Results 1 to 12 of 12
  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    USA, Southern
    Posts
    24,523
    Thanks (Given)
    27687
    Thanks (Received)
    15847
    Likes (Given)
    1861
    Likes (Received)
    1542
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475175

    Default Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg hits back at Trump's calls to stop impeachment: 'The pres

    Business Insider
    Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg hits back at Trump's calls to stop impeachment: 'The president is not a lawyer'
    Business InsiderDecember 17, 2019, 10:29 AM CST
    Jacquelyn Martin/AP

    Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg shut down President Donald Trump's attempts to discredit impeachment proceedings, saying on Monday that "the president is not a lawyer."

    CNN reported that Ginsburg made the remark at an event in New York City where she was awarded the Berggruen Institute Prize for Philosophy and Culture.

    On Wednesday, the House is expected to pass two articles of impeachment against Trump: abuse of his office, and obstruction of Congress.

    In recent days, Trump has embarked on multiple Twitter tirades to defend himself against the charges and accuse House Democrats of subjecting him to a "witch hunt."

    Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

    Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg shut down President Donald Trump's attempts to discredit impeachment proceedings, saying on Monday that "the president is not a lawyer," CNN reported.

    Ginsburg made the remark at an event in New York City where she was awarded the Berggruen Institute Prize for Philosophy and Culture.

    On Wednesday, the House of Representatives is expected to pass two articles of impeachment against Trump: abuse of his office, and obstruction of Congress.

    If the House votes by a simple majority to impeach Trump, the Senate will hold a trial, with Ginsberg's colleague Chief Justice John Roberts serving as the judge.

    In recent days, Trump has embarked on multiple Twitter tirades to defend himself against the charges and accuse House Democrats of subjecting him to an unfair and illegitimate "witch hunt."

    During an Oval Office meeting with the president of Paraguay on Friday, Trump described the impeachment process as a "witch hunt," a "sham," and a "hoax."

    "It's a scam. It's something that shouldn't be allowed, and it's a very bad thing for our country," he said. "You're trivializing impeachment. And I tell you what, someday there will be a Democrat president and there will a Republican House, and I suspect they're going to remember it."

    Trump also accused Democrats of cheapening the impeachment process at the NATO summit earlier this month in London. In a televised sit-down with French President Emmanuel Macron, Trump said a Republican Congress would impeach a Democratic president.

    "Because somebody picked an orange out of a refrigerator and you don't like it, so let's go and impeach him," Trump said.

    This partisan, stupid old hag needs to shut her liberal ignorant ass up.
    The impeachment is a scam, a dem party political strategy and nothing more- yet this old ugly ffing witch seems to think it is a real case!!
    This is why POS like her should never be on the highest court in the land.
    A perfect example of how and why libreals are ffing insane.
    I bet anybody here that my IQ is far, far higher than hers!!!!
    There is not a single one of the female justices on that court that truly deserve to be that- a damn fact an a damn crying shame too..-Tyr
    18 U.S. Code § 2381-Treason Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Posts
    35,704
    Thanks (Given)
    20829
    Thanks (Received)
    19239
    Likes (Given)
    140
    Likes (Received)
    3964
    Mentioned
    226 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475352

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tyr-Ziu Saxnot View Post
    This partisan, stupid old hag needs to shut her liberal ignorant ass up.
    The impeachment is a scam, a dem party political strategy and nothing more- yet this old ugly ffing witch seems to think it is a real case!!
    This is why POS like her should never be on the highest court in the land.
    A perfect example of how and why libreals are ffing insane.
    I bet anybody here that my IQ is far, far higher than hers!!!!
    There is not a single one of the female justices on that court that truly deserve to be that- a damn fact an a damn crying shame too..-Tyr
    Thing is, regardless our individual and collective opinions of this farce is, she is correct and this IS a real case.

    Despite everyone knowing it's a crock, it proceeds as a REAL legal case as long as the Dems keep it alive.
    Last edited by Gunny; 12-17-2019 at 09:57 PM.
    My quota of bullshit cop outs from closed minds is full today, Tomorrow's not looking good for you either.

  3. Likes CSM liked this post
  4. #3
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Podunk, WI
    Posts
    8,745
    Thanks (Given)
    3800
    Thanks (Received)
    4050
    Likes (Given)
    3950
    Likes (Received)
    2351
    Mentioned
    36 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    19777783

    Default

    Let her spew her senile crap. The entire impeachment farce is about as popular as a festering pimple on someone's ass.

    This whole impeachment charade has been about the dems knowing they can't beat Trump in 2020, and it would appear that the majority of Americans are now aware of it, and sick of it.

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Mid Atlantic
    Posts
    1,236
    Thanks (Given)
    1589
    Thanks (Received)
    2217
    Likes (Given)
    525
    Likes (Received)
    470
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14442562

    Default

    I agree with Ruth Bader Ginsburg on virtually nothing, but will give her the benefit of the doubt that she might possess integrity, something that is exceedingly rare among liberals. For one thing, she was able to be close friends with Antonin Scalia even though he was a strict conservative. Most liberals can't even talk to conservatives. For another thing, she personally put a temporary halt on some Dem subpeona for Trump's tax records last week, despite not wanting to. I don't like RBG, but I will give her credit for not being a hypocrite.
    Last edited by Russ; 12-17-2019 at 09:16 PM.
    Wise men don't need advice, and fools won't take it - Ben Franklin
    You may not be interested in war, but war may be interested in you - Leon Trotsky
    It's not how you start, it's how you finish.

  6. Thanks Gunny thanked this post
  7. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Posts
    35,704
    Thanks (Given)
    20829
    Thanks (Received)
    19239
    Likes (Given)
    140
    Likes (Received)
    3964
    Mentioned
    226 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475352

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Russ View Post
    I agree with Ruth Bader Ginsburg on virtually nothing, but will give her the benefit of the doubt that she might possess integrity, something that is exceedingly rare among liberals. For one thing, she was able to be close friends with Antonin Scalia even though he was a strict conservative. Most liberals can't even talk to conservatives. For another thing, she personally put a temporary halt on some Dem subpeona for Trump's tax records last week, despite not wanting to. I don't like RBG, but I will give her credit for not being a hypocrite.
    I happen to believe this whole damned thing is a farce. Problem is, the consequences are real and I don't trust a damned one of them on either side. Just one side moreso than the other

    Same time, Trump needs to quit sounding like the one who "protesteth too much". My take-away from Bader-Ginsburg is Trump needs to start taking this for the legal proceeding it is rather than just some contrived BS he keeps claiming it is. Sounds like good legal advice to me.

    I don't know that I agree with her about anything, but more than a few on her side of the aisle could do worse than conduct themselves professionally as she does.
    My quota of bullshit cop outs from closed minds is full today, Tomorrow's not looking good for you either.

  8. Thanks STTAB thanked this post
    Likes Kathianne liked this post
  9. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    8,973
    Thanks (Given)
    22
    Thanks (Received)
    189
    Likes (Given)
    17
    Likes (Received)
    60
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    1187266

    Default

    Ruth is worried she may have to cling to her seat on the bench for five more years.....
    ...full immersion.....

  10. Thanks Tyr-Ziu Saxnot thanked this post
    Likes Tyr-Ziu Saxnot liked this post
  11. #7
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    USA, Southern
    Posts
    24,523
    Thanks (Given)
    27687
    Thanks (Received)
    15847
    Likes (Given)
    1861
    Likes (Received)
    1542
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475175

    Default

    Despite others here that I truly and deeply respect, giving her creds and support, I stand 100% behind my original post in this thread.
    That she a liberal has recently made a few good calls does not change the stripes she has always worn and still wears.
    No, I think not that she has integrity because I know that no damn liberal alive has any!!
    In liberalism integrity is a curse word.
    All that matters is power and dictating to we peasants how to live- or rather in truth
    --how to be good little slaves to the almighty and supremely powerful state.
    And I adamantly restate- not a damn one of those women truly deserve to serve on the highest court in the land.
    She is left-side biased, political and has and does break her sworn oath, just like every damn one of those liberal scum do.
    Truth is cold, hard and immensely savage biatcchhh sometimes.
    But truth in the end is also totally invincible.. --Tyr
    Last edited by Tyr-Ziu Saxnot; 12-18-2019 at 06:50 AM.
    18 U.S. Code § 2381-Treason Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

  12. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    3,002
    Thanks (Given)
    731
    Thanks (Received)
    844
    Likes (Given)
    42
    Likes (Received)
    579
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4675108

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gunny View Post
    Thing is, regardless our individual and collective opinions of this farce is, she is correct and this IS a real case.

    Despite everyone knowing it's a crock, it proceeds as a REAL legal case as long as the Dems keep it alive.

    But she is incorrect when she says Trump called for SCOTUS to intervene. He merely asked a question. A dumb question to be sure. But a question nonetheless.

  13. Thanks Gunny thanked this post
  14. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    3,002
    Thanks (Given)
    731
    Thanks (Received)
    844
    Likes (Given)
    42
    Likes (Received)
    579
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4675108

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gunny View Post
    I happen to believe this whole damned thing is a farce. Problem is, the consequences are real and I don't trust a damned one of them on either side. Just one side moreso than the other

    Same time, Trump needs to quit sounding like the one who "protesteth too much". My take-away from Bader-Ginsburg is Trump needs to start taking this for the legal proceeding it is rather than just some contrived BS he keeps claiming it is. Sounds like good legal advice to me.

    I don't know that I agree with her about anything, but more than a few on her side of the aisle could do worse than conduct themselves professionally as she does.

    Man Gunny you know you aren't supposed to say anything nice about anyone on the other side or negative about Trump. Are you turning into a liberal commie faggot or something?

  15. Thanks Gunny thanked this post
  16. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Posts
    35,704
    Thanks (Given)
    20829
    Thanks (Received)
    19239
    Likes (Given)
    140
    Likes (Received)
    3964
    Mentioned
    226 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475352

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by STTAB View Post
    Man Gunny you know you aren't supposed to say anything nice about anyone on the other side or negative about Trump. Are you turning into a liberal commie faggot or something?
    I figure when I'm not embellishing, and everyone knows or should I am conservative, such an observation on her professional conduct would bet more notice than coming from the mouth of a leftwingnut.

    I didn't say anything about her politics. I have an appreciation for proper conduct and an expectation of it from those that allegedly run our country.

    "Liberal, commie, faggot". How does one become one of THOSE? Is their a vaccine?
    My quota of bullshit cop outs from closed minds is full today, Tomorrow's not looking good for you either.

  17. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Upper Bucks County, PA
    Posts
    81
    Thanks (Given)
    11
    Thanks (Received)
    33
    Likes (Given)
    2
    Likes (Received)
    13
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    367810

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tyr-Ziu Saxnot View Post
    Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg shut down President Donald Trump's attempts to discredit impeachment proceedings, saying on Monday that "the president is not a lawyer."
    That's a nonsensical statement because this process is a legal charade. The rules are whatever the House says they are, evidentiary / testimonial standards were suspended and foundational canons of justice were stood on their head.

    When an article of impeachment is based upon the denial of the right of the President to seek redress in the courts -- that the action of challenging the validity of subpoenas against the separation of powers is considered contempt of Congress, the argument that one needs to be a lawyer to comment is preposterous. The Democrats are extinguishing "the law" as a guiding principle for impeachment.

    What's next, will the Democrats seek to file judicial impeachment articles against SCOTUS Justices for granting certiorari, for deciding to hear the President's arguments?

    The process is entirely political and thus it can be rebutted as such. The old bird needs to stay in her lane and abide by the rule that SCOTUS does not offer advisory opinions.

    You can not truly call yourself “peaceful” unless you are capable of great violence.
    If you are incapable of violence, you are not peaceful, you are just harmless.



  18. Thanks Tyr-Ziu Saxnot, Gunny thanked this post
    Likes Kathianne, Tyr-Ziu Saxnot liked this post
  19. #12
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    USA, Southern
    Posts
    24,523
    Thanks (Given)
    27687
    Thanks (Received)
    15847
    Likes (Given)
    1861
    Likes (Received)
    1542
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475175

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Surf Fishing Guru View Post
    That's a nonsensical statement because this process is a legal charade. The rules are whatever the House says they are, evidentiary / testimonial standards were suspended and foundational canons of justice were stood on their head.

    When an article of impeachment is based upon the denial of the right of the President to seek redress in the courts -- that the action of challenging the validity of subpoenas against the separation of powers is considered contempt of Congress, the argument that one needs to be a lawyer to comment is preposterous. The Democrats are extinguishing "the law" as a guiding principle for impeachment.

    What's next, will the Democrats seek to file judicial impeachment articles against SCOTUS Justices for granting certiorari, for deciding to hear the President's arguments?

    The process is entirely political and thus it can be rebutted as such. The old bird needs to stay in her lane and abide by the rule that SCOTUS does not offer advisory opinions.
    Whats next, you ask??
    Well if the Dems get their way it will be sorta like a banana Republic but with the dem party serving a dictatorial junta, complete with a puppet President with strings only they get to pull.
    Or even worse in IMHO...-Tyr
    18 U.S. Code § 2381-Treason Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

  20. Thanks Surf Fishing Guru thanked this post

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •