Trump announces Amy Coney Barrett as SCOTUS nomination to replace Ginsburg

[Dashinka 24,496]

So Chuckie Schumer with his over-the-to hyperbole said last evening was the darkest day in the history of the US Senate.  Hmm, seems this episode would be a bit darker.  Not really surprising it was a Democrat inflicting the violence.

 

Violence Over Enslavement on the Floor of the U.S. Senate

 

Violence on the Floor of the Senate

Brooks hesitated before approaching Sumner, as several women were present in the Senate gallery. After the women left, Brooks walked to Sumner’s desk and reportedly said: “You have libeled my state and slandered my relation, who is aged and absent. And I feel it to be my duty to punish you.”

 

With that, Brooks struck the seated Sumner across the head with his heavy cane. Sumner, who was quite tall, could not get to his feet as his legs were trapped under his Senate desk, which was bolted to the floor.

 

Brooks continued raining blows with the cane upon Sumner, who tried to fend them off with his arms. Sumner finally was able to break the desk free with his thighs and staggered down the aisle of the Senate.

 

Brooks followed him, breaking the cane over Sumner’s head and continuing to strike him with pieces of the cane. The entire attack probably lasted for a full minute, and left Sumner dazed and bleeding. Carried into a Capitol anteroom, Sumner was attended by a doctor, who administered stitches to close wounds on his head.

 

Brooks was soon arrested on a charge of assault. He was quickly released on bail.

 

https://www.thoughtco.com/violence-over-slavery-in-senate-1773554

[B_J 2,752]

Well, that seems a little extreme but nothing compared to what's happened now...the Republicans voted for something they wanted.  The horror!

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,370]

I wonder why so many supreme court justices dont retire, when they know they might not make it thru 4 more years. Not singling her out, but she knew under Obama she was going down hill. If she was that passionate about her cause and a conservatives not replacing her, why not do the right thing and retire.

[Dashinka 24,496]

42 minutes ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

I wonder why so many supreme court justices dont retire, when they know they might not make it thru 4 more years. Not singling her out, but she knew under Obama she was going down hill. If she was that passionate about her cause and a conservatives not replacing her, why not do the right thing and retire.

I completely agree.

[Ban Hammer 13,337]

[TBoneTX 45,288]

18 hours ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

Tom Cotton (R)

What's wrong with Cotton?

[TBoneTX 45,288]

16 hours ago, Dashinka said:

hyperbole

Oh, but hyperbole is the greatest thing EVER!       

[TBoneTX 45,288]

17 hours ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

WI's extension

other extensions

the PA one

the NC one

What I can't mentally reconcile is this:  Doesn't any extension render the concept of "Election Day" meaningless?

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

4 minutes ago, TBoneTX said:

What's wrong with Cotton?

Neocon, establishment swamp creature who chose a little wiser to keep his career going rather than follow his buddy Bill Kristol out the door to the Democrats. The Senate is rife with these people. 

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

10 minutes ago, TBoneTX said:

What I can't mentally reconcile is this:  Doesn't any extension render the concept of "Election Day" meaningless?

That would be a salient point to bring up to people who want to abolish the electoral college. Rules and standards are clearly as arbitrary as their feelings of any given day, so I'd not be shocked you see people suggesting (or rather implementing, since radicalism is the norm now) votes go weeks beyond election day. The beauty of this is it would by default bring the election closer to being decided by the House.

 

It's why ensuring that the election be decided in a normal expedient fashion is essential. We know the cases of fraud goes up as more allowances are made in ballot casting, from harvesting to post election voting and counting... look at how CA flipped seats in the midterm. I think all but one of those was post election day. 

Edited October 28, 2020 by Burnt Reynolds

[TBoneTX 45,288]

It would also enable the other side to manufacture enough absentee/mail votes to change the outcome.

[TBoneTX 45,288]

Back to Justice Barrett:  see here.  Good long commentary, but her specific "throw down the gauntlet" comments begin in the section that contains the 5th image/picture (scroll down).  Should absolutely be required reading/contemplative material for laymen and lawyers alike.

https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2020/10/27/justice-amy-coney-barrett-throws-down-the-gauntlet/

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

Yes.. I'm thinking logic prevails here, but it's no guarantee. PA should lose the lawsuit before SCOTUS which hopefully results in a similarly ridiculous ruling on NC thrown out.. in simple terms. This is why Trump wanted Barrett seated asap. 

 

Also people don't even need to manufacture ballots if they are allowed to collect them from others, engage in the fraud you posted (in TX), and simply mess with them as they please. What are the chances missing ballots found would result in an overturned election weeks, months, or years later? Can't get the time back and do it over. Thus why election integrity is supposed to be a burden that people simply deal with to ensure more accurate results. 

[TBoneTX 45,288]

8 minutes ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

people don't even need to manufacture ballots if they are allowed to collect them from others, engage in the fraud you posted (in TX), and simply mess with them as they please.

What I meant (poorly worded) was to manufacture votes on ballots by messing with them.

8 minutes ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

What are the chances missing ballots found would result in an overturned election weeks, months, or years later?

If most or all were for the Democrats, as by great coincidence they would most certainly be, many forces would align in single-minded fervor to ensure this outcome.

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

1 minute ago, TBoneTX said:

What I meant (poorly worded) was to manufacture votes on ballots by messing with them.

If most or all were for the Democrats, as by great coincidence they would most certainly be, many forces would align in single-minded fervor to ensure this outcome.

That's true and vice versa.. hell no. 😉

 

I will wind up disagreeing with conservatives on a number of things but protecting the integrity of elections isn't one of them.