Posted on 09/21/2020 2:29:48 PM PDT by Zenyatta
Democrats are reportedly gearing up for “total war” and plan to implement radical changes to the legislative and judiciary branches of the government if the GOP-led Senate confirms a new Supreme Court (SCOTUS) justice before the Nov. 3 election then lose the majority after the election, Axios reported Sunday.
The Democrats’ options include ending the Senate filibuster rule — which requires a 60-vote supermajority to end debate and move to a vote instead of a simple majority — expanding the number of Supreme Court justices, granting statehood to the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, and even undertaking a second impeachment effort against the President if he tries to fill the seat vacated by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
(Excerpt) Read more at lacortenews.com ...
“Once total war is declared, the result is often not what is envisioned by the aggressor.”
Agree entirely.
That said, if we prevail in November we have no choice but to do everything possible to eradicate the radical left from American politics. We need to drive Marxism from our shores - forever.
The Republicans control the Executive, the Senate and, if Trump and McConnell can get a constitutional conservative judge to replace RBG, then they will control the Judicial, as well.
Not sure, except for a lot of hateful bluster, how the democRATS think they will be able to do anything substantive. They might start impeachment hearings against Trump again but where will that take them? Nowhere.
All talk and no do.
What does total war mean.
Bring it.
“Love it. Add southern and western virginia (that wanted to join west virginia...new state # 1) and eastern oregon/northern california (new state # 2). I’ll see you on your 4 senators and raise you your light blue representatives turning red.”
There is a problem with that. While adding new states from a territory like Puerto Rico can be done by a vote of Congress, creating new states from portions of existing states also requires the approval of the state legislatures of the states losing territory as well. So in your scenario, the state legislatures of California, Virginia and Oregon (all Dem controlled) would have to agree. There is no chance that would happen if it would give the GOP more senators.
Goebbels initially coined the phrase “Total War”.
So you can only imagine if a Republican used the term, the press would jump all over it for the Nazi connotations.
“You keep saying 6-3 like you don’t know about Roberts.”
I think as long as Roberts can’t be the swing vote, he would be more likely to vote with the majority, if only to be able to control who gets to write the decision.
“cant make new states out of existing states”
You can, but only if the existing state(s) agree. (See: West Virginia.)
I know that
“Do you think they could get by with passing a law expanding SCOTUS, which at the same time prohibits any future changes to its size?”
No, they cannot do that without a Constitutional amendment, nor can they require a super-majority to change the law. It is well-established law that a current Congress cannot bind a subsequent Congress from repealing or altering a statute.
BUMP!!
This is no surprise.
They do not want to let anything get in their way of a total power grab.
The bloodlust in them is unbelievable.
I pray that people would see them for who and what they are.
And New New York.
There’s actually been a movement for some time now to secede from NYC.
Upstate hates NYC. NYC has ruined the rest of the state.
They’re going to try and do these anyway regardless if he confirms a Nominee or not....He needs to just keep trucking on and ignore the noise until they actually do something he can counter act on.
Upstate was once quite lovely as we use to travel to the city there close to our northern Border.....but family still living out there says nobody goes to the city anymore as there’s way too much crime.....they’ve ruined that lovely upstate city.
The demographic trend continues to look grim.
“That’s why there are so many ‘unintended consequences.’”
Nothing unintended about it if they start a war we kill everyone we need to to win that war.
Intentionally.
They do not get to define the rules of that war.
Enemies are simply targets and they are going to have to put on their big boy panties to be buried in.
Wars are won by rendering death and destruction not by playing school kid word games.
The last “Total War” ended with the first use of a nuclear weapon. Your side will kill the opponent to the point of their becoming not capable of warfare. You convince them of your intention to eradicate them if their surrender is not forthcoming.
That's the problem. Starting with the ultra-liberal Warren Court, many "well-established laws" were thrown under the bus.
Since the GOP's only short-term counter-move in the 1950s required an impossibly high threshold of 67 votes to impeach and remove, they just sat helplessly and watched one law after another being enacted by 9 unelected, life-termed men.
Are you absolutely confident that a 19-member SCOTUS with a Millennial Marxist majority a year from now will abide by the "well-established law" conventional wisdom?
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.