Great... except that the Supreme Court hasn't exactly stepped in to stop the proceedings, now have they? They've had ample opportunity... but no action.
The same thing with the Election Fraud. The Supreme Court had ample opportunity to hear cases of coordinated voter fraud and election theft... but they have chosen to ignore it.
I don't want to hear any "righteous indignation" from any of these Supreme Court embarrassments. YOU failed our nation several times recently... so don't start claiming to care now.
SCOTUS has absolutely no power to step in, its all Commiegress. By law.
Kavanaugh, -IF- he made the statement, and that's how it reads, commented on one of the on-going cases, someone just "inferred" that Kavanaugh ALSO meant to say this in regard to the impeachment.
Read the article, carefully. Doesn't matter in the end, its not up to SCOTUS in any way to start, stop or delay an impeachment, they are just observers by SCOTUS blog on the issue.
100% this. SCOTUS cannot do anything to affect the proceedings. They have no enforcement power, they have no intercession power. A judge cannot round up all the bailiffs and go arrest people, or do anything.
They render opinions on cases they put before themselves. THAT IS IT.
Anyone saying otherwise is doing it for show, for ignorant citizens who think they have any other powers.
I see this as very bad news, supporting Demoncrats.
Not sure I see it as "bad news", if I read the article correctly. To my eye, and thought, and as I already said IF this even took place, its Kavanaugh telling libtards to stop filing lawsuits against Trump (one investigation still going on in NYC, need to research what else may be in play, still). As of now, and before we see some opinions rendered in the upcoming docketed cases, I am hoping the 3 "conservatives" will stick to the Constitution, thus I am giving Kavanaugh a pass on this one until we figure out where he stands.
I’m not so sure. I am not a scotus justice or constitutional scholar, but the Texas case seemed like it had real legs. I was shocked when they turned it down. Seemed to be a procedural reason of filing under Article 2 vs 3, so I was also surprised TX didn’t re-file the case appropriately. Anyways I think if Trump put 3 justices on and couldn’t get any of them to agree to hear any case, there’s some reason for that. It could be part of the plan or he could have picked 3 bad justices, I’m pretty sure it’s the plan.
Trump nominated 3 justices that were selected by McConnell and some bullshit deep state front group, who's name currently escapes me. He would have been better leaving the seats empty than filling them with deep state stooges.
Federalist Society I think it is, maybe you’re right, in which case the military is the only way. If Roberts has done what Lin Wood says he has, then that presents another good reason to use tribunals instead of civil courts including SCOTUS. Hopefully we are covered either way
Great... except that the Supreme Court hasn't exactly stepped in to stop the proceedings, now have they? They've had ample opportunity... but no action.
The same thing with the Election Fraud. The Supreme Court had ample opportunity to hear cases of coordinated voter fraud and election theft... but they have chosen to ignore it.
I don't want to hear any "righteous indignation" from any of these Supreme Court embarrassments. YOU failed our nation several times recently... so don't start claiming to care now.
SCOTUS has absolutely no power to step in, its all Commiegress. By law.
Kavanaugh, -IF- he made the statement, and that's how it reads, commented on one of the on-going cases, someone just "inferred" that Kavanaugh ALSO meant to say this in regard to the impeachment.
Read the article, carefully. Doesn't matter in the end, its not up to SCOTUS in any way to start, stop or delay an impeachment, they are just observers by SCOTUS blog on the issue.
100% this. SCOTUS cannot do anything to affect the proceedings. They have no enforcement power, they have no intercession power. A judge cannot round up all the bailiffs and go arrest people, or do anything. They render opinions on cases they put before themselves. THAT IS IT.
Anyone saying otherwise is doing it for show, for ignorant citizens who think they have any other powers.
I see this as very bad news, supporting Demoncrats.
Not sure I see it as "bad news", if I read the article correctly. To my eye, and thought, and as I already said IF this even took place, its Kavanaugh telling libtards to stop filing lawsuits against Trump (one investigation still going on in NYC, need to research what else may be in play, still). As of now, and before we see some opinions rendered in the upcoming docketed cases, I am hoping the 3 "conservatives" will stick to the Constitution, thus I am giving Kavanaugh a pass on this one until we figure out where he stands.
I’m not so sure. I am not a scotus justice or constitutional scholar, but the Texas case seemed like it had real legs. I was shocked when they turned it down. Seemed to be a procedural reason of filing under Article 2 vs 3, so I was also surprised TX didn’t re-file the case appropriately. Anyways I think if Trump put 3 justices on and couldn’t get any of them to agree to hear any case, there’s some reason for that. It could be part of the plan or he could have picked 3 bad justices, I’m pretty sure it’s the plan.
Trump nominated 3 justices that were selected by McConnell and some bullshit deep state front group, who's name currently escapes me. He would have been better leaving the seats empty than filling them with deep state stooges.
Federalist Society I think it is, maybe you’re right, in which case the military is the only way. If Roberts has done what Lin Wood says he has, then that presents another good reason to use tribunals instead of civil courts including SCOTUS. Hopefully we are covered either way
Can't have preconditions for nomination. I will bet this was covered in the hearings.