Still trying to lynch that uppity negro, some things never change. Democrats would reinstate the fugitive slave act if they could use it to bring renegade conservative ****** back to the plantation.B.See » 09 Mar 2022, 9:26 am » wrote: ↑ Should it REALLY be any surprise to anyone even remotely KEEPING UP about some of the latest revelations on chief house ------------- unk Clarence THOMas' apparent conflict of interests and involvement with REICH winged dark money sources? The guy who most vehemently denied right winged political influence and favoritism among his fellow conservative justices???? I sure wasn't.
New report details Clarence Thomas’ 'shady ties to sprawling network of dark money' - Alternet.org
Associate Justice Clarence Thomas Wants the Supreme Court To Look At Facebook's "Broad Immunity"
also:
Supreme Court Conservatives Poised To Halt Biden Administration’s Climate Regulations
Supreme Court Poised To Shift Executive Branch Power To Itself
The Supreme Court was one vote away from blowing up federal elections.
Neo » 09 Mar 2022, 9:28 am » wrote: ↑ Still trying to lynch that uppity negro, some things never change. Democrats would reinstate the fugitive slave act if they could use it to bring renegade conservative ****** back to the plantation.
I have no use for minorities that vote against their freedom and vote for continued government dependency. Replacing fathers with welfare checks destroyed the once enviable black family.B.See » 09 Mar 2022, 9:38 am » wrote: ↑ Right. Because the only GOOD minority to the MAGAS are those FEW THEY CAN FIND amen-ing THEIR HATE FILLED FASCIST ****.
"Hey, look at my African American over there!" (Trump)
Probably about the same number of PRO-abortion justices that Democrat presidents have nominated.Blackvegetable » 21 Jan 2022, 9:21 pm » wrote: ↑ What are the odds that Yahoo administrations would nominate SIX CONSECUTIVE anti abortion jurists?
Again.
No...your math really blows.Zeets2 » 09 Mar 2022, 11:13 am » wrote: ↑ Probably about the same number of PRO-abortion justices that Democrat presidents have nominated.
But THAT'S ok with you, right?
Yeah? Well, here are the last 7 SC nominees made by Democrat presidents. Why don't you tell me which ones were NOT pro-abortionists?:
B.See » 09 Mar 2022, 9:26 am » wrote: ↑ Should it REALLY be any surprise to anyone even remotely KEEPING UP about some of the latest revelations on chief house ------------- unk Clarence THOMas' apparent conflict of interests and involvement with REICH winged dark money sources? The guy who most vehemently denied right winged political influence and favoritism among his fellow conservative justices???? I sure wasn't.
IkeBana » 26 Jan 2022, 5:24 am » wrote: ↑ Gorsuch is a **** headcase partisan who has it out for Democrats because he believes the stress of a contempt of Congress charge against his mother, who was the EPA Director in 1983, and her subsequent resignation, gave her the cancer that killed her. In fact, his mother was a **** political extortionist, just like Donald Trump with the Ukraine, who got caught using her office politically.
It's the Gorsuch gene pool of **** malfeasance.
ha ha ha ha haha. your true self shines. instincts have no secrets because all they do is navigate mutually evolving here now. Intellect deceives self and others joining in ways to manipulate time as displaced here now.anitamaria » 10 Mar 2022, 1:39 am » wrote: ↑ Listen, if the don liked them, they are surely corrupt!! When the judge that raped that woman was accepted I was appalled the corrupt Republicans refused any access to his files. May be now they need to look because he perjured himself. We have criminals in our most powerful court of the land!!
B.See » 10 Mar 2022, 9:05 am » wrote: ↑ In Statement, Justices Alito, Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh Signal Willingness to Expand ‘Ministerial Exception’ for Religious Colleges
For "the integrity of the court": Why Clarence Thomas' wife is a major problem for the Supreme Court | Salon.com
Beware the "Independent State Legislatures doctrine" — it could checkmate democracy | Salon.com Will the
Independent State Legislature doctrine literally mean the end of democracy? | Salon.com
When people gamble using relative time and double or nothing bets, don't have anything to lose and everything others have to gain. You gave away what you are demanding everyone pay you for whom you rather become.B.See » 16 Mar 2022, 6:21 am » wrote: ↑ The buffoonery and COMPLICITY of one the REICH'S favorite house ----------------------. (okay... the blank word is "co-conspirators" right") ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) AND his reich winged wife:
Clarence Thomas roasted for speech claiming the Supreme Court may lose credibility: 'Irony is dead' - Raw Story
Clarence Thomas, Whose Wife Fought Election Results, Warns Of Political Influence In Supreme Court | HuffPost Latest News
Ginni Thomas, Wife Of Clarence Thomas, Says She Attended Jan. 6 'Stop The Steal' Rally
Latest revelations about Ginni Thomas makes Supreme Court’s right-wing majority look like ‘partisan hacks’: columnist - Raw Story LOOK like?????
MEANWHILE:
Anita Hill on what could restore public trust in the Supreme Court.
Support for Supreme Court Term Limits Grows, Survey Shows
Won't miss what you avoid. Only catch what you believe true. Either way, you are always incomplete of understanding the whole situation you evolve in now.B.See » 17 Mar 2022, 1:11 am » wrote: ↑ [Oh a side note on those ten notifications I see up top... I won't be bothering to even LOOK at those tonight. Most of them are trash flames, driveby's and insults. So if I don't happen to catch your response in thread, guess I'll miss it]
And I told you so about that AS WELL.
You were never a quantified educator of life in plain sight, yet you convinced how many generations of other peoples' ancestors forward to continue denying now is eternity.Xavier_Onassis » 17 Mar 2022, 9:15 am » wrote: ↑ Clarence Thomas has never been qualified to be on the Supreme Court.
He should be impeached, removed and replaced. I don't expect this to happen, so the best we can do is pray to the Cardiac Infarction Fairy.
I explain how biologically it is and you define it isn't theoretically and theologically cannot happen. Social consensus says I am wrong and rule of law protects the majority ignoring how life is evolving as specifically taking place here.Xavier_Onassis » 17 Mar 2022, 9:29 am » wrote: ↑ Now is not eternity. Eternity is simply a word you have fallen in love with.
The Universe has not always existed, so it is limited in time, and therefore not eternal.
Of course, as far as humans go, the Universe might as well be eternal, since its lifespan into the future is far ,longer than the existence of humans.
You are still totally wacky, sole.