https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-capitol-riot-obstruction-charge-trump-5cf0db4a71766f0b40ec199dd0d5a1ab WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Wednesday said it will hear an appeal that could upend hundreds of charges stemming from the Capitol riot, including against former President Donald Trump.
The justices will review a charge of obstruction of an official proceeding that has been brought against more than 300 people. The charge refers to the disruption of Congress’ certification of Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential election victory over Trump.
That’s among four counts brought against Trump in special counsel Jack Smith’s case that accuses the 2024 Republican presidential primary front-runner of conspiring to overturn the results of his election loss. Trump is also charged with conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding.
The court’s decision to weigh in on the obstruction charge could threaten the start of Trump’s trial, currently scheduled for March 4. The justices separately are considering whether to rule quickly on Trump’s claim that he can’t be prosecuted for actions taken within his role as president. A federal judge already has rejected that argument.
A lawyer for Trump didn’t immediately return a message seeking comment on the Supreme Court’s decision to review the charge.
The Supreme Court will hear arguments in March or April, with a decision expected by early summer.
The obstruction charge, which carries up to 20 years behind bars, is among the most widely used felony charges brought in the massive federal prosecution following the deadly insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021, when a mob of Trump supporters stormed the Capitol in a bid to keep Biden, a Democrat, from taking the White House.
At least 152 people have been convicted at trial or pleaded guilty to obstructing an official proceeding, and at least 108 of them have been sentenced, according to an Associated Press review of court records.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
A lower court judge had dismissed the charge against Joseph Fischer, a former Pennsylvania police officer, and two other defendants, ruling it didn’t cover their conduct. The justices agreed to hear the appeal filed by lawyers for Fischer, who is facing a seven-count indictment for his actions on Jan. 6, including the obstruction charge. The other defendants are Edward Jacob Lang, of New York’s Hudson Valley, and Garret Miller, who has since pleaded guilty to other charges and was sentenced to 38 months in prison. Miller, who’s from the Dallas area, could still face prosecution on the obstruction charge. U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols found that prosecutors stretched the law beyond its scope to inappropriately apply it in these cases. Nichols ruled that a defendant must have taken “some action with respect to a document, record or other object” to obstruct an official proceeding under the law. The Justice Department challenged that ruling, and the appeals court in Washington agreed with prosecutors in April that Nichols’ interpretation of the law was too limited. Other defendants, including Trump, are separately challenging the use of the charge. Defense attorney Kira Anne West, who has represented several Jan. 6 defendants charged with obstruction of an official proceeding, said the courts will have to “undo a whole bunch of cases” and adjust many sentences if the Supreme Court rules in their favor. “This is a watershed day,” she said. “In our world — defense lawyer world — this is huge.” West represents a man scheduled to be tried in early January on charges including the obstruction count. She doesn’t yet know if she will seek a delay until the Supreme Court resolves the challenge. More than 1,200 people have been charged with federal crimes stemming from the riot, and more than 700 defendants have pleaded guilty.
Anonymous
>pack the court and decriminalize piecemeal the actions of those who knowingly committed a crime at your behest. were republicans always this transparent with their mafioso wet dreams?
Anonymous
>>1245479 when the the GOP pack the court? The size of the court hasn't changed since 1869
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1245479 i guess providence could still shine on orange hitler, apparently we deserve this
Anonymous
>>1245484 ???
when the republican senate refused to bring garland's nomination to the floor because 8 months out was 'too close' to an election, then happily offered the other hand to let trump appoint three justices including one which went from vacancy to confirmation in 33 days, one week before an election to boot
Anonymous
>>1245479 trumps picks are antiwhites
Trump is a democrat
Anonymous
>>1245490 >antiwhites what does this mean
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1245491 It means he saw a commercial for the black mermaid movie and now he thinks helter skelter is real
Anonymous
>>1245489 a. how is that packing the court? packing the court is when you change the size of the court because you are losing and want to put extra judges on it.
b. that is literally the senate's job. In 2014 the American people elected a republican senate in order to blunt obongo. rather than place a compromise, bipartisan candidate like Kavanaugh or Gorsuch, obongo nominated a far left anti gun communist who was overturned multiple times for being anti gun and a communist totalitarian.
The last time a scotus judge was confirmed by a senate of the opposing party when he was nominated in an election year was in the 1880s.
Far left communist and hater of all Americans, Joe Biden said in 1992 that should a scotus spot open up in 1992 for Bush the senate would not fill the spot and instead hold it in case a democrat was elected
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/joe-biden-in-1992-no-nominations-to-the-supreme-court-in-an-election-year/2016/02/22/ea8cde5a-d9b1-11e5-925f-1d10062cc82d_story.html c. It took 50 days (42 if you start from when the senate got the nomination) to confirm RBG
d. in 2018 the American people saw what a great job trump was doing and signaled their faith in him by ensuring he had a senate majority, in a massive contrast to 2014 obongo who was very unpopular and was a very bad president. Since 1796 ten times has a president with a same party senate nominated a scotus judge before the election during an election year and 9 of those 10 judges were confirmed, with the single one who was not losing out to a bipartisan effort for being corrupt.
tl;dr, the GOP did not pack the court and the GOP was just following the joe biden rule, which joe biden invented in 1992 because he is and always has been an agent of communist china
Anonymous
>>1245527 >in 2018 the American people saw what a great job trump was doing and signaled their faith in him >bush leaves obama 2008 mess >obama spends 8 years unfucking it >trump gets the keys from obama is is "doing a great job" hey man i can turn a clunker of a car into something great over 8 years, doesnt mean the guy i sold it to is doing a great job when he gets the keys.
Anonymous
>>1245539 nope
>be clinton >repeal glass steagall >instruct banks to give loans to blacks who have no jobs with the goal of destroying white towns >economy collapses >be obongo >give wallstreet tons of cash >do everything in your power to fuck up the recover for everyone else >never have a single year of 3% gdp growth >worst recovery since the great depression >do such a bad job millennials still talk about how shit the economy was >do such a bad job bernie sanders runs for nomination as a democrat on the platform that obongo was a shitty president who ruined the economy >rig the DNC primary and have clinton say she is going to be obongo term 3 >the prospect of 4 more years of obongo's terrible economy is so fucking bad Trump gets elected >trump lowers taxes and does great with the economy. >have the CCP, the group that controls the DNC, release fake flu so you can rig the 2020 election >have dem politicians shut down cities and states to intentionally tank the economy >have brandon raise oil royalties for the first time in a century and refuse to give drill permits to shale companies so that his gay jewish lovers in opec and standard oil can make bank and so inflation hurts Americans because biden hates America >intentionally raise income tax on the middle class because biden and the dems hate Americans Anonymous
Anonymous
>>1245547 the economy collapsed under Clinton?
Anonymous
>>1245558 NTA, but no, he caused it but it took a few years to happen.
NAFTA and repealing glass-steagall were extremely damaging.
Anonymous
>>1245558 the economy collapsed due to actions taken by clinton. aka repealing glass steagall. This was part of a blockbusting effort by the jews to make money.
>jews give loans to blacks with no income or assets >town goes to shit and everyone wants to move >property values drop >bank buys houses on the cheap >gentrifies area and makes money dems like this because it makes it harder for small towns to organize against them
>blacks with no jobs don't pay their mortgage >stock market goes tits up >obongo gives free money to the rich while telling everyone else to fuck off >ows and the teaparty happen >jews start pushing homosexuality and anti white racism as a way to get people off their trail >banks intentionally cause covid >use the free money from the government their puppet biden gave them to buy all the houses in cash >jack up rents Anonymous
>>1245562 holy shit this is actually schizophrenic
please for the love of god go for a walk and talk to your family
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1245558 I gotta agree with
>>1245561 and
>>1245562 Most of the banking practices that led to the collapse of 04 was due to banking restrictions repealed under clinton
Anonymous
>>1245562 so in the same breath it's fair to say trump was doing well because of Obamas actions.
Clinton handed Bush the economy and it took Bush 8 years to destroy it.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1245563 its literally well documented, you actual retard
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/02/21/how-wall-street-bought-single-family-homes-and-put-them-up-for-rent.html >>1245566 no, trump was doing well because he cut taxes and undid a bunch of obongo actions that obongo was doing to suppress the economy.
and again, clinton repealed glass steagall, which obongo says was the cause of the 2008 recession.
Anonymous
>>1245566 >Clinton handed Bush the economy and it took Bush 8 years to destroy it. Clinton handed Bush a disaster waiting to happen and Bush did nothing to prevent it.
And no the Obama economy was terrible.
It was the poorest I ever felt until Joe Biden took over. Now I'm scraping to pay my mortgage and feed my family thanks to inflation.
Thanks blue team. You're assholes.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1245575 obama took the 2008 republican economy to one that was flourishing.
is it really inflation or corporate gouging? you cant figure out how to feed you family? chicken is still 3.99/lb, rice costs nothing, a banana is 17 cents. maybe your drivethru goyslop is doubled but thats corporate jew gouging.
you cant pay your mortgage thats on average well under 2kusd? jew companies are paying 15/hour like its a badge of honor, unemployment is lowest in like half century, gas is 3 bucks a gallon, djia hit all time high today.
maybe youre just awful at the game of life.
Anonymous
>>1245527 Nah, it was packing the court, you can't deny it with semantics.
Anonymous
>>1245527 I can actually smell this post. I feel bad for your family
Anonymous
>>1245589 pack the court
idiomatic phrase
: to increase the number of justices on a court and especially the United States Supreme
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pack%20the%20court cope
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1245590 >zero arguments >I know, I'll call him smelly you got dunked on
Anonymous
>>1245592 Nah, it's still packing the courts.
Like how Jan 6 was a failed coup by Trump.
All your couping doesn't change the facts.
Anonymous
>>1245595 >Nah, it's still packing the courts. Quit doing this, retard.
Anonymous
>>1245595 >Nah, it's still packing the courts. literally no. I got a dictionary definition. you are just reeing
>Like how Jan 6 was a failed coup by Trump. a. not relevant
b. it was a fiery but peaceful protest
>All your couping doesn't change the facts. you are literally coping demanding a definition be changed because the GOP legally and correctly sat 3 judges. Hell, the only seat that got flipped from communist to human was the RBG/ACB seat. And RBG literally wanted trump to nominate her replacement. if she didn't she would have retired under obongo, but she didn't because she fucking hated obongo for being black, being a communist and being a shitty president
Anonymous
>>1245597 >>1245604 Stop projecting.
The Republican court packing needs to be busted up.
Also it was a coup, the fact you're telling people to not believe the footage of violent terrorists attacking the capitol is pretty telling of the level of gaslighting you're doing to defend both Trump's failed coup and Republican court packing.
Anonymous
>>1245607 a. when did the GOP change the size of the court?
b. if jan 6 was a violent coup, why werent any of the congressmen lynched?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1245609 cause its not 1842 and left dont act like monkeys at that level
the insurrection was a riot
Quoted By:
>>1245443 >could undo Capitol riot charges Riot charges should stay, yes, but only a basketful of deplorables should be charged with insurrection, and of this basketful, 20% should be the FBI plants
Anonymous
>>1245607 >The Republican court packing needs to be busted up. Stop it. It stopped being funny months ago, fuckface.
Anonymous
>>1245609 see garland forward and you will see the hypocrisy.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1245617 see
>>1245527 you were already deboonked
Anonymous
>>1245609 >>1245612 >Still trying to gaslight about the courts >Now moving the goalposts about Trump's failed Jan 6th coup. Incompetently executed coups are still coups.
They certainly did build a gallows to assassinate Trump's VP for daring to not betray his oath to the Constitution and not siding with Trump's violent coup.
Anonymous
>>1245629 no one is gaslighting about the courts. you are just a retard who doesn't know what "pack the courts" means and are upset you got outsmarted by an old fag from kentucky
also it wasn't a coup. no one got lynched
Anonymous
>>1245631 Nah, you're still trying to gaslight about the Republican court packing.
And moving the goalposts over Trump's failed coup.
Anonymous
>>1245634 >court packing You really need to shut the fuck up.
On the off chance you're such an idiot you believe this horseshit here's the definition:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/court-packing This was invented by FDR because he was also a losing loser and whiney crybaby bitch.
Anonymous
>>1245635 >He's giving up on trying to gaslight about Trump's failed coup and instead going all in on defending the Republican court packing. lol
Anonymous
>>1245635 You're being awfully pedantic
The guy defined what he was referring to, the horseshit hypocrisy in stealing a Supreme Court nomination from Biden/Obama.
You can't really defend that so you're hiding. And it's funny because in that retarded desperation to undemocratically push through Republicunt policy, the GOP shot itself in the dick. Turns out most people don't like rights stripped from them.
The court can try to sneak this case through to save Trump and his retarded and violent computers, but if he does I wouldn't be surprised if that kicks off some real riots. Try to steal justice and we'll show you faggots what it actually looks like to 'take back our country'
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1245666 Shut up satan, you whiny bitch.
Anonymous
>>1245666 >>1245647 He's objectively correct and you are objectively wrong
Anonymous
Based Supreme Court will vindicate the God Emperor and send millions into unknown levels of TDS.
Anonymous
>>1245708 The scotus knows that they have to be careful not to give democrats enough reasons to pack the courts, or rather unfuck the courts. If Joe Manchin gets convinced that the scotus is too conservative then they're fucked. That's a pretty high bar though.
Anonymous
>>1245666 >Try to steal justice and we'll show you faggots what it actually looks like to 'take back our country' The closest you came to real riots was in 2020 when you BLM faggots burned down inner cities all summer and then cried and tried to blame the boogaloo boys when you started getting arrested for it
>>1245710 >The scotus knows that they have to be careful not to give democrats enough reasons to pack the courts, or rather unfuck the courts. Threatening to upend the judicial branch because you don't get what you want is typical leftism- it's a shame the packing the court fantasy will never happen and you'll continue to seethe about the system working as intended to stop fascists like you.
You can do nothing except whine.
Anonymous
Anonymous
>>1245715 >Threatening to upend the judicial blah blah blah Maybe the scotus should reflect what the American people want then. The scotus' power is very dependent on public opinion, they know this. If they get too unpopular then people will support unfucking the court, or they may get Andrew Jacksoned.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1245731 >Maybe the scotus should reflect what the American people want then What the American people want or what Democrats want?
>The scotus' power is very dependent on public opinion It's not at all actually, the Judicial branch doesn't work that way at any level of government.
> If they get too unpopular then people will support unfucking the court, You mean, if they do things Democrats don't like Democrats will try to rig the court in their favor?
>or they may get Andrew Jacksoned. So after mild resistance that ultimately ends in capitulation, they'll get a proclamation of the their ultimate power to decide constitutional questions and emphasizing that the court's decisions had to be obeyed?
Sounds like you're just a whiny, seething fascist
Anonymous
>>1245634 >>1245647 you already got proven wrong. repeating yourself without an argument doesn't make you right. it just shows you are too fucking stupid to come up with an argument and that you have no penis
Anonymous
>>1245666 >The guy defined what he was referring to, which isn't the definition.
>the horseshit hypocrisy in stealing a Supreme Court nomination from Biden/Obama. it wasn't hypocrisy, see
>>1245527 (You). The GOP was literally just following what biden said to do in 1992
>You can't really defend that so you're hiding. again, see
>>1245527 (You)
>Turns out most people don't like rights stripped from them. the only party stripping rights is the dems with their anti gun anti free speech shit
Anonymous
>>1245710 a. the courts aren't fucked
b. to pack the courts would take an act of congress, not jus joe manchin (who is retiring in 2024 anyway). the communists can't break the filibuster and only have a minority in the house. Just based on the 2024 election map, there is no scenario where the dems get 60 senate seats in 2025
Anonymous
>>1245731 the job of the scotus is not to reflect popular opinion you retarded communist, that is the congress/president. The job of the scotus is to uphold the constitution against popular opinion. You literally do not know what you are talking about because you are chinese.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Can I write n*gger on here? And say, when hiring n*ggers, expect to lose money. Just curious.
Anonymous
>>1245750 >>1245751 If your dumbass knew anything about about political science you'd know that the scotus is entirely dependent on it's reputation. That was the whole point of Marbury V. Madison, when they said "we have judicial review, because we said so." The scotus' powers aren't written into the constitution, they can and have been ignored.
Anonymous
>>1245756 >The scotus' powers aren't written into the constitution Marbury v. Madison was 1803. If their powers were not based in the constitution (the supremacy clause) and english common law, why was it allowed to stand? in 1803 Jefferson was the president and Madison, Hamilton and Adams were still around. Basically all the founders except Washington were alive, why would they let something unconstitutional stand? you have very little understanding of US history and civics.
>they can and have been ignored. yes, I agree, democrat in both state governments and lower courts are ignoring bruen. they should be hanged for treason for this and it is all the more reason to never vote for a democrat and never let a democrat be appointed to any level of the courts.
Anonymous
>>1245763 >why was it allowed to stand? How about you answer that yourself you dumbass.
Anonymous
>>1245666 >You can't really defend that so you're hiding. I can't defend it because it's hilarious.
Also that's still not packing the courts. If that faggot quit packing the fudge for a second instead of using a term that specifically means expanding the courts then maybe I'd listen.
So quit packing the fudge, faggots.
Anonymous
>>1245731 >Maybe the scotus should reflect what the American people want then. Dipshit, that is not the purpose of the Judiciary.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1245770 That's literally the number 1 way the leftist retards argue on this board; they redefine scary words to mean what they want
Anonymous
>>1245767 so you don't know and believe the myth that the court invented the power out of nothing? Judicial review was intended as part of the ability of the courts. if it wasn't why bother making a court, retard ?
Anonymous
>>1245772 Is the role of the government not to reflect the will of the people that it represents? Having an unelected body of government that acts with impunity is the antithesis of democracy.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1245781 What if the people are stupid though?
The US is a republic also.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1245781 >Having an unelected body of government that acts with impunity is the antithesis of democracy. Good let's get rid of all the bureaucrats then. Every public job should be by direct election only
Anonymous
>>1245775 >so you don't know and believe the myth that the court invented the power out of nothing? Well they did, there is no article in the constitution that gives the supreme court the power of judicial review. They made it up. If the founding fathers intended for the court to have such strong powers they would have intentionally written it in.
Anonymous
>>1245781 >Is the role of the government not to reflect the will of the people that it represents? the people is not just the majority. or do you think the government was good when segregation was a thing or fags weren't allowed to marry? The will of the people during brown v board of ed was segregation. the will of the people during oberfell was banning fags from marrying
>Having an unelected body of government that acts with impunity is the antithesis of democracy. yeah, thats the point. we are a constitutional republic, not a democracy and the court exists to protect the minority from democracy
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1245547 covid 19 exists you schizo
Anonymous
>>1245802 literally articles III and VI of the constitution give them the power of judicial review. Fucking federalist 78, which was written by hamilton, is paraphrased in maubery. judicial review was always the intention. its why they even bothered with the 11th amendment
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1245443 Roberts was on Epsteins Island and is a Bush Admin appointee. No chance this is judged apprpriately. May as well be a democrat party hearing like the sham j6 commission.
Anonymous
>>1245805 Your two responses contradict one another
Anonymous
>>1245807 The judiciary lies below the Constotution, not beside it, nor above it.
Judges can overturn acts using amendments, but overturning Amendments using case law or "living interpretations" nullifies the entire Amendment process.
As for Hamilton, he was for centralized banking and Im glad he was shot. I wish it happened earlier. He was protocommunist trying to recreate England and empower corporations. And he succeeded. Here we are.
F Hamilton, and F his fans too.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1245781 Tell me you dont understand Roman history and why the Republic fell. Hint: Maurians.
Democracy is a shit system. Which is why Amendments require big majoroties and judges arent supposed to be elected.
If the people were represented in elections in America both parties would be hung for treason along with activist judges.
A plague on both of your houses
Anonymous
>>1245547 >be clinton >be given repeal of glass steagel by the lead supermajority >either sign it or have your power usurped fixed that for you, faggot.
Anonymous
>>1245812 He signed it though.
>He was bullied into signing it Even if true that just proves he should have never been president.
Anonymous
>>1245809 they do not. you just have shitty reading comprehension
>>1245810 >The judiciary lies below the Constotution, not beside it, nor above it. >Judges can overturn acts using amendments, but overturning Amendments using case law or "living interpretations" nullifies the entire Amendment process. when did I say anything that contradicts this? the judiciary is empowered by the constitution with the mission to protect the people from the legislatures unconstitutional acts. That is literally all the roberts court has done since 2017
Anonymous
>>1245812 he signed it, faggot
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1245746 >>1245706 >Trying to gaslight on on /news/ LMAO
Anonymous
>>1245566 >every president has only ever played cleanup to the previous president's mess When will this meme die?
Anonymous
>>1245562 >>banks intentionally cause covid meds
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1245828 UN/WEF? Are you aware this exists?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>retards arguing with retarded trolls trying (poorly) to gaslight everyone into what court packing is Court hasn't been packed for nearly 150 years. Stop feeding the trolls thats like rule 1 of the internet. Then, mass suicide for everyone ITT. Including me. Verification not required.
Anonymous
>>1245828 yeah, just a coincidence that covid and biden's post covid policies caused a massive transfer of wealth from the American people and the government to the banks
Anonymous
>>1245817 >>1245819 Either sign it or look weak, those were the two options you retards.
Anonymous
>>1245832 correlation does not imply causation
Anonymous
>>1245818 You point to when the scotus failed to protect the minority, and then say that the scotus is there to protect the minority.
Anonymous
>>1245827 When republicans quit fucking everything up
Anonymous
>>1245832 yeah, it's just a coincidence that the virus leaked from the wuhan lab funded by the acting NIH director who was using the lab to engineer gain of function coronaviruses. it's just a coincidence that medical corporations were wargaming this exact scenario via event 201 just months prior to the outbreak. so many coincidences.
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1245834 He shouldn't have been president then.
Anonymous
>>1245832 oh sorry, let me get it right this time
>>>/pol/ >>>/meds/ Anonymous
>>1245812 >sign it and prove yourself spineless as you take all the blame for something you didn't even want to do, or >don't sign it and be viewed as a strong leader standing for their ideals as all the blame falls on the supermajority that overruled you He either wanted to sign it, signed it because he's a weak-willed faggot, or signed it because he's a retard that prioritizes his short term public image over literally everything else. These are your real options.
Anonymous
>>1245839 holy shit are you retarded or foreign?
>majority of people opposed integration of schools in 1954, as seen by the laws >scotus does brown v board of ed and forced integration against the will of the people >majority of people are against fag marriage in 2015 >obergefell makes faggot marriage legal in all 50 states >>1245834 so you are saying is was a bitch?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1245835 >>1245848 >Pay no attention to (((that man behind the curtain, goy!))) >>1245842 this
Anonymous
>>1245853 >holy shit are you retarded or foreign? >so you are saying is was a bitch? Lol
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1245852 There's literally no good reason to not sign it. It would become law no matter what. Not signing (if you're not familiar with the politics of the time, which you're obviously not) would just be stupid.
Anonymous
>>1245853 Oh I was getting brown v board mixed up with plessy v ferguson, but that court case proves my point of the scotus not looking out for the minority.
Also quit with the fag talk. "Fag this faggot that." You sound like a retarded edgelord.
Anonymous
>>1245857 >oh no a typo, better attack that and ignore that someone literally did not fucking know what brown v board of ed was >>1245861 listen here, faggot. The job of the scotus is to ensure the majority does not violate the constitution. the constitution contains protections for the minority from the majority. at the time of plessy the scotus was following the constitution. The constitution was then amended. not my fault you literally are too retarded to know about brown v board
Anonymous
>>1245863 Was Korematsu v. United States protecting the minority and upholding the constitution when they ruled that it's okay to round up us citizens and put them in camps?
Anonymous
>>1245866 Korematsu v. United States was done by FDR appointees when he packed the court in the 30s. All of them were communists who hate America (they all ruled as anti gun in miller) and is the reason no democrat should ever be allowed to be a judge because they are evil pieces of shit who do not read the constitution. Hell RBG famously said she did not rule based on the text of the US constitution. She ruled based on the south african constitution and how she thought the US constitution should be
Anonymous
>>1245871 Is this a chatgpt bot programmed to give incorrect and retarded replies?
Anonymous
>>1245872 >keep getting btfo >I know, I'll accuse him of being a bot because I keep getting fucking btfod and have no argument Anonymous
>>1245873 It was such a stupid thing to reply with that I didn't think a human could have type it. Like really, you think fdr packed the courts?
Anonymous
>>1245876 8 of the 9 judges who ruled on Korematsu were appointed by FDR. It is like you retards don't even fucking know about the switch in time that saved the 9 or the fact that every new deal law got btfo'd in the courts until FDR was able to put communist yes men who literally wanted Americans in concentration camps on the bench
Anonymous
>>1245878 Not FDR's fault that 8 justices died/stepped down in his time as president.
Anonymous
>>1245879 then it isn't trumps fault 3 judges died/stepped down when there was a republican senate
Anonymous
>>1245880 >when there was a republican senate Haha you have to make that distinction because you know it's court packing.
Anonymous
>>1245881 explain why you think FDR using organized crime to murder/force into retirement 8 judges is not court packing, but trump appointing 3 judges is?
Anonymous
>>1245882 >murder/force Why make stuff up?
Anonymous
>>1245883 congress literally passed a law making it so if you retired as a scotus judge you kept your full salary right before the preFDR judges all started to retire.
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1245891 so no deal making there. But I am sure you think kennedy was bribed
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1245781 Tell us, dipshit, of all the forms of government which ones fit your description?
Oh, didn't know there was more than one?
Anonymous
Supreme Court raising chuds hopes so they can dash it as a joke.
Anonymous
>>1245950 They're not that crazy. They have ruled against Trump and his cultists before during and after the last election.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1245993 And you probably think apples are oranges, you fucking simpleton
Anonymous
>>1245749 >the only party stripping rights is the dems Every accusation a confession.
Anonymous
>>1246148 Okay John Oliver bot, no one is really buying this line anymore. Time to update your script.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1246150 Wow, you stopped calling everyone Rachel maddow, good for you
Anonymous
>>1246148 I dont see the GOP trying to ban guns
Anonymous
>>1246255 you've never heard of the mulford act
Anonymous
>>1246333 half the cosponsors on that were democrats and california has a dem majority in both houses and a majority of dem lawmakers passed it.
so your argument is
>the gop is anti gun, look at this one law from california from 56 years ago that was bipartisan Anonymous
>>1246336 who signed it. who's the act named after. why have i never seen a right winger admit these two things
Anonymous
>>1246340 again, your argument is one law in one state 56 years ago that was passed with a bipartisan vote. where as today, dems in Illinois are banning semi autos, ny nj and california are trying to violate bruen and the feds are demanding a semi auto ban and registry
Anonymous
>>1246350 but that proves your side don't actually believe in untrammeled gun rights
Anonymous
>>1246352 in 1967 there were members of the DNC who were active KKK leaders. everyone who voted for and signed the mulford act is dead. it shows how shitty your position is when your only argument is
>a bunch of dead guys did a thing a half century ago Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1246352 >Californians don't believe Anonymous
>>1246359 are you a conservative or do you believe 50 years ago was some obscure bygone era? i don't think you can think both unless you're being dishonest
Anonymous
>>1246363 I don't see how one law passed by a democrat majority half a century ago by a bunch of people who are now dead has shit to do with the fact that right now, today, dems are tying to confiscate and ban all guns.
Also by your logic, dems threw japanese Americans into concentration camps and a dem majority scotus said it was fine. ergo dems are the anti right party because they literally put Americans into concentration camps
Anonymous
>>1246366 once again, you're refusing to admit republican darling ronald reagan had any part in it. when your party lies to you again don't come crying to me
Anonymous
>>1246368 your communist darling FDR threw Americans in concentration camps.
Also reagan wasn't a conservative. he was a far left socialist jew
Anonymous
Quoted By:
when in doubt, cry about jews ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1246371 >your communist Wrong
>darling FDR threw Americans in concentration camps. Correct
>Also reagan wasn't a conservative. he was a far left socialist jew Wrong. Quit being retarded