The Supreme Court of the United States Thread

#10,876
#10,876
turbovol said:
You're very sensitive to facts. Oh, wait: Now one of you will come back with the statement that that government or lefties wanted to put the rubes in camps. That nonsense has been trotted out many times. Very silly.
Click to expand...
The PF when Turbo says one of us is sensitive to facts:

1720036043672.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: CagleMtnVol, Vol since 77, JOEY’S ALL VOL !!! and 9 others
#10,879
#10,879
turbovol said:
Perhaps it's slipped your mind that Trump lied to the American people for months in an attempt to subvert/overturn an American presidential election---including demanding that Georgia's top election officials commit felony vote fraud and just give him 8,000+ votes or whatever the number. And it did so after it had been affirmed by courts, state election officials and his own attorney general and WH lawyers that there had been no vote fraud and that he'd lost the election. No other president has done that or incited a mob attack on the U.S. Capitol that got people killed. Have you forgotten? Apparently so. And he led an effort to submit fraudulent electors in several states.

It was all unprecedented--and it's the reason he belongs in prison. He also committed major bank fraud and was convicted for it---and was adjudicated a rapist. Have we had other presidents who were affirmed by a judge to have committed sexual assault?

He now owes more than HALF a BILLION in civil fines for his crimes---and that makes him a MASSIVE national security threat, as he's deeply corrupt and a man who I'm sure will be approached--if he hasn't already--but people representing Russia, or China, or SA, or all of them, offering him money in exchange for favors should he get elected. He's got eager to again be Putin's gay lover. He's got this inexplicable ax to grind with NATO--and I can assure the sodbusters that Trump didn't just decide on his own to start hating on NATO--a bedrock of American foreign policy since the 1950s. He would have got that from Russia. As president he was in love with dictators and cold to America's longtime and vital allies. That is treasonous behavior--period. The man belongs in prison.
Click to expand...
you understand, that a president has the right to challenge any election. Remember? When your libtard party did that in 2016 and many still said Trump was illegitably elected. So don't give me that bull crap. there was plenty of voting issues and a lot of underhanded stuff that went on in 202. So he had all the legal rights to challenge the election. So don't give me that bull crap. Bank fraud? Seriously you need to pull your liberal head out of your butt and stop watching MSNBC and quit reading mother Jones
 
#10,882
#10,882
Someone was posting yesterday or Monday that the Supreme Court ruling will affect admissibility of evidence in the form of testimony from government officials and I criticized that as an incorrect read and irrational.

My apologies. Not going to go find it but you were correct and I was wrong. That holding is alarming and seems to be designed to undermine specifically the Trump cases. I don't know who else is going to know about a President's intent than other officials. Again, this seems designed to help Trump, specifically.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85, RockyTop85, GroverCleveland and 1 other person
#10,883
#10,883
lawgator1 said:
Someone was posting yesterday or Monday that the Supreme Court ruling will affect admissibility of evidence in the form of testimony from government officials and I criticized that as an incorrect read and irrational.

My apologies. Not going to go find it but you were correct and I was wrong. That holding is alarming and seems to be designed to undermine specifically the Trump cases. I don't know who else is going to know about a President's intent than other officials. Again, this seems designed to help Trump, specifically.
Click to expand...
You still get a like due to the self acknowledgement you were incorrect but no on the rest of it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85, CobbVol, MemphisVol77 and 2 others
#10,884
#10,884
lawgator1 said:
Someone was posting yesterday or Monday that the Supreme Court ruling will affect admissibility of evidence in the form of testimony from government officials and I criticized that as an incorrect read and irrational.

My apologies. Not going to go find it but you were correct and I was wrong. That holding is alarming and seems to be designed to undermine specifically the Trump cases. I don't know who else is going to know about a President's intent than other officials. Again, this seems designed to help Trump, specifically.
Click to expand...
Ditto on what @NorthDallas40 said.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#10,886
#10,886
turbovol said:
You're very sensitive to facts. Oh, wait: Now one of you will come back with the statement that that government or lefties wanted to put the rubes in camps. That nonsense has been trotted out many times. Very silly.
Click to expand...
Lol… You said that. You said that on this very board.

Except it was Earls instead of Rubes. 🤷‍♀️
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland
#10,887
#10,887
85SugarVol said:
I watched Jamie Raskin breathlessly bleat out Monarch, Monarchy, Monarchist, and Constitutional Monarchy all on the same CNN segment last night.
Click to expand...
Jamie Raskin serves a useful purpose. On many issues, I can conserve what little intellectual energy I still have by simply adopting a position 540 degrees from Raskin's.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JOEY’S ALL VOL !!!, GroverCleveland and StarRaider
#10,889
#10,889
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Vol423 and StarRaider
#10,890
#10,890
jmacvols1 said:
Supreme Court ruling on Chevron starting to pay dividends...

justthenews.com

Federal judge cites SCOTUS Chevron ruling when halting HHS rule on gender identity discrimination

U.S. District Judge Louis Guirola agreed with 15 conservative states that sued the administration in his ruling, agreeing that the new law exceeded the government's authority.
justthenews.com justthenews.com
Click to expand...
Wonderful. Single biggest SCOTUS ruling in my lifetime. Heaven forbid we make lawmakers be as specific as possible with the laws they pass.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol423, hog88, 82_VOL_83 and 4 others
#10,891
#10,891
  • Like
Reactions: Vol423, hog88 and jmacvols1
#10,892
#10,892
85SugarVol said:
Good.

Federal Agencies don’t get to dictate the rules. That is the job of Congress.
Click to expand...

Neither Congress nor anybody else can write laws or regulations that cover every contingency or circumstance. Rules and regulations
are always interpreted at every level--city, county, state, federal, courts, etc. If you challenge a moving violation in court, a judge will interpret
the law against the particular circumstances of your case. The same holds for practically everything. Without people interpreting rules and laws, you'd have anarchy. As is, this rogue Supreme Court's decision will just result in more court cases, and we have too many of those at every level already.

 
#10,893
#10,893
turbovol said:
Neither Congress nor anybody else can write laws or regulations that cover every contingency or circumstance. Rules and regulations
are always interpreted at every level--city, county, state, federal, courts, etc. If you challenge a moving violation in court, a judge will interpret
the law against the particular circumstances of your case. The same holds for practically everything. Without people interpreting rules and laws, you'd have anarchy. As is, this rogue Supreme Court's decision will just result in more court cases, and we have too many of those at every level already.

Click to expand...

Then we must have been totally dysfunctional prior to 1984 when it was passed. How did we survive for over 200 years? Amazing.

Also, any other fake molestation accusations you want to make?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40, MemphisVol77, hog88 and 5 others
#10,894
#10,894
turbovol said:
Neither Congress nor anybody else can write laws or regulations that cover every contingency or circumstance. Rules and regulations
are always interpreted at every level--city, county, state, federal, courts, etc. If you challenge a moving violation in court, a judge will interpret
the law against the particular circumstances of your case. The same holds for practically everything. Without people interpreting rules and laws, you'd have anarchy. As is, this rogue Supreme Court's decision will just result in more court cases, and we have too many of those at every level already.

Click to expand...

You do realize Chevron was a relatively new precedent, right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland
#10,895
#10,895
turbovol said:
Clarence Thomas and Alito are now at home, sitting by their Trac Phones, waiting for a call from one of their rich, dark-money
conservative friends offering a secret luxury vacation. For the corrupt grifters, it's now "personal hospitality" time!
Click to expand...
Yep… next thing they’ll do is call up some mercs and send out the squads…..
Bang bang, shoot 'em up
Bang bang, blow you away
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top