It’s pretty clear that their numbers can be changed.
The only fair way to increase that number would be to set the date after the next Presidential election. Especially since Biden didn’t say he was going to do it during his campaign.
Fair? HERHAW! Did you say fair? This is politics.
Ok, you don’t like fair, how about it being the only way an ever expanding court doesn’t happen. And also the only way half the country doesn’t immediately have no respect for their verdicts.
If the reason was really that the court needs to expand because of workload the best way would be to limit that expansion to one justice per Presidential term starting with the next term until the desired number has been reached.
Maybe you missed it, but I am not in favor of the idea. It is perfectly legal however, that was my point.
It’s legal. But it’s also a disgusting tactic.
3 Likes
I don’t like it either
1 Like
Yeah but.
That’s exactly correct. Stringing the base along for votes.
It’s not a difficult concent
Continue to be a boiling frog.
1 Like
I heard all this from you guys during the 8 years of the guy before the former President. Socialism and communism snd mass inflation snd everything else in between were judt around the corner.
I’m speaking of this situation only at the moment.
We can see the increments. We can your hero went from not going to talk about it to creating a commission and seriously considering it while a bill is being proffered.
Quit trying to tell me I’m not seeing what we are all seeing just because it’s hard to admit being wrong about how it would never get to this point we are at right at this very moment.
1 Like
This is a bit different.
This is much more serious than stringing the left wing base along for “living national wages” and such things.
This would be a generational defining event. It’s not something to take likely.
1 Like
I don’t want it to happen and imo it won’t
You made up the serious considering of this bill. I know why but you made that up though.
Stop calling him j’biden…it’s King Joey! 
J’Biden the “trafficker in cheef”
I never said seriously considering the BILL. Read the sentence as written, not what you feel it is saying. I said they were seriously considering packing the court while they are proffering a bill.
Why would Biden create a commission if he was not seriously considering the option?
You don’t create a commission if you don’t give a ■■■■ and care less about the outcome.
1 Like
Your point? We now have fully open borders facilitated by an entirely disinterested White House, legislation introduced to pack the Supreme Court, and Democratic Congress members openly calling to abolish the police while simultaneously encouraging violence. If the hammer and sickle fit, pick 'em up.
3 Likes
We do not have fully open borders. Those huge numbers you keep hearing about those are arrests…
Of course you do. That’s exactly what you do
My apologies. I did misread your post.
