg to retire?


#63

I know Rove will be indicted any day now…

Allan


#64

LOL. much ado over nothing.

Allan


#65

Trump is not an extremist in any sense. He was purloined as a D during the R primary in 2016.

if you ever heard him on Howard Stern you would realize that he is a tolerant and humorous personality.

I could easily see him finding a female with moderate to only slight right bias rulings and I think people would be fine with this.

It might take 2 or 3 picks to find the right one. No matter what I expect the first one to be met with withering opposition. Maybe he tries to get the right pick the first time or maybe he understands the emotion and finds a pick that the opposition can expend its energy on??

At any option, I am certain he will seat (not just pick) an outstanding judge that will have only fringe objections.


#66

He’s 2 for 2 in extremist SCOTUS nominees.
If he were a moderate.

One of the 2 would have been Garland.

but nope 2 for 2.

He owns the extremist tag for now.

Allan


#67

Everyone knows Trump is not afraid to offend the left or any DC swamp dweller.

I think President Trump will balance a clean record with any left or right tendencies. A clean record and personal candor will be paramount.

Any motion to the right of RBG will be a win for everyone. It would be unnecessary to swing that seat too far to have a solid and fair court.


#68

A fair court would have included Garland. Instead of Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.

Allan


#69

Probably a mute point.

I find neither of his picks more than slightly off center philosophically.


#70

You dont know much about SCOTUS justices then.

Both Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are two of the most right wing justices to date.

Allan


#71

Why?

Fate was a factor in their picks, timing, and election results.

The more you look behind, the less you see ahead.

:eyes:


#72

Nope. I sure do not. I will keep looking ahead.

:eyes:


#73

at least you are honest enough to admit you know nothing about SCOTUS justices and the leanings.

I commend you for your honesty,

Allan


#74

Sorry for what? Some on here were setting a “standard” when SC Justices should retire because their mental capacity starts to slip.

Just pointing out that Boozin’ Brett’s brain may already be slipping. Years of alcohol abuse does that. I’d keep my eye on him. He might glow another gasket.


#75

What if Trump nominated Merrick Garland? He wasn’t really a bad choice.


#76

That’s what he should have done.


#77

Trump has a list. A published list. Garland isn’t on that list.

I truly doubt that Trump would give the appearance of acceding to libs by diverging from that list.

Back when Garland was nominated, he was replacing Scalia. I saw that as a shift to the left.

Today, if Garland replaced Ginsberg, it would constitute a shift to the right. I could live with that. It’s not what Trump said he would do though. (And to me, sticking to his pledge on judicial picks has been his best achievement.)


#78

Here’s hoping for two more!!


#79

As much as I despise the leftist Democrats, I think you are grossly overstating the potential of their reaction to a third Trump nominee.


#80

I said the same as Spade.

It’s not what I am HOPING for, mind you. I truly hope you are right and I am wrong.


#81

If he nominated a woman, such as Joan Larsen or Amy Barret, it would defange much of the leftist opposition.


#82

That’s ridiculous. Neither of his successful nominees are extremists. Well, unless you consider being a Constitutionalist an extreme position, that is.