TIME SLIME

Democrat Media Monkeys

Time: ‘Does Neil Gorsuch Talk Too Much?’ Liberal journalists are worried about Neil Gorsuch. The October 16 issue of Time magazine fretted of the newly-minted conservative Supreme Court justice: “Does Justice Neil Gorsuch talk too much?" Writer Tessa Berenson touted liberal critics complaining about Gorsuch “ruffling some feathers.” [SCROLL] It didn’t take long for the newest member to make his presence known on the Court. Gorsuch, a conservative judge nominated by President Trump and confirmed in April, had been sitting in his first oral argument last spring for just 10 minutes before he asked his first question. Over the next hour, he asked 21 more, posing more questions at his first oral argument than any of his eight colleagues did at theirs. He blew past Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s previous record of 15 questions at her first oral argument, according to Adam Feldman, who runs a blog tracking Supreme Court data. That’s rare for a freshman justice. By the Court’s unwritten rules, new members are often seen more they are heard. “I think he has ruffled some feathers on the Court,” Garrett Epps, a professor at University of Baltimore School of Law, says of the newest justice. Eventually, she got to the real question: “In its new term beginning October 2, the Supreme Court will consider many pressing questions. Can a baker refuse to make a cake for a gay wedding? Can states redraw districts to help a political party? And, does Justice Neil Gorsuch talk too much?” Berenson cited another liberal, activist Nan Aaron: Justices often give speeches to liberal or conservative groups, but Democrats are upset by the optics of Gorsuch’s recent appearances. “Generally, Supreme Court justices, whether appointed by Democrats or Republicans, do their best to avoid any outward support for an administration,” says Nan Aron, president of liberal judicial advocacy group Alliance for Justice, who argues Gorsuch has “erased any possibility that he is anything other than a partisan.” To be fair, the journalist also included some conservative fans of Gorsuch. But how often have Barack Obama’s appointees been chastised for “talking too much?” When Gorsuch was nominated, outlets such as CBS and the Washington Post fretted that he was either "right" or "far-right." In contrast, Sonia Sotomayor, appointed by Barack Obama, was "not nearly as liberal" as you may have heard. [Free Republic]  I found this on FR.  It's run-of-mill crap one expects from Time & Ilk.  What I found especially interesting was in the comment   threads.  We know Roberts was (inappropriately) being directly pressured by Obama.  After Roberts' bizarre decision I wondered whether there was some sort of black mail involved  Only thing that could possibly explain it. To: Kaslin Traitor Roberts became much quieter after his treason... To: Paladin2 You are being unfair to Chief Justice Roberts. He only voted once with the liberal Justices. To: Kaslin Yeah but that one vote was the very worst one which impacted millions of lives. To: Kaslin Yeah, probably the most important vote since Roe v Wade. Roberts is a traitor to the constitution. He lived the closet homo life, and finally late in life when it because noteworthy, he got a wife illegally bought a few Irish orphans. (???) He stabbed every American in the back over healthcare. It’s impossible to be “unfair” to him. Hmmmmm.

Clowns are Scary

"If you're trying to change minds and influence people it's probably not a good idea to say that virtually all elected Democrats are liars, but what the hell, they are" TRKOF

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer in 2013: "We much prefer the risk of up or down votes and majority rule [on judicial nominees], than the risk of continued total obstruction. That's the bottom line no matter who's in power." Schumer now: "The irresistible, immutable logic is, if the nominee doesn't get 60 [votes], you change the nominee, not the rules." Senator Tim Kaine in October 2016: "If [Republicans] think they're going to stonewall the filling of [the SCOTUS] vacancy or other vacancies, then a Democratic Senate majority will say, 'We're not going to let you thwart the law.' And so we will change the Senate rules to uphold the law." Kaine now: "The way I look at it is the Supreme Court is the only position that requires you to get to a 60-vote threshold, which means it mandates that there be some bipartisanship and that is appropriate. Life tenure. Highest court in the land. Should have to get to 60 votes." And, "I will oppose his nomination." Senator Elizabeth Warren in November 2013: "If Republicans continue to filibuster these highly qualified nominees for no reason than to nullify the president's constitutional authority, then senators not only have the right to change the filibuster, senators have a duty to change the filibuster rules." And she also said, "We need to call out these filibusters for what they are — naked attempts to nullify the results of the last presidential election." Warren now: "I believe Judge Gorsuch's nomination should be blocked." Not that reporting any of this matters; the USofA having jumped the shark.

Please .. Not the Briar Patch

Gorsuch nomination ‘almost certainly’ will require GOP to go ‘nuclear’ previously .... Democrats Go 'Nuclear,' Eliminate Filibusters on Most Nominees (Nov 21, 2013)