Posted on 09/25/2020 12:04:23 PM PDT by Hostage
How is it that conservatives are snookered time and time again on judicial picks?
AMY CONEY BARRETT
Above is a photo of the ‘frontrunner’. Say what? Who is saying Barrett is the ‘frontrunner’? Why . . . fake state media, of course.
Let’s get something straight, Barrett is not liked by liberals which makes us conservatives feel all gushy and stuff. Seriously, she’s not a liberal pick but if liberals must, they will accept a deal with her as the pick.
But ask liberals if they will accept Barbara Lagoa and they will jump in their vans, show up at your home at 2 am with their BLM comrades and set your garden on fire. Seriously, they will fill their media about how Lagoa skins cute little puppies alive for her backyard barbecue roasts.
Yes, Amy Coney Barrett has an impressive background and has chalked up some great sounding achievements. I’m sure she’s a ‘nice person’ but then I’m sure Chief Justice John Roberts is also a ‘nice person’.
To see the real person, their true grit, we need to see a little about who their parents are and what influences are in the background.
To make a conservative assessment of Amy Coney Barrett, first start by observing who backs her, who promotes her. Conservatives will find the picture is not always good, especially in the last week.
Start with Newsweek, that bankrupt teetering sellout to liberal graft. Look at their recent headline:
"Amy Coney Barrett Clear Favorite Over Barbara Lagoa To Be Trump's Supreme Court Pick” According to … wait for it . . .
Betting website Oddschecker!
Uh-huh. Oddschecker. Well sunny beaches, guess it’s case closed.
BOZO BEZO WAPO is warming to Barrett. Look at their headline from September 20, 2020:
"Amy Coney Barrett, potential Supreme Court nominee, wrote influential ruling on campus sexual assault"
Yep, WAPO got her pegged as ‘influential’ on a favorite divisive gender narrative.
And it gets worse from there. Keep looking at recent headlines and it becomes clear what’s happening.
Diving deeper shows the whole state media hedging towards Barrett while dumping on Lagoa. There’s a reason for that and we’ll get some specifics, enough data to sway you to Barbara Lagoa in lieu of Amy Barrett.
But again, Barrett is not a bad pick on the surface, but she’s backed by the same groups that gave us John Roberts and Christopher Wray. The Federalist Society, a so-called conservative depot with address in that conservative bastion of conservativism known as the District of Corruption, is a social group established in 1999 by moderates skilled at dancing as conservatives. You get the picture. They pushed hard for Roberts, Wray, and others, and now they are pushing hard for Barrett. Um, not good.
Amy’s a shiny object to that duplicitous culture posing as the conservative end of a self-imposed Swamp Aristocracy. Let’s put it this way, if Billy Boy Gates the Psychopath had to settle for a Trump pick, he would be content with Barrett and in fact might even get a Chris Matthew’s tingle up his leg at the thought of Barrett and her apparent regard for the 1905 Jacobson decision (more on this below).
To Barrett’s credit, she holds well to some conservative values but it seems she will do so on Monday but then maybe reverse on Tuesday, and who the hell knows the rest of the week? No, she’s good, we like her, we really do, at least today we do.
Let’s see how Barrett dances:
Um-kay.
So what’s this about this Jacobson thing in 1905? Well, Amy has said the upcoming Bill Gates sponsored mandatory Mark of the Beast vaccine (I know, I know I appear as one of those Christian whackjobs who sees a devil behind every corner … Mark of the Beast yeah), Amy says the RFID-laced vaccine may be mandated based on Jacobson vs. Massachusetts (1905)
Uh-huh.
I love President Trump and so grateful he brought on Dr. Scott Atlas.
But …
POTUS can’t do an executive order to skirt SCOTUS when they go Jacobson on us.
And there we have young Amy affirming that Jacobson will be the cudgel. Ok, we see Amy carries a waffle iron in her purse.
Let’s get a glimpse of Barrett’s parental influences:
Michael was an attorney for Shell Oil, yay! Good solid corporate guy, and Linda was a stay-at-home mom (the most important job in life, seriously). Nothing wrong with these parents. But … where’s the conservative values? They are likely there somewhere but they don’t jump out at us. They did seem to do something most important and to their credit, they apparently instilled a belief in God in Amy, at least we hope so. But belief in God is a life-long learning process and believers are at various stages in the process. Where is Amy?
Amy’s been on the federal bench for three years. She’s waffled with her answers before the Senate Judiciary committee especially before Senator Diane Frankenstein of that decaying mass of Newsom climate change known as California. I’ll give Amy a pass on her dance performance before that snake pit.
But overall, I’d say Amy, you got three years of federal judgeship under your belt, you’re 48 years old, come back in 10 years and show us your sword after we finish taking out Satan’s army and their war against the innocents, abolishing their Planned Parenthood Industrial Complex, taking down their hell of child sacrifice and trafficking of fetal body parts for which a brave Christian is held hostage and faces 10 years of state prison in California for reporting such diabolical trade. Come back and pray with us, that God loves us when we love his creation and his creation is in the womb.
Now on to Barbara Lagoa. Or as Idi-Amin might say, "Baba Wagaga".
Appointed to Florida Supreme Court by Governor Ron DeSantis.
Justice Lagoa is a Cuban-American from Hialeah, Florida, where her parents instilled in her an appreciation of the freedoms enjoyed in the United States.
Columbia University School of Law in 1992, where she served as an editor to the prestigious Columbia Law Review
Justice Lagoa, 54 years old, recipient of numerous awards, was appointed as a U.S. Attorney in 2003 until her appointment to the bench in 2006. Over her 14 years on the appellate bench, Justice Lagoa has heard more than 11,000 cases and issued more than 470 written opinions.
That’s a lot of experience as a judge, lots.
Her background puts her conservative credentials in BIG BOLD COLORS.
Early in her career she was a pro bono lawyer who represented the Miami family of Elián González.
In April 2019, Lagoa wrote for the unanimous court when it found that Governor DeSantis acted within his authority by suspending Sheriff Scott Israel for his response to the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting.
In November 2019, Lagoa participated in oral arguments concerning an advisory opinion on whether the governor could require those felons whom voters had re-enfranchised through 2018 Florida Amendment 4 to pay fines before being allowed to vote.
On September 12, 2019, President Donald Trump announced his intent to nominate Lagoa to a seat on the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. (POTUS knew where this lady was going)
In July 2020, Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee wrote directly to Lagoa urging her to recuse herself from a challenge to felon disenfranchisement in Florida due to her earlier participation in a related matter on the Florida State Supreme Court. (Lagoa declined to recuse herself and her response was a doozy) In September 2020, Lagoa joined the majority when the en banc circuit, by a vote of 6–4, upheld the constitutionality of the law the Florida legislature had passed required re-enfranchised felons to pay all financial obligations, including fines, fees, and restitution before being allowed to vote. (This lady don’t back down)
Barbara is Cuban-American who is second generation of parents who fled Cuba, fled communism, she’s fully anti-communist all the way which means BLM/Antifa aren’t finding a sweet spot in Barbara’s world.
Barbara's been solidly anti-lockdown which we can infer flows from her parent’s values with lock-downs viewed as a horse of fascism by any other name. And Amy? Um … not so much, she could be for lock-downs on Tuesday but maybe by Friday she’s not for them but come Monday ,,,,
Like Amy Coney Barrett, Lagoa is a practicing Roman Catholic, who cites Catholic education as instilling "an abiding faith in God that has grounded me and sustained me through the highs and lows of life.” Good on both of them!
Justice Lagoa is the one who unsealed the Epstein records in Florida which is a big deal in fighting organized pedophilia. Justice Lagoa worked in tandem with the AG in the Virgin Islands in the whole matter of Epstein Island.
he Federalist Society which is a GOPe tool is pushing for Barrett.
The Federalist Society also pushed for John Roberts and Christopher Wray.
Barrett’s not a bad pick but she can come later.
Lagoa is better for now. She won’t be swayed by the Jacobson decision like Barrett appears to regard.
Her use of Jacobsen v. MA caused me to jump off the Barrett bandwagon. Her use of that case as a citation suggests (actually shouts) that she will stand with the government every time they claim "emergency". Lockdowns, internment camps, FISA warrants, etc., etc.
She will be Chief Justice Roberts best friend on the Court.
“...Whereas Lagoa was confirmed in early 2017 soon after President Trump had taken office when everything was sunshine and roses.
Don’t fall for the vote tallies, Democrats hate both of them.”
***********************************************************
Nice try, Sparky, as you attempt to dismiss Lagoa’s substantial DemocRAT support in her confirmation vote. By the way, please explain how November 20, 2019 (Lagoa’s REAL confirmation vote) equals “confirmed in early 2017”. Again, nice try... but you;re not fooling us.
Barbara first, then Amy after the election
Stephen Breyer is 82 years old
No way. With the kind of support Logoa got from democrats, I suspect she would be the next Souter. Souter and Logoa also share another Red Flag often found in R appointed judges, a thin record in writing demonstrating unequivically their judicial philosophy. Constrast that with ACB, she shares a trait with Scalia and Thomas, a clear written record of opinions that do demonstrate ACB’s judicial philosophy. Her many written opinions provide an absolute record of her jurisprudence, and it proves she is a strict constructionist/textualist, and its not even close.
The fact is Judge Logoa is the kind of R Supreme Court pick from the pre-Trump Republican Party, when the R’s collectively just couldn’t find the stiffness in their spine to stand up to the democrats. Things are different now and President Trump and most of the R’s the Senate will now fight and not be deterred by the dirty fighting marxist democrats. The pick is going to be Barrett, and no amount of BS like this article, is going to deterr the President from appointing a known Conservative Constitutionalist with a proven written record, in this case Amy Coney Barrett, she is the pick and you can make bank on it, because she is the safest pick for Conservatives at this time when we cannot afford to put a possible typcial R squish on the Supreme Court, this is the opportunity of a generation and the R’s cannot afford to blow it.
They both are promising. May the lady of God’s choosing at His appointed hour be the one announced by the President tomorrow.
I got a sense of the same in her Kanter v Barr dissent. If Trump nominates her, I’ll keep an open mind and support the nomination, but I definitely wouldn’t feel as good about it as with his two prior picks.
Granted, I still prefer her over Lagoa.
Not that I have been asked, but my preference is Lagoa.
Trump is in Florida. I know that this is a timing issue. But, would he announce Barrett's nomination while in or on his way back from Florida? Could be a tell.
Are the parents of either one libs? Are they NRA members? What charities and orgs have they been involved in. Trump needs to flat out ask them in private. Do you vote democrat or republican. If they won't answer they should be out.
The Supreme court is a lost cause for advancing limited government. The best we can hope for is to just not make the situation worse so I don't think we should get wound too tight on this. Just get someone better than RBG and get them on the court before the election. As a side note, I think it was a big mistake for the President to pin himself down to picking a women. Just saying it will be a women is pandering and a clear indication of an affirmative action pick. Does not one person thing think alienating men in this decision is a bad move? I think some male supporters are going to be a bit pissed.
betting sites mean nothing here, everyday people bet against teams they like and for teams they don't like depending on the opponent...
Yes, that’s the way I see it.
It’s important to understand that Bill Gates and his vaccine cabal are still out there with plans for a mandatory RFID laced vaccine.
If you’re not up to speed on the vaccine threat or you think it’s a bunch of hooey, you’d better get up to speed on it because it’s very real.
POTUS has said the vaccines his Administration will approve will be voluntary but there are certain to be states that will make it mandatory setting the whole thing up for a SCOTUS ruling.
But SCOUS ruled in 2005 Jacobson vs. Massachusetts that states could force vaccinations.
So Gates and his psychopathic mind in eugenics thinks he can win. And he will go all out to see it through. He is seriously a maniac.
The problem is Barrett recognized the Jacobson case AND she’s resigned to the fact that Roe v. Wade will stand.
The fact that Barrett is backed by the Federalist Society who gave us Roberts and Wray gives us concern. If she sees Wray forced out and Roberts stepping down, her views will shift and become firm to doing the right thing. The way she is now is she’s trying to have it both ways. She’s still a good nominee but she’s one of those that must be reminded of what conservatism stands for.
Sometimes jurists get so wrapped up in their version of jurisprudence they forget fundamentals laid down by the Founders, they begin to think the Founders weren’t so wise as Americans are led to believe, that the Constitution and law can be ‘adjusted’ or shifted in context to better conform with their view of history, their understanding of intents and meanings. It becomes sophomoric.
My review of Barrett shows she is susceptible to that cultivation of jurists. But she holds strong to values she likely picked up from Scalia which is good. But her spine strength is not a sure thing.
My review of Lagoa is that her parents taught her well how Castro communism can sneak in and take over. She’s conditioned to keep an eye out for the scammer. It’s not what is said, it’s what’s the agenda is behind what is said. It’s not what is said, it’s what’s done or planned to be done, the agenda.
In this crazy time of BLM/Antifa, Pelosi and Impeachment, Fauci and False Pandemics, liar media, psychopaths like Gates and his vaccine lunacy, we need a Justice that has an eye for the scam, who can see what’s in play, and who can apply the Constitution to protect us all. That would be Lagoa. Barrett might do well but she’s not as sure a thing as Lagoa.
> “a thin record in writing demonstrating unequivically their judicial philosophy”
I reviewed her writings and saw nothing of the sort.
Bring examples.
Quite a mouth you have on you there, too bad you don’t have the brain to match.
Which of the two female judges will rule by the Constitution and not legislate from the bench no matter who the case involves.
(nominee AC Brrett) An interesting read about another remarkable woman. "Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California – grilled her on the role of her Catholic faith in judging." I really don't think anyone who had in her employ for 20 years, a Chinese Spy, her chauffeur, should be asking any questions of a future judiciary on the SCOTUS! No telling what the Chinese Spy gleamed from the U. S. Senator over the years..... Amy Barrett's Bio seems impeccable and probably the more conservative of the two choices...being mindful of the US Constitution and swearing to uphold and protect that document...doesn't mean it will be so.....Pray is about all we can do.
Lagoa didn’t do any unnecessary, beside-the-point signaling in court documents, political circles or religious social circles. She hasn’t been campaigning to be put on the SC bench. I like that honesty and have more trust for Lagoa. Besides, DeSantis trusts her.
Anyone who really wants a nominee who strictly follows the Constitution on several issues and has honest documents to show for it would be advocating for Britt Grant. She’s proven herself to be loyal in regards to our Second Amendment and several other categories of rights. Anyone wanting someone who’s least likely to be corrupted would be urging the nomination of Rushing.
Look at the quote in the body text above quoting what Barrett said about Roe v. Wade.
Barrett appears to be an excellent nominee and we can bet the President would not have picked her if he thought otherwise.
But we need to be careful how the media play us, how they try to prod Americans in a certain direction.
Conservatives need to be more careful and dig deeper in their due diligence about judicial picks.
Barrett is in general very good but look at what she said about the Jacobson decision which is crucial to whether a COVID vaccine will be forced on us or not and look at what Bill Gates has in mind for these vaccines which he is behind.
The Jacobson decision is what gives the Bill Gates maniacs the idea they can prevail regardless of Trump’s views. And Barrett is there recognizing the Jacobson decision, doesn’t mean she will affirm it but she could have written or spoken how it goes against the grain of American liberty and freedom, but she didn’t.
Be careful, look at where we are at. Forced to wear masks, forced to stay indoors, forced to shut down businesses, and forced vaccines are on the horizon and the vaccine planned is like no vaccine ever seen before. It’s all out there and Gates is behind it. He’s truly deranged. So why couldn’t Barrett see this and write an informative essay to let us know she’s got our backs?
Barbara Lagoa is anti-communist to her core which means BLM/Antifa and the Democrat Socialists are unable to fool her with their forced vaccines, forced masks, forced testing to come, and so on, they will not get past her because those are measures to take away freedoms. Lagoa sees it plainly, she has demonstrated consistently, solidly that she’s anti-lockdown which ostensibly stems from her anti-fascist, anti-communist upbringing. Right now, that’s what’s needed.
Barrett can come later. She’s only been a judge for three years. Likely Souter will be gone in a year or two, them Amy comes.
Lagoa has been courageously anti-lockdown without wavering.
Anti-lockdown translates from anti-fascism, anti-communism, anti-Marxism and those principles were instilled in her from the beginning by her family who fled Castro’s Cuba.
So BLM/Antifa, their Democrat puppet-masters, and the never-ending Arabella groups to follow are not going to have an easy time with Lagoa. That’s what we need in this time which could go on for years and years.
Yes, that DeSantis trusts her is a big plus.
Britt is 42 years old and I agree she is solid and also experienced. But young. I think she could be if appointed and confirmed one of the youngest SCOTUS Justices ever. That could be a good thing.
Barrett is excellent as well but like so many in DC, she mixes sometimes with the wrong crowd, willingly or not. And she writes well but her public statements do not bring always confidence. But she was a protégé of Scalia and that has to have had a positive effect.
I believe either one or Britt Grant would be good choices. My personal favorite is ACB.
The only problem is that you have your dates completely wrong.
Amy Coney Barrett was confirmed in October, 2017 - right in the middle of your supposed “honeymoon period” - and only got 55 votes to confirm.
Barbara Lagoa was confirmed in November, 2019 - right in the middle of impeachment - and got 80 votes to confirm.
The only other judges to get confirmed with anything close to that vote in 2019 was William Nardini for the 2nd Circuit in NY (formerly clerked for Sandra Day O’Conner), and Danielle Hunsaker for the 9th Circus, who was originally appointed as a state judge by lesbian governor of Oregon Kate Brown and recommended by Wyden and Merkley.
So it seems pretty clear that the Dems would vote for people they saw as sympathetic to their views. For anyone even slightly conservative or originalist, the confirmation votes were almost entirely along party lines, with the weak sisters (Collins, Murkowski) occasionally voting with the Dems.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.