Supreme Shenanigans

Welcome to the Precious Metals Bug Forums

Welcome to the PMBug forums - a watering hole for folks interested in gold, silver, precious metals, sound money, investing, market and economic news, central bank monetary policies, politics and more.

Why not register an account and join the discussions? When you register an account and log in, you may enjoy additional benefits including no Google ads, market data/charts, access to trade/barter with the community and much more. Registering an account is free - you have nothing to lose!

SCOTUS Was Never Meant To Be Kings & Queen But Then This Happened...​

Jun 27, 2024 #MoreFromThom

America’s Founders designed the judiciary as the weakest branch. John Marshall changed all that. And today, we’re paying the price for it.


9:09
 
Pillow-snuffed.

All that's in question, is the specifics.

This is how the Left changes hearts and minds...not. They change laws and ossify the Ruling Classes.
 
searcher said:

SCOTUS Was Never Meant To Be Kings & Queen But Then This Happened...​

Jun 27, 2024 #MoreFromThom

America’s Founders designed the judiciary as the weakest branch. John Marshall changed all that. And today, we’re paying the price for it.


9:09
Click to expand...

searcher said:

SCOTUS Was Never Meant To Be Kings & Queen But Then This Happened...​

Jun 27, 2024 #MoreFromThom

America’s Founders designed the judiciary as the weakest branch. John Marshall changed all that. And today, we’re paying the price for it.


9:09
Click to expand...

This guys an idiot. Apparently he thinks that the more than 200 government agencies should have the power to fine at will without a trial. Guess he's never looked at the constitution.
 
Cigarlover said:
This guys an idiot. Apparently he thinks that the more than 200 government agencies should have the power to fine at will without a trial. Guess he's never looked at the constitution.
Click to expand...
He's a tool.

Probably compensated well by the Deep State. The flip side of it is, if he discovers he has an opinion differing from the one he's told to have, he loses his sinecure.
 
She's a brainless automaton, doing as she's told.

It never ONCE bothered ANY of the Left, when politically-connected Stuporeme Kangaroos sided with their hero of the moment, or his Department uh Just Us.
 

Supreme Court Could Face Huge Changes Under Proposed Plan​

Democrats have renewed calls to add four more seats to the Supreme Court as a way of diluting its conservative majority.

On Thursday, Massachusetts Senator Edward J. Markey and Georgia Representative Hank Johnson, a member of the Judiciary Subcommittee, held a news conference to call for an expansion of the court and highlight the Judiciary Act, which would create a 13-justice Supreme Court.

Markey, the lead author of the legislation, told reporters in Washington, D.C., that the bill is intended to overcome the court's swing to "extremist" far-right politics.

"The court's recent decisions on presidential immunity, Chevron deference and overturning Roe v. Wade laid bare that a far-right, extremist majority has been fully captured and plunged the court into a crisis of confidence and legitimacy," he said.

More:

 
It's only a crisis of confidence and legitimacy for the left right now. If roles were reversed and they were shoving shit laws down the throats of conservatives it would be democracy in action.
Not sure what difference it makes anyway when the SC rejects stuff like Biden forgiving student loans but he does it anyway. I guess if the left had a majority then Biden could get permission to do it?
What really gives the SC no legitimacy is when they decide one way or the other depending on who has the majority. The big difference is when conservatives are in charge, the courts follows the constitution more closely. When the left is in charge, they just go along with whatever the left wants regardless of the constitution.
 
Cigarlover said:
When the left is in charge, they just go along with whatever the left wants regardless of the constitution.
Click to expand...
The left is in charge now, and the court sure aren't giving them everything they want. That's what they are bitching and moaning about. That they aren't ruling the way dems/leftists want.
 

Joe Biden wants to rein in the Supreme Court, saying it's gone rogue after rulings on abortion and presidential immunity​

  • Biden has proposed a radical reform of the US Supreme Court.
  • The plan includes term limits and a binding code of conduct.
  • The proposal follows controversial rulings and a conservative-leaning court composition.
Citing "recent ethics scandals" involving Supreme Court justices, President Joe Biden has announced a proposal to drastically reform the workings of the court, including by establishing term limits for sitting Justices.

More:

 
Graham chimes in (soap opera time)

Graham signals opposition to more justices on Supreme Court, term limits​

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said that he would oppose Supreme Court reforms on Sunday, going against reported ideas from President Biden that would impose more strict ethics requirements and term limits for justices.

Graham told CBS’s Robert Costa on “Face the Nation” that he won’t work with Biden on any reform bill.

More:

 
searcher said:
The proposal follows controversial rulings and a conservative-leaning court composition.
Click to expand...
Yea, the old "wah! we aren't getting our way on everything!" temper tantrum bull shit the dems always try to pull.

If there is an existential threat to our nation, it's the democrat party.

In the other thread, you said you like things the way they are with our gov, but here you seem to want things changed. Lol
 
To do what Joetato wants would require a Constitutional Amendment.

To do it with a simple act of Congress would be unConstitutional.
 
Joe King said:
To do it with a simple act of Congress would be unConstitutional.
Click to expand...

I can't predict the future but I have a feeling that should Kamala win there will be some major changes with the SC. They're way outta control. Especially Alito and Thomas.
 
searcher said:
I can't predict the future but I have a feeling that should Kamala win there will be some major changes with the SC. They're way outta control. Especially Alito and Thomas.
Click to expand...
It's not up to the President to change the construction or the operations of the Supreme Kourt.

Kameltoe can try. Will try, probably - she's that stupid.

That's unconstitutional - a flagrant violation of structure and Separation of Powers - and will take us right into Civil War.

Which, as an aside, is where we're headed anyway. Here's some dark readings, by a guy a bit more articulate than I...

tldavis.substack.com

The Worst and the Vilest

A battle for the U.S., perhaps a full blown war, is shaping up.
tldavis.substack.com tldavis.substack.com

Whatever you think about Substack, I'd encourage you to bounce over and see if what T.L. has to say, resonates with you. He predicts civil war - and predicts that there's no way OUT of civil war.
 
searcher said:
I can't predict the future but I have a feeling that should Kamala win there will be some major changes with the SC. They're way outta control. Especially Alito and Thomas.
Click to expand...
So it'd be ok with you if they violate the Constitution?

Why even have a Constitution, if it is not going to be followed?

Do you support our Constitution, or not?
 
Casey Jones said:
It's not up to the President to change the construction or the operations of the Supreme Kourt.
Click to expand...
I don't think @searcher cares if the gov takes unConstitutional actions.

All he seems to care about, is that the gov does what he thinks it should do.
....even if that means violating the Constitution.


Am I right, @searcher ?
 
Well? Am I?

When I show clear proof of separation of powers being violated, you don't seem to care about it, but then go on to say that you want separation of power.

Which is it you want? You can't have both.

The Constitution CLEARLY defines the three branches of gov and does not grant the power of one branch to the others.
...yet you seek to preserve an Executive branch that exercises legislative and judicial power.


Can you please tell us which way you want it?
 

Supreme Court LEAKS Get Exposed in JUST IN TIME​

Aug 5, 2024

Michael Popok joined by Dina Doll sitting in for KFA, on the Legal AF podcast (after dark edition) debate how the new Supreme Court leaks will help President Biden and the Harris campaign reform the Supreme Court.


10:57
 
^^^ why does she repeatedly misrepresent the immunity ruling as giving "absolute" immunity to the potus?

It did no such thing. All it said was that the potus has immunity only for OFFICIAL acts.
 
Joe King said:
By "momentum", you really mean lies, right?
Click to expand...

One man's lie is another man's truth.
_________________________________________

Looks like they are using Fox to spew propaganda.

Supreme Court CAUGHT USING FOX to help FAILING Trump​

Aug 5, 2024 Legal AF Podcast

Alt-right Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch just went on Fox News to THREATEN President Joe Biden and VP Harris and their efforts to return ethics and accountability to the Supreme Court. Michael Popok puts the outrageous appearance in perspective and analyzes the fall of Gorsuch.


20:16
 
searcher said:
One man's lie is another man's truth.
_________________________________________

Looks like they are using Fox to spew propaganda.

Supreme Court CAUGHT USING FOX to help FAILING Trump​

Aug 5, 2024 Legal AF Podcast

Alt-right Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch just went on Fox News to THREATEN President Joe Biden and VP Harris and their efforts to return ethics and accountability to the Supreme Court. Michael Popok puts the outrageous appearance in perspective and analyzes the fall of Gorsuch.


20:16
Click to expand...

Is there no honest discourse for you to cut & paste?
Michael Podunk is a lying twisting twerp.
At least that's my truth.
 
searcher said:
One man's lie is another man's truth.
Click to expand...
But only one can actually be true
.....and the truth is, the immunity ruling ONLY applies to official acts.

it says so right in the ruling.

Or are the idiot dems mad about it because they can't tell the dif betwixt official and no-official (personal) acts of the potus?

Or is it an admission that the things Trump did that they don't like, were in fact official acts protected by Article 2 of the Constitution?


searcher said:
Alt-right Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch just went on Fox News to THREATEN President Joe Biden and VP Harris and their efforts to return ethics and accountability to the Supreme Court. Michael Popok puts the outrageous appearance in perspective and analyzes the fall of Gorsuch.
Click to expand...
How is he not correct?

You said that you want our gov to have separation of power, did you not?

We have three co-branches of gov. As in, no single branch is over the other two. They are separate.
...and as such, none have power over the others to make them them have to do anything.



glockngold said:
Is there no honest discourse for you to cut & paste?
Click to expand...
No, he has nothing like that to post at all.
 
glockngold said:
Is there no honest discourse for you to cut & paste?
Click to expand...

No different than anyone else, talk when I want, copy & paste the same way.

glockngold said:
Michael Podunk is a lying twisting twerp.
Click to expand...

You're stating an opinion. Here's some facts.

Michael S. Popok | Zumpano Patricios - New York City

Michael S. Popok is Managing Partner of the New York Office of Zumpano Patricios.
www.zplaw.com www.zplaw.com

Joe King said:
.and the truth is, the immunity ruling ONLY applies to official acts.
Click to expand...

You're correct on this one and Judge Chutkan knows the score. She's moving along with the Jan 6th case. Won't happen before the election but I'm hoping it happens before Jan 6th. In fact, I think it would be poetic justice for the jury to reach a decision on this coming Jan 6.
 
Joe King said:
the truth is, the immunity ruling ONLY applies to official acts.
Click to expand...

searcher said:
You're correct on this one
Click to expand...
Of course I'm correct. So why are the dems and those carrying their water attempting to lie about it?

Even one of the lib SC Justices lied about it in her dissenting opinion on the case, yet no one in the msm has fact checked her on it.
 
searcher said:
One man's lie is another man's truth.
Click to expand...
Disagree. Vehemently.

There are many opinions, and all are derived from facts, understandings, moral absolutes that each person has or has not.

FACTS...ARE.

There are incomplete or incorrect understandings of what is the truth...what is fact. That does not change reality.

Misunderstanding facts, truths, is something we all do. It's what discussion is supposed to resolve, at least partially.

To DELIBERATELY mis-state facts, to weave a "My-Truth" Narrative...IS TO LIE.

And there is no defense for lying. The 32 years of Hell that this nation has gone through since Bubba told his lies, and the media called it good...defended lying...are the result of rejecting empirical Fact in favor of pleasing Narrative.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom