The Supreme Court, Mitch McConnell and the Wages of Hypocrisy

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

So everyone has probably heard by now that Justice Anthony Kennedy, who for years has been the fifth vote in the Supreme Court's many 5-4 decisions, is planning to retire by the end of July.

Some of you may remember, in the far-off days of that venerable year that the ancients called "2016," that there was a kerfuffle over a Supreme Court vacancy. Maybe, now that you are reminded, you are wondering what that kerfuffle was all about. You might recall that this guy Merrick Garland ended up being important in some way or another, although maybe you couldn't say exactly why. You know it had something to do with Obama and the Republicans. And maybe if you were really following it, you might remember this chap Neil Gorsuch eventually doing...something or other, something important.

I am here to remind you of the one name you should have remembered and which you should remember from now until the end of time: the name of the noxious hive of carrion beetles wearing a human-suit made out of recycled douches, or as the good people of Kentucky know him, Mitch McConnell.

In early 2016, Justice Antonin Scalia died suddenly in his sleep. As of early 2016 and until late January of 2017, the sitting president was a chap called Barack Obama. You may have heard of him. Because there was a vacancy on the court, and because he was the President, Obama nominated a replacement. His replacement was a fairly bland but extremely nice centre-of-the-scale guy called Merrick Garland, whose name had been floated earlier during the last Supreme Court vacancy in 2010 - by Republicans, as an example of the kind of nominee they would vote for.

Now, Supreme Court nominations are made by the sitting President, like a lot of other federal nominations. But, like a lot of other federal nominations, it is the Senate that confirms the nominee - ticks the boxes that say "Ayup" and lets the person officially go to work. So when Merrick Garland was then nominated in March 2016, he went to the Senate for confirmation. The same Senate that, at the time, was being controlled by the radioactive swamp fungus that had the memories and face of a man who the good people of Kentucky call "Mitch McConnell."

Mitch McConnell is the Republican party's Senate majority leader. This means that so long as the Republicans maintain their squeaky-thin 51-seat majority in the Senate, Mitch McConnell is the guy who decides what the Senate gets to talk about at any given time. That meant Mitch McConnell was in charge of whether or not the Senate ought to confirm Merrick Garland.

Mitch McConnell did not even hold hearings on whether to consider Garland's nomination. Instead, he kept the nation's highest court operating one judge short for almost a year until Obama's term timed out and a Republican president had a shot at making his own nominee (the otherwise-innocent Neil Gorsuch.)

To hear Mitch say it, it was simply undemocratic for the Senate to confirm a Supreme Court nominee in an election year. No; the right thing to do was wait until after the election, once the people had spoken, so that the nominee would have the blessing of Democracy behind them and the seal of the people's will on their nomination form.

So it was that Merrick Garland languished in nomination limbo for eleven months until the inauguration of Donald Trump, who then appointed Neil Gorsuch instead and proceeded to crow about up to this very day, because Donald Trump has the sportsmanship of an impotent wife-beating Argentinean soccer player high on methamphetamine.

And that brings us all back from that mythical, antediluvian era to the present day, where Anthony Kennedy is retiring just a few months away from the 2018 midterm elections. And what did the sentient cloud of homicidal flesh-eating nanomachines from the future assembled in the shape of a man the good people of Kentucky call "Mitch McConnell" have to say about it?

"Well, it's not really an election year."

The plan is to get a replacement for Kennedy before the Senate and confirmed as soon as possible before the November midterm elections take place. For nearly a year, McConnell shrugged off calls to hold hearings on Garland's nomination, because there was no rule saying that he couldn't do that. Now he's doing the opposite, because there's no rule saying that he can't, and because Republican voters refuse to punish their elected representatives for their dishonesty and hypocrisy. Mitch McConnell is playing fucking Calvinball and getting away with it.

I really can't over-emphasise the importance of a Supreme Court seat in US politics. In a day that included news about a Trump-Putin summit in just a couple weeks and news that the North Koreans are still working on their nuclear capacity, this is what caught my eye. The Supreme Court is the institution that decides what the Constitution means. They are the guys you rely on to protect democracy when Congress won't and the law can't. If Trump decides he can pardon himself, it will be the Supreme Court that decides whether or not he's allowed to do that. And if the US turns into a kleptocracy where the commander-in-chief can plunder the state and pardon himself for whatever crimes he commits in the process, the rest of the world will suffer.

Go vote. If you're American and you're reading this, go find out the dates you need to vote in your primary and general elections. Do it right now. Do it on Google. I don't care what party you're from. Go vote.

A vote for anyone but Democrats is a vote for Trump. Voting for Bernie was voting for Trump. Voting for Bernie caused this. Stein didn't help either.

The SC should be a democratically elected seat. The SC is supposed to be a check and balance against Congress and the Presidency, not it's pawn, which is literally is clearly, as Congress and the President have the SC by the testicles.

We literally need a new government, this one is broken.

Also hey, Elaine Chao, your husband is a bitch and a bully, and a Nazi. You want us to lay off him? HE NEEDS TO STOP RAPING AMERICA!

To add to the above, a seat on the SCotUS lasts indefinitely. You retire, die in office, or you get impeached...which never, ever, ever happens.

Get a terrible person in, and you have to sit around for a few decades and wait for them to die.

Thaluikhain:
To add to the above, a seat on the SCotUS lasts indefinitely. You retire, die in office, or you get impeached...which never, ever, ever happens.

Get a terrible person in, and you have to sit around for a few decades and wait for them to die.

Scalia was a Reagan nominee (so was Kennedy).

Reagan has been fucking this country for over 40 years.

Saelune:
A vote for anyone but Democrats is a vote for Trump. Voting for Bernie was voting for Trump. Voting for Bernie caused this. Stein didn't help either.

lolno. Sorry, none of this is true, in any way. Wanting the democrats to be an actual left-leaning party didn't cause Trump.

BreakfastMan:

Saelune:
A vote for anyone but Democrats is a vote for Trump. Voting for Bernie was voting for Trump. Voting for Bernie caused this. Stein didn't help either.

lolno. Sorry, none of this is true, in any way. Wanting the democrats to be an actual left-leaning party didn't cause Trump.

If you cared about left-wing values, you would do anything to keep Trump out of power.

BreakfastMan:

Saelune:
A vote for anyone but Democrats is a vote for Trump. Voting for Bernie was voting for Trump. Voting for Bernie caused this. Stein didn't help either.

lolno. Sorry, none of this is true, in any way. Wanting the democrats to be an actual left-leaning party didn't cause Trump.

A lot of people seemed to prefer Trump to the Democrats that weren't left-leaning (or weren't the way they wanted to be). That's certainly a problem.

Saelune:

BreakfastMan:

Saelune:
A vote for anyone but Democrats is a vote for Trump. Voting for Bernie was voting for Trump. Voting for Bernie caused this. Stein didn't help either.

lolno. Sorry, none of this is true, in any way. Wanting the democrats to be an actual left-leaning party didn't cause Trump.

If you cared about left-wing values, you would do anything to keep Trump out of power.

You seem to be missing the point. "A vote for Bernie was a vote for Trump." Uh. Bernie didn't make the primary. He wasn't in the election. Unless you're telling me that voting for him in the primaries was a vote for Trump, a statement completely divorced from reality, or that write ins for Bernie that went nowhere were a vote for Trump (which I agree with because you're just pissing in the wind, but I doubt those people were a huge demographic) I don't know what you're on about.

It's probably gonna start sucking to be gay, a minority, or a woman pretty soon, again.

erttheking:

Saelune:

BreakfastMan:

lolno. Sorry, none of this is true, in any way. Wanting the democrats to be an actual left-leaning party didn't cause Trump.

If you cared about left-wing values, you would do anything to keep Trump out of power.

You seem to be missing the point. "A vote for Bernie was a vote for Trump." Uh. Bernie didn't make the primary. He wasn't in the election. Unless you're telling me that voting for him in the primaries was a vote for Trump, a statement completely divorced from reality, or that write ins for Bernie that went nowhere were a vote for Trump (which I agree with because you're just pissing in the wind, but I doubt those people were a huge demographic) I don't know what you're on about.

Shes making the point that a vote for a 3rd party is a vote for trump, which it kinda is. Third party candidates really only exist to help the major political party opposite of them since they siphon votes from the similar major party. Not sure why she used Bernie as an example aside from some Bernie bros being mad at Hillary winning and either didn't vote or voted republican to troll democrats.

erttheking:

Saelune:

BreakfastMan:

lolno. Sorry, none of this is true, in any way. Wanting the democrats to be an actual left-leaning party didn't cause Trump.

If you cared about left-wing values, you would do anything to keep Trump out of power.

You seem to be missing the point. "A vote for Bernie was a vote for Trump." Uh. Bernie didn't make the primary. He wasn't in the election. Unless you're telling me that voting for him in the primaries was a vote for Trump, a statement completely divorced from reality, or that write ins for Bernie that went nowhere were a vote for Trump (which I agree with because you're just pissing in the wind, but I doubt those people were a huge demographic) I don't know what you're on about.

In the election of Trump vs Hillary, if you did not vote for Hillary, you voted for Trump.

If it was Bernie vs Trump in that election, then I would be saying the same thing about not voting for Bernie. I would have gladly voted for Bernie over Trump.

Saelune:

BreakfastMan:

Saelune:
A vote for anyone but Democrats is a vote for Trump. Voting for Bernie was voting for Trump. Voting for Bernie caused this. Stein didn't help either.

lolno. Sorry, none of this is true, in any way. Wanting the democrats to be an actual left-leaning party didn't cause Trump.

If you cared about left-wing values, you would do anything to keep Trump out of power.

Sister, Hilary's campaign didn't do everything to keep trump out of power. And the country doesn't automatically become a left-wing paradise once he leaves office.

Thaluikhain:

BreakfastMan:

Saelune:
A vote for anyone but Democrats is a vote for Trump. Voting for Bernie was voting for Trump. Voting for Bernie caused this. Stein didn't help either.

lolno. Sorry, none of this is true, in any way. Wanting the democrats to be an actual left-leaning party didn't cause Trump.

A lot of people seemed to prefer Trump to the Democrats that weren't left-leaning (or weren't the way they wanted to be). That's certainly a problem.

Not really. The percentage of people who voted for Bernie in the primary then voted for Trump in the general is less than the percentage of people who voted for Hillary in the primary and McCain in the general. It was Hilary's election to lose, and boy did she lose it.

BreakfastMan:

Saelune:

BreakfastMan:

lolno. Sorry, none of this is true, in any way. Wanting the democrats to be an actual left-leaning party didn't cause Trump.

If you cared about left-wing values, you would do anything to keep Trump out of power.

Sister, Hilary's campaign didn't do everything to keep trump out of power. And the country doesn't automatically become a left-wing paradise once he leaves office.

No, it doesn't, because Trump's damage will be felt for decades, this Supreme Court situation is proof enough.

I will never forgive Bernie and his supporters.

If you wanted to push further left, then letting Trump take us extreme right is NOT THE ANSWER.

BreakfastMan:

Saelune:
A vote for anyone but Democrats is a vote for Trump. Voting for Bernie was voting for Trump. Voting for Bernie caused this. Stein didn't help either.

lolno. Sorry, none of this is true, in any way. Wanting the democrats to be an actual left-leaning party didn't cause Trump.

Saelune's right.

People who declined to vote for Clinton - or who voted third party - on the basis of desiring a more left-leaning Democratic party essentially surrendered Garland's seat and allowed the Republicans to set a conservative judiciary who will still be handing down conservative decisions decades from now.

It's not just happening at the Supreme Court level; that's just the most high-profile. Thanks to McConnell, Trump inherited an unprecedented number of federal court vacancies, which he has spent the past months busily packing. America will be suffering from Trump's judiciary for generations.

This could have been stopped in 2016. A lot of Republicans held their noses and voted for Trump because a Supreme Court seat was on the line. If Democrats had done the same, then Mitch McConnell would not now be reaping the reward for his brazen machinations. I'm not kidding about how huge this is; it's not an exaggeration to say that same-sex marriage is under threat. That's not even getting into all the decisions already passed - the Muslim ban, the union-busting, the punt on racial gerrymandering. These are massive, tangible setbacks for progressives.

bastardofmelbourne:

BreakfastMan:

Saelune:
A vote for anyone but Democrats is a vote for Trump. Voting for Bernie was voting for Trump. Voting for Bernie caused this. Stein didn't help either.

lolno. Sorry, none of this is true, in any way. Wanting the democrats to be an actual left-leaning party didn't cause Trump.

Saelune's right.

People who declined to vote for Clinton - or who voted third party - on the basis of desiring a more left-leaning Democratic party essentially surrendered Garland's seat and allowed the Republicans to set a conservative judiciary who will still be handing down conservative decisions decades from now.

No, she really isn't. The idea that everybody who didn't vote or voted for Stein wanted Trump to win is absurd. So is the idea that Hilary is blameless and her campaign made no mistakes during the primary. Like, does nobody remember what the election was actually like before November 9th anymore?

BreakfastMan:

bastardofmelbourne:

BreakfastMan:

lolno. Sorry, none of this is true, in any way. Wanting the democrats to be an actual left-leaning party didn't cause Trump.

Saelune's right.

People who declined to vote for Clinton - or who voted third party - on the basis of desiring a more left-leaning Democratic party essentially surrendered Garland's seat and allowed the Republicans to set a conservative judiciary who will still be handing down conservative decisions decades from now.

No, she really isn't. The idea that everybody who didn't vote or voted for Stein wanted Trump to win is absurd. So is the idea that Hilary is blameless and her campaign made no mistakes during the primary. Like, does nobody remember what the election was actually like before November 9th anymore?

Moving goalposts. I am not arguing Hillary was perfect and you know it.

Saelune:

BreakfastMan:

bastardofmelbourne:

Saelune's right.

People who declined to vote for Clinton - or who voted third party - on the basis of desiring a more left-leaning Democratic party essentially surrendered Garland's seat and allowed the Republicans to set a conservative judiciary who will still be handing down conservative decisions decades from now.

No, she really isn't. The idea that everybody who didn't vote or voted for Stein wanted Trump to win is absurd. So is the idea that Hilary is blameless and her campaign made no mistakes during the primary. Like, does nobody remember what the election was actually like before November 9th anymore?

Moving goalposts. I am not arguing Hillary was perfect and you know it.

You are arguing that those who voted third party or didn't vote at all in the general election because they didn't like Hilary are one of the primary causes of Trump being elected. That inherently comes with the assumption that Hilary and her campaign didn't fuck up, an assumption that is provably false.

BreakfastMan:

Saelune:

BreakfastMan:

No, she really isn't. The idea that everybody who didn't vote or voted for Stein wanted Trump to win is absurd. So is the idea that Hilary is blameless and her campaign made no mistakes during the primary. Like, does nobody remember what the election was actually like before November 9th anymore?

Moving goalposts. I am not arguing Hillary was perfect and you know it.

You are arguing that those who voted third party or didn't vote at all in the general election because they didn't like Hilary are one of the primary causes of Trump being elected. That inherently comes with the assumption that Hilary and her campaign didn't fuck up, an assumption that is provably false.

Trump's campaign of being the worst piece of garbage should have been more than enough.

No one was 'conned' by Trump. He wore his bigotry on his sleeve. Anyone who was 'conned' by Trump wanted to be conned.

Saelune:

BreakfastMan:

Saelune:
Moving goalposts. I am not arguing Hillary was perfect and you know it.

You are arguing that those who voted third party or didn't vote at all in the general election because they didn't like Hilary are one of the primary causes of Trump being elected. That inherently comes with the assumption that Hilary and her campaign didn't fuck up, an assumption that is provably false.

Trump's campaign of being the worst piece of garbage should have been more than enough.

No one was 'conned' by Trump. He wore his bigotry on his sleeve. Anyone who was 'conned' by Trump wanted to be conned.

The people who didn't vote or voted third party weren't "conned" by trump, they just didn't like Clinton. There was the assumption, before the election ended, that Hilary was destined to win and that there was no way in hell that Trump could win. Many people voted third party or not at all because they were disgusted by both choices, and there was the assumption that it was safe at that time. And quite frankly, they were right to be disgusted: Hillary was a shit candidate who ran a shit campaign. If you want someone to be angry at over Trump being president, be angry at Hillary and the Democratic party establishment, as they did jack shit to prevent it.

BreakfastMan:

Saelune:

BreakfastMan:

You are arguing that those who voted third party or didn't vote at all in the general election because they didn't like Hilary are one of the primary causes of Trump being elected. That inherently comes with the assumption that Hilary and her campaign didn't fuck up, an assumption that is provably false.

Trump's campaign of being the worst piece of garbage should have been more than enough.

No one was 'conned' by Trump. He wore his bigotry on his sleeve. Anyone who was 'conned' by Trump wanted to be conned.

The people who didn't vote or voted third party weren't "conned" by trump, they just didn't like Clinton. There was the assumption, before the election ended, that Hilary was destined to win and that there was no way in hell that Trump could win. Many people voted third party or not at all because they were disgusted by both choices, and there was the assumption that it was safe at that time. And quite frankly, they were right to be disgusted: Hillary was a shit candidate who ran a shit campaign.

So they got conned by Bernie?

BreakfastMan:

The people who didn't vote or voted third party weren't "conned" by trump, they just didn't like Clinton. There was the assumption, before the election ended, that Hilary was destined to win and that there was no way in hell that Trump could win. Many people voted third party or not at all because they were disgusted by both choices, and there was the assumption that it was safe at that time.

Uhrm, ignorance isn't really a good defence. If they assumed that, they assumed wrong, and the assumption raised Trump's chances.

BreakfastMan:

And quite frankly, they were right to be disgusted: Hillary was a shit candidate who ran a shit campaign. If you want someone to be angry at over Trump being president, be angry at Hillary and the Democratic party establishment, as they did jack shit to prevent it.

People can be angry at two things at once; I'm angry at everything all the time, and although it's exhausting, it's manageable. Culpability rests in more than one place.

In a two-party system, a vote for a third-party candidate (or a spoiled vote, or a non-vote) ends up assisting the winner, whoever they are. The winner did not need that vote, but the loser did.

Nobody's arguing that third-party voters wanted to assist Trump, but that was to some degree the impact of their decision.

Saelune:
So they got conned by Bernie?

How does this follow?

Bernie encouraged his supporters to vote for Clinton over Trump in the Presidential. If some of them didn't listen, that's on them.

But it's not his fault for criticising her during the Primary. That's what a Primary is for, and democracy would suffer without it.

Silvanus:

BreakfastMan:

The people who didn't vote or voted third party weren't "conned" by trump, they just didn't like Clinton. There was the assumption, before the election ended, that Hilary was destined to win and that there was no way in hell that Trump could win. Many people voted third party or not at all because they were disgusted by both choices, and there was the assumption that it was safe at that time.

Uhrm, ignorance isn't really a good defence. If they assumed that, they assumed wrong, and the assumption raised Trump's chances.

BreakfastMan:

And quite frankly, they were right to be disgusted: Hillary was a shit candidate who ran a shit campaign. If you want someone to be angry at over Trump being president, be angry at Hillary and the Democratic party establishment, as they did jack shit to prevent it.

People can be angry at two things at once; I'm angry at everything all the time, and although it's exhausting, it's manageable. Culpability rests in more than one place.

In a two-party system, a vote for a third-party candidate (or a spoiled vote, or a non-vote) ends up assisting the winner, whoever they are. The winner did not need that vote, but the loser did.

Nobody's arguing that third-party voters wanted to assist Trump, but that was to some degree the impact of their decision.

Saelune:
So they got conned by Bernie?

How does this follow?

Bernie encouraged his supporters to vote for Clinton over Trump in the Presidential. If some of them didn't listen, that's on them.

But it's not his fault for criticising her during the Primary. That's what a Primary is for, and democracy would suffer without it.

I hold Trump responsible for his follower's actions, as I do Bernie.

Hillary had a ton of BS propaganda against her, and even I fell for it somewhat. Hillary is far from perfect, and infact, I was uneasy about supporting her too early on (though I was never convinced by Bernie).

For all her flaws, Hillary improved with age. I would not want 1996 Hillary for President in 2016, good thing that Hillary wasnt running.

As much as Zontar likes to cite the 90's for why Hillary is bad and Trump is good, it just highlights the opposite. 1996 Trump would still be awful, but probably more Bush aweful, which sadly seems not so bad anymore, and I fucking hate that feeling.

Silvanus:

BreakfastMan:

The people who didn't vote or voted third party weren't "conned" by trump, they just didn't like Clinton. There was the assumption, before the election ended, that Hilary was destined to win and that there was no way in hell that Trump could win. Many people voted third party or not at all because they were disgusted by both choices, and there was the assumption that it was safe at that time.

Uhrm, ignorance isn't really a good defence. If they assumed that, they assumed wrong, and the assumption raised Trump's chances.

An assumption was propagated by Hilary's supporters and her campaign.

In a two-party system, a vote for a third-party candidate (or a spoiled vote, or a non-vote) ends up assisting the winner, whoever they are. The winner did not need that vote, but the loser did.

And who is to blame then, for that spoiled vote?

Are we still talking about how people should reward politicians for working against them? 2016 never ends.

Silvanus:

BreakfastMan:

The people who didn't vote or voted third party weren't "conned" by trump, they just didn't like Clinton. There was the assumption, before the election ended, that Hilary was destined to win and that there was no way in hell that Trump could win. Many people voted third party or not at all because they were disgusted by both choices, and there was the assumption that it was safe at that time.

Uhrm, ignorance isn't really a good defence. If they assumed that, they assumed wrong, and the assumption raised Trump's chances.

To be fair, polls pointed in the other direction.

They were supposedly informed on their decision, as the charts said Trump was going to lose by a landslide.

Silvanus:

In a two-party system, a vote for a third-party candidate (or a spoiled vote, or a non-vote) ends up assisting the winner, whoever they are. The winner did not need that vote, but the loser did.

People chose to vote based on the polls prediction that Hilary was the winner. Under this misguided assumption, people voting for a third-party candidate would supposedly be assisting Hilary. In reality, it was backwards, and voting third-party had the same effect as sabotaging her (even if that wasn't the intention).

Saelune:

BreakfastMan:

Saelune:
A vote for anyone but Democrats is a vote for Trump. Voting for Bernie was voting for Trump. Voting for Bernie caused this. Stein didn't help either.

lolno. Sorry, none of this is true, in any way. Wanting the democrats to be an actual left-leaning party didn't cause Trump.

If you cared about left-wing values, you would do anything to keep Trump out of power.

The short term game doesn't tell the full story here. Electing a moderate like Hilary sure wasn't going to help bring in left-wing values. Trump might be the best thing that "people who care about left-wing values" could have wanted if, by the end of his term, people look at the state of the country and see how much damage he has done. And policies can always be reversed.

Remember where the term "left-wing" came from - revolutionary change, not keeping the status quo.

I wish I could say that this surprised me, but honestly, I saw this coming almost as soon as I head about them stonewalling Garland's nomination process. It was an excuse, and an especially feeble one considering that a year represented a full quarter of a president's term in office. There was never a snowball's chance in hell that they were going to hold to that idea when it was their party that was in power.

Blood Brain Barrier:
The short term game doesn't tell the full story here. Electing a moderate like Hilary sure wasn't going to help bring in left-wing values. Trump might be the best thing that "people who care about left-wing values" could have wanted if, by the end of his term, people look at the state of the country and see how much damage he has done. And policies can always be reversed.

Policies, sure, but the effects of bad policy can linger. Even assuming he (and his) are replaced by better people, he's got 4 years and you can make a hell of a lot of a mess in 4 years.

You aren't going to scrape SCOTUS members off your shoe that easily, you have to wait til they die.

Blood Brain Barrier:
by the end of his term, people look at the state of the country and see how much damage he has done.

1. Hope the damage doesn't include the law being changed to allow the president to not end their terms.

2. There is no good reason to not try to stop the damage now before more people gets hurt. Or would you kindly explain to them that it's all for the sake of the long term game?

Worgen:

erttheking:

Saelune:
If you cared about left-wing values, you would do anything to keep Trump out of power.

You seem to be missing the point. "A vote for Bernie was a vote for Trump." Uh. Bernie didn't make the primary. He wasn't in the election. Unless you're telling me that voting for him in the primaries was a vote for Trump, a statement completely divorced from reality, or that write ins for Bernie that went nowhere were a vote for Trump (which I agree with because you're just pissing in the wind, but I doubt those people were a huge demographic) I don't know what you're on about.

Shes making the point that a vote for a 3rd party is a vote for trump, which it kinda is. Third party candidates really only exist to help the major political party opposite of them since they siphon votes from the similar major party. Not sure why she used Bernie as an example aside from some Bernie bros being mad at Hillary winning and either didn't vote or voted republican to troll democrats.

She didn't say third party. I agree that people in flip states who voted third party fucked us all and they're the reasons I've honestly thought about killing myself more than once this presidency. But she didn't say third party.

If I had to guess what will happen, Trump will get his second appointment through, he'll fire Robert Mueller, Mueller will go to the Supreme Court to reverse is, they'll side with Donald Trump, then Trump will move to have RowVWade removed, same-sex marriage removed, the 4th amendment removed(Gorsuch has already said that's his goal) and then probably the 22nd Amendment because we all know Trump wants to be president for life.

Silentpony:
If I had to guess what will happen, Trump will get his second appointment through, he'll fire Robert Mueller, Mueller will go to the Supreme Court to reverse is, they'll side with Donald Trump, then Trump will move to have RowVWade removed, same-sex marriage removed, the 4th amendment removed(Gorsuch has already said that's his goal) and then probably the 22nd Amendment because we all know Trump wants to be president for life.

Yeah, great, thanks, really helpful with the "I'm trying to resist the urge to kill myself" thing I'm working on right now.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here