|
typically if one begins to sob openly about how much they love beer during the interview process for a prestigious job they do not get the job. Unless that job is SUPREME COURT JUSTICE, in which weeping openly about how much you love to drink is good, actually
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 14:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 17:22 |
|
|
Devil's triangle drinking game
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 14:55
|
|
|
Bust Rodd posted:typically if one begins to sob openly about how much they love beer during the interview process for a prestigious job they do not get the job. Unless that job is SUPREME COURT JUSTICE, in which weeping openly about how much you love to drink is good, actually like "you libs can't complain we got rid of beer man" and sure I know they're all interchangeable but I'm sure they can find someone shittier than any given person
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 15:00
|
|
|
DACK FAYDEN posted:I honestly still don't understand why they didn't use that as an excuse to dump him and install someone even shittier Kavanaugh is, like, the Platonic ideal of a supreme court appointee. They couldn't not let him in, or else it might signal to others down the pipe that something could interrupt their pre-destined rise to glory https://soundcloud.com/alabpodcast/series-one-lawyer-brain-part-1-be-like-brett
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 15:09
|
|
|
it’s kind of insane that the Democratic Party’s main strategy for the last decade has been “you ABSOLUTELY MUST vote for us or else Roe v Wade is done for!” and they control all 3 branches of the government and it still happened anyway Zoomers will be the first generation of women to have fewer rights than their mothers or grandmothers. lmao
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 15:52
|
|
|
aum shinrikyo
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 15:57
|
|
|
mawarannahr posted:aum shinrikyo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVnscHsPfR4
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 15:59
|
|
|
moist turtleneck posted:“I will soon be giving a first in television history full, unedited preview of the vicious attempted ‘takeout’ interview of me by Lesley Stahl of @60Minutes,” Trump tweeted Thursday. “Watch her constant interruptions & anger. Compare my full, flowing and ‘magnificently brilliant’ answers to their ‘Q’s’.” Omg its so good. i forgot that we used to have an endless supply of these.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 16:09
|
|
|
Toph Bei Fong posted:Kavanaugh is, like, the Platonic ideal of a supreme court appointee. They couldn't not let him in, or else it might signal to others down the pipe that something could interrupt their pre-destined rise to glory 
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 16:15
|
|
|
Bust Rodd posted:it’s kind of insane that the Democratic Party’s main strategy for the last decade has been “you ABSOLUTELY MUST vote for us or else Roe v Wade is done for!” and they control all 3 branches of the government and it still happened anyway They uh, don't actually control the judical branch of the govt. Thats why this is happening.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 17:24
|
|
|
One More Fat Nerd posted:They uh, don't actually control the judical branch of the govt. Thats why this is happening. right but don't they control the branches who would be able to impeach members of the court, or confirm new appointees?
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 17:33
|
|
|
BIG-DICK-BUTT-gently caress posted:Omg its so good. i forgot that we used to have an endless supply of these. in times of plenty we do not think of the times of none
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 17:58
|
|
|
kavanaugh had a bunch of actual people call in with Tips about him being a Bad Guy and the FBI or whatever just ignored them lol also his magical disappearing season tickets debts
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 18:29
|
|
|
On January 22, 1973, the Supreme Court issued a 7–2 decision in favor of "Jane Roe" (Norma McCorvey) holding that women in the United States had a fundamental right to choose whether to have abortions without excessive government restriction and striking down Texas's abortion ban as unconstitutional.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 18:36
|
|
|
brett kavanaugh having hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt because of """""baseball tickets""""""
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 19:33
|
|
|
Pepe Silvia Browne posted:right but don't they control the branches who would be able to impeach members of the court, or confirm new appointees? no, when “control” means 2/3 supermajority
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 19:42
|
|
|
Bust Rodd posted:it’s kind of insane that the Democratic Party’s main strategy for the last decade has been “you ABSOLUTELY MUST vote for us or else Roe v Wade is done for!” and they control all 3 branches of the government and it still happened anyway yeah kind of insane that they were right
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 19:44
|
|
|
ben shapino posted:yeah kind of insane that they were right delusional partisan
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 19:45
|
|
|
ben shapino posted:yeah kind of insane that they were right They just got the conjunction wrong is all.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 19:45
|
|
|
indigi posted:no, when “control” means 2/3 supermajority idk seems like they just confirmed a nominee, just confirm like 9 more. seems easy imo
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 19:50
|
|
|
It also doesn't make any sense to protect the fillibuster anymore, since abortion bans were pretty much the go-to example of why letting the republicans rule with a majority was bad.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 19:51
|
|
|
to add new justices they’d still need 60 for the filibuster
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 19:51
|
|
|
indigi posted:to add new justices they’d still need 60 for the filibuster Judicial nominees are exempt from the fillibuster, dingus. Republicans eliminated the filibuster for supreme court nominees when the filibuster was standing in the way of getting their own nominee through. Then they eliminated the filibuster for all other judicial nominees with the filibuster was standing in the way of getting their own nominees through. By the way you can literally just do that whenever you want, get rid of the filibuster with 50 votes.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 19:53
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:Judicial nominees are exempt from the fillibuster, dingus. Republicans eliminated the filibuster for supreme court nominees when the filibuster was standing in the way of getting their own nominee through. Then they eliminated the filibuster for all other judicial nominees with the filibuster was standing in the way of getting their own nominees through. By the way you can literally just do that whenever you want, get rid of the filibuster with 50 votes. heck you can add it back the next day too for funsies and it won't matter at all
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 19:59
|
|
|
actually you can't because then you will be perceived accountable for how you govern
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 20:03
|
|
|
Antonymous posted:actually you can't because then you will be perceived accountable for how you govern  funniest post ITT
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 20:15
|
|
|
Bust Rodd posted:typically if one begins to sob openly about how much they love beer during the interview process for a prestigious job they do not get the job. Unless that job is SUPREME COURT JUSTICE, in which weeping openly about how much you love to drink is good, actually motherfuckre was probably lying about that too 
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 20:18
|
|
|
If Soviet Union was Upper Volta with missiles, what is USA?
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 20:21
|
|
|
mawarannahr posted:aum shinrikyo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1iwjWmOkuI campaign song for when the cult leader ran for house of representatives in 1990
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 20:40
|
|
|
at that point the cult had killed two of its own members plus a lawyer and that lawyer's entire family
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 20:48
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:Judicial nominees are exempt from the fillibuster, dingus. Republicans eliminated the filibuster for supreme court nominees when the filibuster was standing in the way of getting their own nominee through. Then they eliminated the filibuster for all other judicial nominees with the filibuster was standing in the way of getting their own nominees through. By the way you can literally just do that whenever you want, get rid of the filibuster with 50 votes. to add new justices to the Supreme Court they would have to pass legislation, you can’t just appoint a new one whenever you feel like it. that’s why they only do it when one dies
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 20:52
|
|
|
indigi posted:to add new justices to the Supreme Court they would have to pass legislation, you can’t just appoint a new one whenever you feel like it. that’s why they only do it when one dies You can literally just appoint a new one whenever you feel like it. The process is governed by the constitution, not law, and the constitution doesn't specify a number of justices. THere is no law that would need to be amended to increase the number of justices. There was a standoff in the 40s where FDR threatened to do exactly that until the supreme court stopped striking down his laws.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 20:54
|
|
|
30.5 Days posted:You can literally just appoint a new one whenever you feel like it. The process is governed by the constitution, not law, and the constitution doesn't specify a number of justices. THere is no law that would need to be amended to increase the number of justices. There was a standoff in the 40s where FDR threatened to do exactly that until the supreme court stopped striking down his laws. read it again. the constitution specifies that congress would pass a law governing the courts, which they did a few times but most recently in 1869, which is why it’s 9. it used to be 6, 7, and 10. so yes it would require new legislation to appoint a new justice. do you think guys like FDR and Reagan just withheld out of decorum
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 21:01
|
|
|
Fish of hemp posted:If Soviet Union was Upper Volta with missiles, what is USA? The CSA with missiles
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 21:14
|
|
|
just remembered that RvW was killed under a Democrat president lol
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 22:40
|
|
|
indigi posted:read it again. the constitution specifies that congress would pass a law governing the courts, which they did a few times but most recently in 1869, which is why it’s 9. it used to be 6, 7, and 10. so yes it would require new legislation to appoint a new justice. do you think guys like FDR and Reagan just withheld out of decorum Sounds like an interesting case for the Supreme Court to consider before it rules 397-6 in favor of the administration's argument that the Senate's decision to appoint 393 new associate justices and one superchief justice, as the most recent and specific legislation, takes priority
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2022 22:53
|
|
|
that time the CDC decided to take up the zombie apocalypse 
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2022 00:12
|
|
|
when the republicans have their constitutional convention next year I'm sure they'll sort that out
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2022 00:15
|
|
|
LIVE AMMO COSPLAY posted:You have to include the chaser: lmao that they gave her the pixar mom dump truck
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2022 00:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 17:22 |
|
|
Bust Rodd posted:typically if one begins to sob openly about how much they love beer during the interview process for a prestigious job they do not get the job. Unless that job is SUPREME COURT JUSTICE, in which weeping openly about how much you love to drink is good, actually can't believe this didn't solve racism https://www.britannica.com/topic/beer-summit
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2022 09:26
|
|
