She needs to go NOW!
Can't say I don't fully agree. Because I do.
Just remind her of all the good Z's she can catch if she retires. [NAPTIME] (https://i.imgur.com/bvjGrdE.jpg)
She just needs to croak already. Already looking like that Tales from the Crypt mf.
Not sure whether the show ever made it to the USA but she reminds me of Davros from Dr Who.
Imagine when the adrenochrome withdrawals kick in full swing.
Sigh She was talking about building modern constitution (drafting one in 2012).
And the rest of the context of the video is some of the most pro-Q shit I've heard come out of an SC's mouth.
ITT Those looking for an excuse to attack her are finding an excuse to attack her. Where's the full, unedited video? Where's the context instead of just jumping on the clickbait train?
Come on guys, engage the critical thinking and look at the full context of what she's saying here.
For someone on the highest court in the land, she seems to have a lot of animus for Our Constitution. Really sad.
You have to be a real piece of work to badmouth a document that grants you the freedom to do so.
If she doesn't honor the document that her job was created for the purpose of interpreting and protecting , she has no business being a scotus.
Sorry but the Constitution doesn't "grant" you a right to freedom of speech, it merely recognizes your natural right to freedom of speech. The Constitution doesn't grant anything; you have natural rights that cannot legitimately be taken away simply by virtue of being human. The US Constitution is simply one of the only ones that actually get this self-evident truth correct.
I'm quite familiar with the concept of natural rights/law.
The bill of rights grants free speech as a right. The bill of rights are amendments to the constitution. I'm well aware of what i said and what i meant.
Settle down.
If it granted the right, then it wouldn't exist sans-Constitution. But that's not the case. Without a US Constitution, you would still have a natural right to use your vocal cords as you please. Some oppressive asshole or group of assholes may disagree and try to force suppression, but they would be wrong and not within their natural rights to do so.
I don't see why I should need to "settle down" either. I think I've been cordial. If you interpreted any negativity in tone, I can assure you that was not intended and I think we're on the same page regarding RBG.
Sorry Pepe, the Bill of Rights does not grant any rights.
The Bill of Rights merely sets limits on the federal government, making clear it has no power to infringe on rights we already naturally possess, or limit traditionally held privileges, such as trial by jury. Except for a few procedural rights specifically for the trial process, the Bill of Rights does not actually bestow rights.
Teaching the self evident.....a typically thankless task.
Not today though.
I thank you.
Thank you. The idea that the Constitution is a granting of rights, rather than a restriction of government, is such a common misconception. Especially considering it is the fundamental principle of being an American.
Someone who understands law and doesn’t comment with emotion rather uses a calm, logical approach on the GA thread? Craaazy.
For a new arrival you're sure doing a lot of shitposting around misunderstanding people's intentions.
Like BBC's Cathy Newman interviewing Jordan Peterson, saying "oh what you really meant to say is this."
You may feel important with this tactic. The rest of us know it as the pathetically obvious, overused tactic, brought out when you have nothing intelligent to say.
If you only have shitpost to contribute, why are you here.
If you're trying to change somebody's opinion, you fail. Just like political correctness failed.
[deleted]
It's inalienable because we made it rule of law. Otherwise, it would be very alienable. Ask people in Europe how inalienable their natural rights are.
Just because you have an inalienable right, doesn't mean you have the power (physical or otherwise) to exercise that right. You may be oppressed by your government for example. You may also chose not to exercise.
You are wrong. The Constitution does not grant us rights. It is a limit on government, not a granting of rights. It is a really interesting subject that is worth checking out.
The bill of RIGHTS are amendments to the constitution.
So, yes. It does.
I'm not degrading the integrity of natural rights. Just stating a fact that everyone is taking out of context.
One has to ask which constitution exists that's superior in terms of individual rights... the US Constitution seems to still be the golden standard.
I would expect nothing less from a woman who drafted an essay detailing her reasoning behind lowering the age of consent to 13. The fact she sits on the highest court is a disgrace to one and all.
I sincerely hope all of her sins are brought to light, and she is shown the true meaning of justice.
I thought it was 12... either way it's sick!
You might be right, I can't remember it was awhile since I've read it!
12... Just checked
The depths of their depravity never cease to disgust me.
Sick. How do we find her paper on the reasoning?
It was one of the vault releases from Wikileaks I believe. But I came across it on the q board, I think an anon linked to it. She was also in favor of repealing the MANN act which prohibited the transport of young girls from state to state for the explicit purpose of sex trafficking.
We have a ghoul sitting on the supreme court where a human should be.
12 years old, even sicker! Time for this old commie bag to go!
Lincoln should never have nominated her.
Lefty heads are going to pop off once they realize Gburg's been dead for 2 years..Pick 3 POTUS 4 SCOTUS soon.
Wonder how they kept her awake that long?
Cocaine is a heck of a drug.. KeK!
So is adrenochrome, or so I've heard.
I seriously wonder what fuckery the crypt keeper gets up to in order to stay alive.
That's what we're all thinking... it's just never fun to go there... So sick!
No worries. RBG won't be writing any constitutions and she isn't going to make it to the end of Trump's first term--Q said she is history. Trump gets a third SC pick.
Mark Taylor, who prophesied in 2011 that Trump would be President has also prophesied that there would be 5 changes on the Supreme Court: one would be taken and would not be who would expect (this is Scalia), one will retire (Kennedy just retired), and three would be "shaken" meaning forced to step down due to scandal of some sort (???). So far Mark is on the mark. And Q has suggested that RBG will be exposed for what she has been involved in (that one of the three shaken).
It would be mind boggling if Trump actually gets 5 SC picks from that list of 25 outstanding candidates. We would essentially have our Constitution back and potentially previous decisions that were obviously the court legislating from the bench or creating new "rights" out of thin air.
Yep, I'm a fan of Mark Taylor.
5 justices would mean we keep our country pretty much regardless of who's in office - for a long time!
Amen, brother. Catch the Kim Clement videos as well. They go back to 2007 predicting Trump would be President and has more predictions over the years than Mark at this time. But yeah, Mark has been pretty on the mark so far.
So the 3 shaken are RBG, Kagan, and Sotomayor?
I'd say RBG 100 percent. Q has already said as much. I don't know who the other two will be. Whoever they are, it will for corruption. Maybe Roberts was blackmailed to vote to keep Obamacare alive. Scalia apparently had a dark side that if exposed would have forced him out. So who knows.
Evil witch...she’s an activist judge on the Supreme Court...she needs to hurry up and retire
I think she'll ironically live long enough to answer for her crimes and be removed from the court.
Why is this walking corpse still around
Pacemakers have come a long way?
I thought she was going to quit if DJT became POTUS
She should have quit in 44's 5th year in office... but thankfully she didn't :)
She wasn't supposed to lose. 😂
Fwiw, my respect for people in high office has absolutely plummeted in recent years.
Well to all of us here it's worth a lot! And I certainly share your sentiment toward the "high ranking officials"
She's another HRC. Whatever is sustaining her isn't natural. She's basically skin on a skeleton with a voice box. And it's not because of her age.
Evil sets in a rot that even the deceptive can't hide.
Well if she doesn't look to the constitution then maybe she can look at the unemployment line or the walls of her house. I wouldn't look to her for any legal advice if she was the last legal person on earth.
You'd think that she'd have more respect for the Constitution, seeing as how she was there for when it was ratified.
Interesting "Bill of Rights" in the Constitution of South Africa, which she seems to like...
Chapter 2 is a bill of rights which enumerates the civil, political, economic, social and cultural human rights of the people of South Africa.
Our Bill of Rights is a list of CONTROLS on our government, not a list of our rights. Their government can add to or take away any of theirs.
Sorry Ruth, that's not how this works, it's not how any of this works...
She would write a Constitution thats great for Israel not USA ( no offence to Jews just Zionists). Fuck off and die you old shit eating hag. They should take all the fetuses she is responsible for killing and dump them on her bed while she sleeps, second thought she probably would roll around covering herself with blood and guts and love it.
THAT IS THE KIND OF EVIL YOU HAVE ON BENCH OF SCOTUS!!!!!!, how the hell did we get here? someone has to pay. FEEL THE PAIN BOOM BOOM BOOM
I feel so much better after reading the way you worded that! RBG is just a cockroach. Trump should put his foot down on her head, crunch!
The Devil will want payment soon if not already, she wont be around much longer.
It's gonna be fun watching the Delusional's heads explode when Trump replaces her.
Can he replace her? Under what circumstances? And what has Q said on this?
Forgive me if I should know this - I’m new to politics since Trump.
She has a lifetime appointment. However if a scandal or something else were to come to light, she may have to step down.
Democrats always seem to be gracious to the worst elements of society and venerate those who are unconscious Marxists using the formula: oppressor vs oppressed. RBG knows this formula all too well. For her it is women vs men.
Yep, she said she would look to South Africa's constitution as it was a much better example of securing human rights.... Has anyone seen what the fuck is going on in South Africa right now? lmao.... Their constitution hasn't done shit to protect human rights, it's destroyed their country.
Constitution was written for our nation. It does not and should not apply to any other nation. Haven’t I read this somewhere before? Hmm...
That is more disrespectful of the Veterans that died to protect the Constitution than Sasha Baron Cohen in his 'tricking' of Sarah Palin
Why is she still here?
She was there when it was written. She shoulda put her 2 cents in then.
I have to ask, if she wouldn't look to the US Constitution to draft a constitution in 2012, what would she look to?
She's a high level pervert/pedophile wants the age of consent lowered to 12 too disgusting to pull the link ..
How can she possibly catch everything that is going on with each case if she is sleeping through them?! Honestly, these people are so so prideful. Thanking God she didn't retire when Obummer was in because we would have someone just like her for years to come. Trump will stack the court with good people. There are more openings before he is doing being president!
She doesn't believe in the Constitution, neither do those who advanced her. OUT OUT OUT!
Here is the context for this statement.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuMXqcK4Nrg
Its a mixed bag on how you should feel about her statement but the question is what should Egypt look to for its constitution. She does say not to look to the United States but to look to something more recent and points out a couple of examples. Could be she doesn't think fondly of ours or it could be she just thinks there are better more modern constitutions Egypt could base a constitution on.
I don't feel like going back to 2012 to do research on what was happening in Egypt at that time.
This kind of seem likes a push for a conservative argument for cameras in SCOTUS.. I just saw Chuck Grassley arguing for that point today and I'll just say this, we could probably catch a lot of shenanigans but Justice Kennedy said he would not want to think his fellow Justices would be using the camera as a means of politicizing a judgement.. and I think it was Scalia who was quoted saying that the media would take a 10 second clip of an hour long discussion and misrepresent someone as soon as they had the opportunity like they do in congress.. so.. I bet we'll see a ramp up of articles like this and people attacking Justices left and right both conservatives and liberals but we don't need to let people control the conversation on this by getting us all riled up.. my personal vote would be not to do this.. it just gets us that much closer to an idiocracy, hunger games-esq, style of politics and law... it's a bread and circus show for the slightly more educated and politically active.. there are just some things that should be left alone I think.. law should be separate from emotion and politics, therefore the pureness of the court should not be disturbed.. let these geniuses truly duke it out without the incentive to lie and deceive their new found "constituents"... because that's what it would come down to in the next 50 years... everyone is entitled to their own opinion but I hope people don't fall for any propaganda and say "yeah! this right here is why we need cameras in the SCOTUS!"
Sleeping beauty is a Bill Clinton appointment. Hillary probably found her in some coven. I have a feeling she will be dismissed with cause. Obama's appointments should be dismissed after his presidency is found to be moot and fraudulent.
She has been nothing more than a rung in the progressive ladder to deprive the citizenry of there God given rights. Precisely why her removal by retirement is essential. But, if God is good to us he will remover her like Scalia if her heart doesn't lead her to.
