Tuesday, October 13, 2020

Redefining Court Packing

Liberals are now doing what they do best: stonewalling us on whether or not they will try and “pack the Supreme Court” if they, by some miracle, get elected to the presidency in the short time Biden is president before he is either removed by the 25th amendment because his senility REALLY catches up to him, or he dies in office. We keep pressing them on it, and they keep “tap dancing” around the subject without answering. Biden has even said voters—his employers—don’t even have the right to know if he will or not, which is just about the most arrogant, egalitarian stance I’ve ever seen in a presidential candidate. Now, to divert us from the argument, they are trying to redefine “court packing,” even calling the appointment of ONE judge to BE “court packing.” Like their insistence there are more than two sexes, it just is NOT TRUE that the president doing what he is constitutionally entitled to do—fill a vacancy on the Court—is court packing. It is NOT. Court packing is adding MORE than the current nine justices to the Court so as to maintain their liberal majority so they can do in court what they couldn’t do in the legislature. They are sore afraid that if Trump’s nominee gets confirmed, all their nefarious plans will be wrecked and they will not be able to “fleece America” for a few decades, until they can rebuild their liberal majority on the Court. So they’re using every dirty trick in the book they can to prevent it. Hopefully they will fail. If they don’t, this nation is DOOMED as a free country. (Just common sense)

No comments: