Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: BenLurkin

They will not be satisfied until they have control of all three branches of the Federal Government.


7 posted on 04/10/2021 8:17:44 AM PDT by fireman15
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: fireman15

They will not be satisfied until they have control of all three branches of the Federal Government.

Yeah. The 98% they control now isn’t enough.

From counties on up they have pretty much taken over this country.

That along with big business I think we all know who is running the country.


14 posted on 04/10/2021 8:30:26 AM PDT by JayAr36 (My disgust with government is complete.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: fireman15

Yes, total control as in totalitarianism

Dictionary.com:

of or relating to a centralized government that does not tolerate parties of differing opinion and that exercises dictatorial control over many aspects of life.
exercising control over the freedom, will, or thought of others; authoritarian; autocratic.


15 posted on 04/10/2021 8:31:05 AM PDT by Karoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: fireman15

They won’t be satisfied until there is essentially one branch of government, and one absolute ruler. Then they’ll wonder why they aren’t getting all the stuff they were promised.


20 posted on 04/10/2021 8:35:07 AM PDT by Telepathic Intruder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: fireman15
They will not be satisfied until they have control of all three branches of the Federal Government.

You have to give them credit. The Democrats will do anything to acquire and keep power.

Shame the Republicans don’t fight as hard...

25 posted on 04/10/2021 8:40:55 AM PDT by Magnatron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: fireman15; a fool in paradise; LS
I'm not a lawyer nor do I play on on TV. But let me suggest a possible "poison pill" to the leftist desire to pack the court.

"Precedent" or stare decisis underpins a great deal of the legal system. But what if we were to argue that a change in the number of justices would nullify SCOTUS precedent? Justice Rehnquist explained that stare decisis is not an “inexorable command.” On occasion, the Court will decide not to apply the doctrine if a prior decision is deemed unworkable. In addition, significant societal changes may also prompt the Court to overrule precedent; however, any decision to overrule precedent is exercised cautiously.

I think a few, well-placed law review articles and public comments on the airways that say, basically, if ANYONE packs the court it effectively changes the opinion building process such that prior opinions are nullified. So sure, Bidet gets a few noobs, but the tide goes in and out...And since a great deal of stupidity in govt rests on dumb leftist legal opinions (Obamacare, Kelo), not to mention the expansion of Leviathan on the basis of the Commerce Clause, with the addition of one justice, it is ALL turned to dust.

Get Col Schlichter to float the idea...maybe a few folks from Legal Insurrection to post about it...watch it gather a head of steam...

Sure, liberal hacks will say "no" but all you need is for the idea to germinate, and for conservatives to suddenly EMBRACE court-packing...

...and the idea will die on the vine.

31 posted on 04/10/2021 9:04:57 AM PDT by DoodleBob (Gravity's waiting period is about 9.8 m/s^2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson