FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
Posted on 03/31/2016 12:02:43 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan
Donald Trump on Wednesday fired back at Hillary Clinton, remarking that he would likely nominate Supreme Court justices who “would look very seriously at her email disaster.”
The former secretary of state has been under fire over her use of a private email server during her time at the State Department and called out the Republican front-runner in a speech Monday highlighting the impact the Supreme Court should have on this election. Clinton invoked Trump’s proposal to ban Muslims from entering the U.S. and asked Wisconsin voters what kind of justice a President Trump would nominate.
“Well, I’d probably appoint people that would look very seriously at her email disaster because it’s a criminal activity, and I would appoint people that would look very seriously at that to start off with,” Trump said in a phone interview with ABC's “Good Morning America.”
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
Dear Donald Trump,
Supreme Court justices do not investigate crimes.
That is all.
BuckeyeTexan
this has been posted. ineeed, it’s the worst answer in the history of horrible answers. uninformed, nay, utterly ignorant of the basic functions of the central government.
yeah, this is exactly what I’m looking for in a president. consistent cluelessness.
I posted the previous thread from RawStory. Had no idea it was a bad site. Never looked before. Just took the first article that I saw on Google. Thread was pulled.
Appreciate you re-posting the thread.
You are mis quoting what was said!!!! You are reposting FALSE reporting!!! Anyone reading this thread NEEDS to watch the video Trump was asked about the justice department and the court!!! The answer is about the justice department!!! You buckeye should be ashamed of yourself for reposting FALSE media reporting!!!!
ah. didn’t know it had been pulled. odd, since salon and national enquirer are apparently acceptable sources on FR these days.
It’s not false. Feel free to post a transcript.
The focus of the question was to get Trump’s response to Hillary Clinton’s comment about how scary it would be to think about what kind of justice Trump would appoint.
You’re welcome. It’s a shame we lost the discussion though.
WTF???
Anymore proof needed that this guy would destroy this country?
A shot across the bow of SS Hildabeast.
It is. I’ll attempt to summarize my thoughts on this.
This statement only furthers the notion that Trump is severely ignorant of government matters. He lacks a proper understanding of the Constitution and separation of powers. As has been pointed out SCOTUS does not initiate criminal investigations.
You’d think that someone with his exposure to lawyers and politicians would have a better understanding than John Q. Public about these things. However, I suspect that Trump’s interactions with lawyers only goes so far as picking up the phone to his lawyer and saying, “handle this.” Which is why his first instinct when challenged is to file a lawsuit.
As a result, Trump has demonstrated that he is an aloof individual. He has no inclination to understand the fundamentals of government. What’s going to happen is that Trump will tell one of his flunkies in the administration to put together a list of SCOTUS nominees. But because he lacks the knowledge base he won’t be able to call BS when said lacky shoves a liberal SC nominee in his face and says, “that one.” So your next SC justice nominee, should Trump be elected, will be determined by the likes of Roger Stone or Corey Lewandowski or some other nameless, faceless individual.
Furthermore, he does not appreciate the role of the SCOTUS. Their purpose is to review matters of law brought to them on appeal and either affirm or deny based on the Constitution, federal statue or some legal procedure. It is not to be an activist. We’ve had enough of that already.
Trump’s ignorance is approaching dangerous levels. He’s demonstrating that he should be nowhere near the SC nominating process.
He’s talked about this several times. He’s talking about justice dept people.
Thank you for clarifying that.
He says and supporters argue that he will hire the best people. What worries me is that he has failed his first big test of hiring the best people. He won primaries but left his delegates hanging in the wind with no direction or support. He has no campaign infrastructure and no organization beyond holding rallies.
Supporters argue that he is learning as he goes and will improve. We’ll see. Regardless, it’s worrisome to think that he will likewise have a steep learning curve as POTUS.
This was already posted, and you posted it again just to run your mouth like you did on the other thread.
This politico article doesn’t even link the interview or provide a complete transcript.
And you just got slapped down.
Can you post a transcript of the interview please? I can’t seem to find one. Only a 3 paragraph politico blurb that you rely on as fact.
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.