betting sites mean nothing here, everyday people bet against teams they like and for teams they don't like depending on the opponent...But Barbara would best be chosen for now with Amy coming up for the next go-round.
And then after that? Because there could very well be an after that.
Why there's Sidney Powell who would be an Icon either as a Supreme Court Justice or as an Attorney General following Bill Barr should he retire in POTUS's second term.
Future for justice looks bright!
Pile of dog crap
Barret is a great pick
Barbara is a great pick as well
Why do we still listen to fake news?
I heavily disagree! Lagoa was confirmed to the court by an 80 to 15 vote. Democrats love her, and we should have a problem with that. I would rather President Trump nominate a woman previously confirmed along party lines, and not one that Democrats previously crossed party lines to confirm. We don't need another turncoat Supreme.
Agreed.
You posted this once and it was removed......are you looking to get banned?
Praise Jeebus, you're so much smarter than the rest of us.
We are all like little special-ed kids compared to you.
You should have a blog so you could teach us to be smart.
We all so stoopy.
her nomination was reported out of committee by a vote of 18–4.[22] On November 19, 2019, the Senate invoked cloture on her nomination by a vote of 80–15,[23] and on the next day, November 20, confirmed her nomination by a vote of 80–15
Barbara Lagoa got 80 votes for confirmation - so what in the world makes you think the left would go nuclear over her, while accepting Barrett? Lagoa is the typical GOP “stealth” pick that always comes back to bite us in the butt. See: Warren Burger, David Souter, Anthony Kennedy, John Paul Steven...
I can tell you with absolute certainty, however, that either of them will make a better one than Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Joining what I see is a last minute GOP-e campaign to replace Barrett with Lagoa as the nominee?
I’ll pass... as I suspect most others would.
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.
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...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.
I believe either one or Britt Grant would be good choices. My personal favorite is ACB.
The only reason more Democrats voted to confirm Lagoa, is that there was no excuse for them to oppose her appointment. She didn’t campaign as a political or religious celebrity, and she had no cases involving specific controversial issues.
With Barrett, it appears that the most outspoken commenters here are wanting a nominee for the purpose of only one issue.
So, you disregard Barret’s actual rulings, but include her prediction of what a court which does not include her will do - to predict her judicial leanings?