US Supreme Court Leak (1 Viewer)

[Steve R.]

Another disheartening aspect from the implications of this leak. At a fundamental level, a person within the Supreme Court executed an unethical act. At a higher level, some pundits have raised the belief that the Supreme Court is actually under deceitful attack by the other branches of the government. Biden as President and head of the Executive Branch, Schumer as Majority Leader in the Senate, and Pelosi as Speaker of the House have all virulently condemned the proposed decision. Seems that each of these persons don't believe in the "separation of powers" and the role of the rule-of-law in the democratic process. Essentially, the Democrats are claiming that "we are in charge, dissension not allowed". Another phrase for the Democratic approach to the management of this country, is mob rule. Break out the torches and pitch forks.

 

[AccessBlaster]

Somebody's clerk is about to lose the most prestigious early job they ever held.

What if it turns out to be a renegade justice?

 

[Steve R.]

What if it turns out to be a renegade justice?

Could be, but then our esteemed leaders should be focusing on the "renegade" aspect. As it stands now, Democrats openly want to nullify the Court as being a legitimate component of our republic for the purpose of allowing the Democratic party to "rule" this country unopposed.

Just ran across the image below.

 

[AccessBlaster]

So where was a "women's right to choose" when vaccines were mandatory for women to keep their jobs?

 

[Steve R.]

So where was a "women's right to choose" when vaccines were mandatory for women to keep their jobs?

Which reminds me of this aspect. How can we even have "Women's rights" when being a woman is undefinable? Recall that Ketanji Jackson refused to define what a "woman" is. Biological men can now compete in what was women's sports, since gender identification is by personal choice. Now there is even the unbelievable the assertion that a any person is capable of giving birth.

 

[moke123]

Now there is even the unbelievable the assertion that a any person is capable of giving birth.

men can give birth

Thomas Beatie - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Steve R.]

Thomas Beatie had to be born with a female reproductive system. Surgery, today, is not capable of "manufacturing" ovaries, eggs, uterus, and the hormones needed to manage the growth of the baby, based on that persons (male) DNA. The surgery simply gave that person the appearance of being an ersatz "man". (However, there is an extremely remote possibility that Beatie, do to a very rare genetic anomaly also had male gonads.) The language used to claim that a "man" gave birth is Orwellian Newspeak to grossly manipulate language. Newspeak: "Deliberately ambiguous and contradictory language used to mislead and manipulate the public." Do you really believe that 2+2=5?

 

[Pat Hartman]

Chief Justice Roberts is going down in history as the Chief Justice who killed the Constitution. Maybe they're taking on Roe V. Wade because they failed so miserably when we needed them to uphold the Constitution and prevent the theft of a Presidential election and feel this will appease the Republicans.

 

[Pat Hartman]

Do you really believe that 2+2=5?

It could if you use the right data types and know how to round up. We've all seen floating point errors. You just need to know how to cause them

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Do you really believe that 2+2=5?

It's all a matter of perspective. There was a change at the big construction company and the new boss wanted to test his employees. So he invited three employees for individual interviews. He asked them the same question - "What is 2+2?"

The first employee was an engineer. He whipped out his trusty old-style calculator, punched in the equation, and answered "It is 3.999999995, plus or minus .000000006"

The second employee was a programmer. She thought for a moment and said, "I don't know, but if you give me a team of a senior coder, two junior coders, and a couple of clerks, I can have an answer in about three days."

The third employee was from the marketing department. When the boss asked "What is 2+2?" the marketing guy INSTANTLY responded with "What would you like it to be?"

Which proves that the liberal left comes from a marketing background.

 

[Steve R.]

Adam Schiff on SCOTUS Breach: 'I Don't Care How the Draft Leaked'

Adam Schiff tweeted he did not care how the draft of the SCOTUS opinion on Roe v. Wade leaked -- despite it being an unprecedented breach.

www.breitbart.com

Psaki refuses to condemn leak of Supreme Court draft opinion

White House press secretary Jen Psaki on Wednesday refused to condemn the leaking of a Supreme Court draft opinion signaling the high court may be on the cusp of overturning Roe v. Wade.

www.washingtontimes.com

Democrats sanctimoniously claim to stand for democracy. Democracy depends on the rule of law and ethical behavior, yet Democrats (like Schiff) now claim that breaking the law and tossing ethics aside is OK since it furthers the objectives of the Democratic party.

This failure to condemn, further documents, that the Democratic party is deploying both the Legislative and Executive branches of government to "attack" both the independence and legitimacy of the US Supreme Court. Democrats are undermining democracy. Democrats are the threat to democracy.

PS: Schiff should also call for all the charges, by the US government, against Julian Assange to be dropped since he (Schiff) is not concerned about the origin of the leaked information.

 

[Pat Hartman]

I'm just glad we're back to my body my choice.

 

[Mike Krailo]

This is just a rational thought in general and not directed at anyone here but how deranged do you have to be to consider a baby developing inside of your body to be your body. In the later stages, the baby has it's own heart that beats and it can grab and squeeze its hands and kick its feet independently. To say that the developing baby is part of your body is just flat out wrong. A baby is growing inside your body is more of what is really happening. It's a different body growing inside a host body. To have the view that it is a non living being or mass of cells is to deny science and distort the true situation. Just because it depends on its host body to grow and develop does not mean that it is not living. If anyone really truly believes the baby is their body, then why is there no pain for you when the baby is mutilated alive with the tools used by the physicians who perform the killing of the baby to achieve the desired abortion of life? Did you ever stop to think that maybe the baby growing inside of you might be feeling a great deal of pain during that process?

Again, this is not directed at anyone. It is just that evil is clearly blind to any clear thinking on this matter. This court decision (assuming that's what happens) doesn't even prevent anyone from still having an abortion but seeing the reactions on the left makes it clear what their evil intentions are. The emotions to make it a decision that you have the right to decide another living beings fate simply because of location where the baby grows is pure evil in the making. And that is not even what the draft opinion is about anyway. Instead, the left has totally twisted things around to give the impression that woman cannot have an abortion if this opinion stands as ruling in June. It's as if they have chosen not to read the opinion and instead whip up the frenzied emotions about abortion in general. Even so, there is going to be even more evil unleashed if our court system is allowed to be attacked without penalty. God save the unborn.

 

[Pat Hartman]

History will judge America harshly for our willingness to accept abortion at will. I think that there are less than 10 countries in the world that even allow abortions let alone late term abortions. It always confuses me how the left can be so adamant in their opinion that capital punishment is totally wrong and must be abolished on the one hand and on the other that abortion is totally right up to the point of the mother being in labor in the delivery room. I just don't understand how any thinking person can hold both beliefs. And yet they do. They are perfectly OK with killing the innocent unborn but not with killing the evil criminal.

The Roe V. Wade opinion is not about abortion at all. It is about bending the interpretation of the Constitution to justify a ruling that has no basis in the Constitution, like the one that "validated" Obamacare. The Constitution does not address abortion at all, nor any other medical procedure. That means, we can't make Federal laws to control it. Good or bad, that's the Constitution. If we want to make federal laws to control Abortion, we need to amend the Constitution. Roe V. Wade is just invalid as a decision and this particular court has decided to right that particular wrong. Revoking it just moves the decision to allow/disallow abortions down to the states. If states want to allow/disallow abortion, they are free to do so. The left is making a mountain out of a molehill as usual. But the right shouldn't get all happy either. Roe V. Wade did offer some prohibitions against late term abortions.

 

[moke123]

I think that there are less than 10 countries in the world that even allow abortions let alone late term abortions.

About 65 allow, 20 don't allow.

 

[Pat Hartman]

What about the other 100+ countries. I'm sure you have a link.

 

[moke123]

What about the other 100+ countries. I'm sure you have a link.

 

[AccessBlaster]

The real insurrection

 

[Mike Krailo]

He took the tweet down admitting that it was irresponsible but these are the chumps we have to deal with.

 

[AccessBlaster]

He took the tweet down admitting that it was irresponsible but these are the chumps we have to deal with.

After the damage was done and the unstable got the extreme message.