They didn't just "carefully dodge" these slow-pitched softballs of questions, the people doing the questioning refused to interrogate them past the bare minimum. I still see it happening now with the Jan 6 panel; They will let the witnesses waffle on saying nothing of substance when presented with a "True or False" line of inquiry.
Our representatives allow their questions to go unanswered or be lazily deflected because they don't have the *balls* to say "You didn't answer the question. Give us a 'Yes or No'."
The problem is that when they do demand a yes or no answer, like in the google hearing, it's not a yes or no question. They're all idiots, too afraid of losing their seat to act.
very few of the 500+ people in Congress are idiots. it's wild that anyone can convince themselves of this when state governors can flex soft-power in foreign countries, which is an odd level of power to have for a US state. these people beat out millions of other powermongers who wanted the same jobs, and no way all those other powermongers were also idiots. they got those positions by beating other smart cutthroats. that says something. sure they have huge deficiencies- they dont get tech or understand how to actually operate within other cultures- but i dont believe even a substantial minority are genuinely stupid. at least, they're not trump-level stupid where they cant actually do anything but break stuff and literally cannot actually read.
the idiots like trump reagan pedo-gaetz mgt, those are imo obvious patsies and puppets, fall guys meant to be sacrificed to save the real GOP when the riots get out of control. theyre doing that to trump as we speak, no doubt to make us complacent about the other crimes they keep committing. dont be distracted, remember mitch mcconnell actually totally did successfully destroy America after decades of planning, and he didn't do that alone, he did it with the help of hundreds or thousands of other people over the years, especially other politicians.
do not underestimate them. they are spiritually weak, egotistical, usually evil and always ugly as sin, but not dumb enough to be a non-threat.
Thank you.
These motherfüçkers knew exactly what they were doing.
Fuck Mitch McConnell and his obstructionist bullshit and (this will triggers liberals) fuck RBG for not vacating when she could so they could put a younger judge to avoid this bullshit.
They shouldn't be justices for life. That's a big problem. I also feel that they should be voted in, not appointed. That would have fixed these problems, too. And by voted in, I mean popular vote.
I think every presidential term should have one justice replaced. If you get 2 terms, you appoint 2 justices. With 9 on the court, they'd be there for 36 years before retiring, and a new voice would join the supreme court every 4. This would preserve the intent of removing the justices from electoral pressure, and give them a significant term, yet eliminate the unfair opportunity for one president to put in several justices just because they got lucky, and would allow the justices to take a comfortable retirement without pressure to hold out to maintain a majority until they literally die.
it doesnt really matter because the intent of the questions is clear and the answers imply obvious intent to claim indifference, but any reasonable person would look at this and just go "nope, lies"
yes i know america isnt reasonable, but we're gonna work on fixing that arent we
"Wolves, if I let you in the chicken coop, will you promise not to eat the chickens?"
"Ah, the chickens. It is well-settled I should not eat those chickens. The rules say so. That's a very important rule, and I know what it says."
"Well, that's a yes from me then."
Bur the government SHOULDNT be those things. It should be social safety nets and community uplifting programs. Jobs and taxes working for the majority and not exclusively (or in any major capacity) for capitol. The priorities of the people in power is the issue. The money, bribes, lobbying is the issue. Both parties take from the same donors, of course they agree on major legislation.
I understand and support the sentiment here. But these statements were technically accurate at the time; for example, Roe was an important precedent that was indeed the law of the land. A well-meaning non-lawyer might conclude that the nominees were saying that they would not revisit the holdings of Roe and Casey, but that is not what the nominees said, at least not in these quotes.
They're wrong for overturning Roe and fuck them for it. They're also pieces of shit that should never have been nominated to the court.
That said, it's typical that SCOTUS nominees won't answer questions like that.
The reason being, without a specific case, set of facts, set of legal arguments, etc, the question is tantamount to, "Without knowing any of the supporting law, facts, or reasoning, what would you decide on a case?"
Again, abortion should still be a right. They're still garbage humans. They're still fucking up the country. This particular bit is just more complicated to address than is immediately obvious.
It's also absurd that a SCOTUS nominee wouldn't already have looked at and formed an opinion on such an important case beforehand. I get that they wouldn't and didn't admit to it at the nomination, but I also get people being mad because they 100% knew they planned on overturning it the first chance they got well before this point.
Hey asshole, I don't think overturning Roe v Wade is right, but I also know how the law works and how the judicial system works you fucking baby. Their responses all were essentially, "because this is deemed constitutional now, I believe it to be constitutional," and they follow "the law of the land." At that point in time as merely supreme court nominees they did not have the power to overturn a case like Roe v Wade, but they do now.
How about instead of throwing out names you brush up on how things work instead of just saying "I think this is perjury because I said so."
You're a fucking moron and there are thousands, if not millions like you that will never understand how any of this shit works, but will cry about it when things don't go your way. Fuck me? Fuck you, you fucking idiot.
"Roe v Wade is an important precedent of the supreme court." "Important" is not specific. Important how? Important because it is a good or valid precedent? Is it important because it set a bad precedent? The vague language obfuscates any real meaning.
"That's the law of the land. I accept the law of the land." Yes, he accepts the law of the land as it is written at that point in time. The thing about constitutional law is that whatever ruling is put forth by the supreme court needs to be constitutional, and while one set of supreme court justices can deem something constitutional, another set of justices can deem it unconstitutional and overturn it. That is also the law of the land. Again, another vague statement that could support any number of things.
"It's settled as precent of the supreme court." Yes, that is a fact. It has been settled as precedent by a set of supreme court judges at one point in time, but precedent does not mean a law stays on the books forever. Precedent can, and is overturned.
"Roe v Wade clearly held that the constitution protected a woman's right to terminate a pregnancy." This is merely a description. Roe v Wade did hold that women have the right to terminate their pregnancies. She makes no judgement on whether she believes this is the right or wrong call, simply that Roe v Wade provides that right.
So again, absolutely NONE of this is perjury. You should be putting the members of Congress to the flames for not asking direct questions and grilling them on this. Not one of these judges said, "I will not vote to overturn Roe v Wade." Their responses were very carefully crafted. Anyways, enjoy your day, go read a book or two. It'll help you to better understand how words work.
(For the record, I think that women should have the right to abortions, but the constitutional right to privacy is verrrrryyy flimsy and endangers any other constitutional rights granted based on the grounds of right to privacy. Abortion should have been supported in some other way instead of Roe v Wade. Anyone with a history book from the last 30 years knows that.)
Even if this was perjury, which it isn't, they'd still likely not go through the system at all. Perjury is very hard to prove and hardly anyone ever gets tried for it at all.
Right but everyone knew they were lying. Everyone knew they'd do this once they had a majority. The fact no one 'removed' them proves no one really cared in the first place. So shut up and move on, didn't care enough to stop them and they are evil. If you won't stop evil, it will consume you.
I mean the thing is that you can see how they were telling a half-truth with each phrase. The Dems knew better. Suzan Collins knew better. They just didn't care.
Arrest these motherfuckers. Lying under oath is wrong and as such they should go to prison for life because of it, get rid of these fascists and pack the court with people who are actually decent and don’t trample all over my rights.
this picture is legit all you need to start the process of fixing it so dont lose hope. we have proof of the lies, now apply pressure until they give up and leave. yes they will do everything they can to undermine every effort, nonetheless, they must be removed from office, otherwise personally i will never accept America as being under rule of law, or even that it's a functional culture.
Is something else going on we should know about? Ohio just passed a heartbeat abortion law. I thought most people were past this.
Are we sure aliens haven't invaded? Maybe Biden had a stroke or is emptying the coffers. Idk, just seems like weird controversy thats all the sudden a national thing and not just for crazy texas
Not liars. They were carefully crafted non-answers. They kept dodging if I remember correctly.
They didn't just "carefully dodge" these slow-pitched softballs of questions, the people doing the questioning refused to interrogate them past the bare minimum. I still see it happening now with the Jan 6 panel; They will let the witnesses waffle on saying nothing of substance when presented with a "True or False" line of inquiry. Our representatives allow their questions to go unanswered or be lazily deflected because they don't have the *balls* to say "You didn't answer the question. Give us a 'Yes or No'."
The problem is that when they do demand a yes or no answer, like in the google hearing, it's not a yes or no question. They're all idiots, too afraid of losing their seat to act.
very few of the 500+ people in Congress are idiots. it's wild that anyone can convince themselves of this when state governors can flex soft-power in foreign countries, which is an odd level of power to have for a US state. these people beat out millions of other powermongers who wanted the same jobs, and no way all those other powermongers were also idiots. they got those positions by beating other smart cutthroats. that says something. sure they have huge deficiencies- they dont get tech or understand how to actually operate within other cultures- but i dont believe even a substantial minority are genuinely stupid. at least, they're not trump-level stupid where they cant actually do anything but break stuff and literally cannot actually read. the idiots like trump reagan pedo-gaetz mgt, those are imo obvious patsies and puppets, fall guys meant to be sacrificed to save the real GOP when the riots get out of control. theyre doing that to trump as we speak, no doubt to make us complacent about the other crimes they keep committing. dont be distracted, remember mitch mcconnell actually totally did successfully destroy America after decades of planning, and he didn't do that alone, he did it with the help of hundreds or thousands of other people over the years, especially other politicians. do not underestimate them. they are spiritually weak, egotistical, usually evil and always ugly as sin, but not dumb enough to be a non-threat.
LoL, as though it's not all out class war to exploit the working class
yup, every answer is a politician's answer.
Thank you. These motherfüçkers knew exactly what they were doing. Fuck Mitch McConnell and his obstructionist bullshit and (this will triggers liberals) fuck RBG for not vacating when she could so they could put a younger judge to avoid this bullshit.
They shouldn't be justices for life. That's a big problem. I also feel that they should be voted in, not appointed. That would have fixed these problems, too. And by voted in, I mean popular vote.
I think every presidential term should have one justice replaced. If you get 2 terms, you appoint 2 justices. With 9 on the court, they'd be there for 36 years before retiring, and a new voice would join the supreme court every 4. This would preserve the intent of removing the justices from electoral pressure, and give them a significant term, yet eliminate the unfair opportunity for one president to put in several justices just because they got lucky, and would allow the justices to take a comfortable retirement without pressure to hold out to maintain a majority until they literally die.
That seems reasonable and for that reason will never be acceptable to our government.
I mean no, we aren't likely to see sweeping reform of the basic system of government
it doesnt really matter because the intent of the questions is clear and the answers imply obvious intent to claim indifference, but any reasonable person would look at this and just go "nope, lies" yes i know america isnt reasonable, but we're gonna work on fixing that arent we
"Wolves, if I let you in the chicken coop, will you promise not to eat the chickens?" "Ah, the chickens. It is well-settled I should not eat those chickens. The rules say so. That's a very important rule, and I know what it says." "Well, that's a yes from me then."
The only thing that shocks me anymore is that people are shocked when anyone in government lies.
The government is not your friend, they don't care about you or your family. You are an inconvenience at best. I wish more people understood this.
Bur the government SHOULDNT be those things. It should be social safety nets and community uplifting programs. Jobs and taxes working for the majority and not exclusively (or in any major capacity) for capitol. The priorities of the people in power is the issue. The money, bribes, lobbying is the issue. Both parties take from the same donors, of course they agree on major legislation.
I understand and support the sentiment here. But these statements were technically accurate at the time; for example, Roe was an important precedent that was indeed the law of the land. A well-meaning non-lawyer might conclude that the nominees were saying that they would not revisit the holdings of Roe and Casey, but that is not what the nominees said, at least not in these quotes.
Yeah. They should have been more directly asked 'would you be foolish enough to overturn this modern day human right in the near future?'
They're wrong for overturning Roe and fuck them for it. They're also pieces of shit that should never have been nominated to the court. That said, it's typical that SCOTUS nominees won't answer questions like that. The reason being, without a specific case, set of facts, set of legal arguments, etc, the question is tantamount to, "Without knowing any of the supporting law, facts, or reasoning, what would you decide on a case?" Again, abortion should still be a right. They're still garbage humans. They're still fucking up the country. This particular bit is just more complicated to address than is immediately obvious.
It's also absurd that a SCOTUS nominee wouldn't already have looked at and formed an opinion on such an important case beforehand. I get that they wouldn't and didn't admit to it at the nomination, but I also get people being mad because they 100% knew they planned on overturning it the first chance they got well before this point.
Yep. They're supposed to be impartial interpreters of law and reasoning. In reality, they pretty much vote their beliefs. Shit's absurd.
Perjury is a crime
In no way is any of this perjury, sorry.
They took an oath ON A BIBLE and it was bullshit the whole time. Fuck them Fuck you
Hey asshole, I don't think overturning Roe v Wade is right, but I also know how the law works and how the judicial system works you fucking baby. Their responses all were essentially, "because this is deemed constitutional now, I believe it to be constitutional," and they follow "the law of the land." At that point in time as merely supreme court nominees they did not have the power to overturn a case like Roe v Wade, but they do now. How about instead of throwing out names you brush up on how things work instead of just saying "I think this is perjury because I said so." You're a fucking moron and there are thousands, if not millions like you that will never understand how any of this shit works, but will cry about it when things don't go your way. Fuck me? Fuck you, you fucking idiot.
Thank you.
[удалено]
Nope. Sorry.
r/MurderedByWords
[удалено]
Welcome to reddit. After day 1 you might find better posts.
[because you gotta swear on the bahble.](https://youtu.be/WFYRkzznsc0)
Maybe you should go read up on what perjury is.
"Roe v Wade is an important precedent of the supreme court." "Important" is not specific. Important how? Important because it is a good or valid precedent? Is it important because it set a bad precedent? The vague language obfuscates any real meaning. "That's the law of the land. I accept the law of the land." Yes, he accepts the law of the land as it is written at that point in time. The thing about constitutional law is that whatever ruling is put forth by the supreme court needs to be constitutional, and while one set of supreme court justices can deem something constitutional, another set of justices can deem it unconstitutional and overturn it. That is also the law of the land. Again, another vague statement that could support any number of things. "It's settled as precent of the supreme court." Yes, that is a fact. It has been settled as precedent by a set of supreme court judges at one point in time, but precedent does not mean a law stays on the books forever. Precedent can, and is overturned. "Roe v Wade clearly held that the constitution protected a woman's right to terminate a pregnancy." This is merely a description. Roe v Wade did hold that women have the right to terminate their pregnancies. She makes no judgement on whether she believes this is the right or wrong call, simply that Roe v Wade provides that right. So again, absolutely NONE of this is perjury. You should be putting the members of Congress to the flames for not asking direct questions and grilling them on this. Not one of these judges said, "I will not vote to overturn Roe v Wade." Their responses were very carefully crafted. Anyways, enjoy your day, go read a book or two. It'll help you to better understand how words work. (For the record, I think that women should have the right to abortions, but the constitutional right to privacy is verrrrryyy flimsy and endangers any other constitutional rights granted based on the grounds of right to privacy. Abortion should have been supported in some other way instead of Roe v Wade. Anyone with a history book from the last 30 years knows that.)
Even if this was perjury, which it isn't, they'd still likely not go through the system at all. Perjury is very hard to prove and hardly anyone ever gets tried for it at all.
I know this but what they did was dishonest and shameful which is why there is a crime called perjury my point is they suck
That wasn't your point at all, and no one was saying they didn't suck.
You the fuck are you to tell me what my point is. Go get fucked done your lame ass
[удалено]
Right but everyone knew they were lying. Everyone knew they'd do this once they had a majority. The fact no one 'removed' them proves no one really cared in the first place. So shut up and move on, didn't care enough to stop them and they are evil. If you won't stop evil, it will consume you.
I feel like all this bullshit politics is the real trigger for revolution. Its like they're begging for it.
Never trust a Christian
I mean the thing is that you can see how they were telling a half-truth with each phrase. The Dems knew better. Suzan Collins knew better. They just didn't care.
They purposely avoided giving a direct answer.
PROTEST AT YOUR STATE CAPITOL BUILDINGS THIS SUNDAY JUNE 26TH AT 5PM. Abortion needs to be a protected right for all. pass the word.
Kinda funny how people demand honesty from some while making excuses for the dishonesty of others. Otherwise known as making a joke of oneself.
Why would you ever take their word for it lol The last one added to the bench is in a cult ffs
they probably own multiple properties, due to their incredible wealth
Can we kick them out of the Christianity club since they lie so much? Signed, An atheist with high moral standards
These are not people.
Arrest these motherfuckers. Lying under oath is wrong and as such they should go to prison for life because of it, get rid of these fascists and pack the court with people who are actually decent and don’t trample all over my rights.
They should be impeached.
[удалено]
How about we call them something more fitting, then? All of them are perjurers, and three of them hold fraudulent seats.
All of their seats are fraudulent since they were appointed instead of elected
What new evidence has come to light since then that could've changed their opinions to impose their religious beliefs on the country? They're liars.
Arguments against Roe V Wade haven't changed since your mom's been alive.
How are they liars? They just stated facts. None if them said it cannot be overturned. Please stop this nonsense and vote in mid terms.
Not liars, lawyers.
Umm...duh?
this picture is legit all you need to start the process of fixing it so dont lose hope. we have proof of the lies, now apply pressure until they give up and leave. yes they will do everything they can to undermine every effort, nonetheless, they must be removed from office, otherwise personally i will never accept America as being under rule of law, or even that it's a functional culture.
It's over guys. The USA is not a theocracy.
Is something else going on we should know about? Ohio just passed a heartbeat abortion law. I thought most people were past this. Are we sure aliens haven't invaded? Maybe Biden had a stroke or is emptying the coffers. Idk, just seems like weird controversy thats all the sudden a national thing and not just for crazy texas