Best buds
-
-
Lazy people don’t bother to read. Ugh. Thank you for this thread.
-
More like, angry people don’t bother to see any truths that oppose their narrative.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
When is that decision made?
-
That's not what I was asking, or meant, rather. I meant Justice Perjurapist's decision to abstain from the decision. His vote wasn't needed
-
Not on this one, that is for sure. But his influence is there from his dissents at Circuit Court.
-
Exactly. One wonders if he already had an inkling that his vote wouldn't be needed on this one, so he could sit it out
-
At least you don’t sound like a crazy conspiracy theorist
-
Pffft, you literally tweeted that Hillary is a Klan member, gtohpic.twitter.com/HBzHFvwGfs
-
I tweeted “Hillary is a klan member?” Lol, sure Jan. All you people do is lie and deflect. This obviously had nothing to do w Kavanaugh and instead of admitting it, you go full potato.
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Understandable focus on BK, but why not also on
#GorsuchResign? He's a drag on this Cooked Court as sure as the other, no? -
To save our democracy we have to reestablish processes based on basic principles of Justice. To impeach Gorsuch he has to have done something wrong. Not beyond any doubt but beyond a reasonable one.
-
Gorsuch is fruit of the poison tree. If you follow the hastag you'll find a thread or two with the argument all fleshed out, but here's the gist of it:pic.twitter.com/Qk1Vlw76Ki
-
Thomas & Kavanaugh need to be looked at carefully. Thomas' wife's behavior has been sketchy since he got on the court. Need to win house to start
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It was his first day on the job. I would assume testimony had occurred prior to his arrival. Thus, he could not be a voting member.
-
there was no testimony, that's not how this works...that's not how any of this works
@chrisgeidner@CHHolte@Jeanne0256 -
-
What was argued in person? The North Dakota voter ID case? Not it was not argued in person before the SCOTUS.
@yankee_bailey@chrisgeidner@CHHolte@Jeanne0256 -
Umm, that's a requirement for anything before the SCOTUS decides. They send a written argument and then they appear before the SCOTUS for the oral argument. It's a procedure and PROCESS.
-


Are you an attorney? I hope not. That's not what happened in the North Dakota voter ID case. Please do some research of the different ways the SCOTUS acts, it does more than you seem to be aware of.
@yankee_bailey@chrisgeidner@CHHolte@Jeanne0256 -
Are you aware of the action the SCOTUS took on the travel ban case? There was no oral argument before the SCOTUS before they took the action they did. Please don't give out false info if you don't know how things work.
@yankee_bailey@chrisgeidner@CHHolte@Jeanne0256 -
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.