NOTORIOUS RBG Back in Hospital

Just think of the chaos if she kicked on November 1
Hey, prez-elect won’t take the oath until January. Imagine the memes and lamentations If she kicks it on Christmas and Trump had a new justice by New Year’s. Double if the incoming prez was a Dem.
 
4EH8IJ.gif

View: https://youtu.be/nHzd1wzn_jo
 
Tell that to the Democrats if she goes, you really think it's not going to be a shitfest of "wait for the next president and see, the will of the people to elect blah blah"?

Trumps specializes in shitfests.

The next one is rumored to be a woman, which is going to cause all sorts of mental imbalance and conflict among leftists when they try to a stop it.
 
Hey, prez-elect won’t take the oath until January. Imagine the memes and lamentations If she kicks it on Christmas and Trump had a new justice by New Year’s. Double if the incoming prez was a Dem.
the senate will be on their holiday break, i doubt they'd hustle back for confirmation hearings. republican or democrat, a paid vacation is a paid vacation. [laugh]
 
I don’t wish her dead, but wonder how she is still around. My sister in law was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer and 63 days later she was dead. Perhaps it’s that pisser terrific federal healthcare she’s has?
Exactly, I was wondering the same thing. A friend of mine had pancreatic cancer and was gone in four months.
 
Exactly, I was wondering the same thing. A friend of mine had pancreatic cancer and was gone in four months.

My brother’s going on 5 years, even after an unsuccessful whipple procedure that nearly killed him. He‘s certainly not the norm, but it’s not always an quick death. Sorry about your friend, it’s a brutal way to go.
 
Tell that to the Democrats if she goes, you really think it's not going to be a shitfest of "wait for the next president and see, the will of the people to elect blah blah"?

Yeah but isn't that what McConnell did in 2016 by denying Garland a spot on scotus? I think letting the people decide is a good thing. The only problem is that this country is packed to the gills with dummies.
 
I think letting the people decide is a good thing.

"He [the president] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments."

The US constitution is very clear on who decides Supreme Court picks, and it is not "we the people".
 
"intravenous antibiotic treatment" sounds like serious business, considering her past medical history. From what i have seen happen to others, i give her a 50-50 chance of not loosing her kidneys over the antibiotics. And she is probably too sick for dialysis

that is how my brother went. Specialist in fighting infections said "ah, he should be able to handle the antibiotics". A week later it was all over.


Sorry for the loss of your brother.

I'm not in the medical field, but have family members who had a whole lot LESS issues, and when their kidneys shut down, there was no way to get them started again.

I don't wish anybody or their families to go through this. At a certain point, as a human being, you have to take politics out of this news.

Jay
 
Yeah but isn't that what McConnell did in 2016 by denying Garland a spot on scotus? I think letting the people decide is a good thing. The only problem is that this country is packed to the gills with dummies.

There is a slight difference if RGB leaves SCOTUS between now and the election, for whatever reason. Obama was a lame duck (as someone previously wrote) - he could not be re-elected. So, Cocaine Mitch invoked the 'Biden Rule' to allow the next president, a Republican or Democrat, to nominate a replacement to fill the vacancy. This gave either party the opportunity to fill the vacancy.
 
"intravenous antibiotic treatment" sounds like serious business, considering her past medical history. From what i have seen happen to others, i give her a 50-50 chance of not loosing her kidneys over the antibiotics. And she is probably too sick for dialysis

that is how my brother went. Specialist in fighting infections said "ah, he should be able to handle the antibiotics". A week later it was all over.

It is not always the kidneys, sometimes it is the liver. That is what happened me. Crashed a motorcycle. Smashed my leg to pieces. Leg got infected. After several months of IV antibiotics they said hey your liver is all messed up. You can live without a leg but not a liver so off with the leg.

Those antibiotics did a real number on my body. It was several years before I could pass basic blood tests on liver enzymes etc. They also messed up my digestive tract and gave me C Diff. It is 35 years later and if I don't take digestive enzymes and pro-biotics everyday I am hosed.

Bottom line. She might get past this one but her days are numbered.
 
they won't let him submit a nominee anyway.
I say this not to nitpick, but to amplify your point (I think) - they can’t stop him from submitting a nominee if he chooses to, but the Senate is far too spineless to borrow a set of balls from someone to consider any nominee he does submit.
 
Oh fffffs

Now we have TWO RGB thread?

If she DOES step down/other then you better believe that the republicans will nominate and appoint someone before the elections

If they dont then the base will not turn out for senators in states up for re-elections......

100%.....if there's an opening it will be filled before Nov
Not a chance. The Senate has proven time and again they don’t have a hair on their ass to upset the status quo.
 
I say this not to nitpick, but to amplify your point (I think) - they can’t stop him from submitting a nominee if he chooses to, but the Senate is far too spineless to borrow a set of balls from someone to consider any nominee he does submit.


you are not nitpicking and you are absolutely correct. He can nominate someone. I should have said they would not confirm his nominee....nor would they consider it unless he won the election.
 
Back
Top Bottom