197
Comments (32)
sorted by:
15
AmazinKrackin 15 points ago +15 / -0

She was a complete and utter fraud.

0
giantrabbit1 0 points ago +3 / -3

Senate makes its own rules.

Filibuster isn't written into the Constitution, it's in Rule XXII of the Senate. So Senate could abolish or set a new precedent by simple majority vote any time and the courts can't do anything about it. It's outside their jurisdiction.

Stop blaming her for nothing.

-1
Tartarian-Kingtwo -1 points ago +2 / -3

Quit simping over a traitor nerd

-1
giantrabbit1 -1 points ago +2 / -3

Fuck off dude. That's how the law works. Senate rules are under the sole jurisdiction of the Senate. SCOTUS cannot weigh in - it's a nonjusticiable question under the law.

4
Devildtails 4 points ago +4 / -0

The original post didn’t say ACB can’t be relied on to reverse the senate’s rules, the original post said ACB can’t be relied on to stop the democratic senate from deconstructing the constitution and thereby destroying checks and balances. tedandlisa123 is right, you are wrong.

-2
giantrabbit1 -2 points ago +1 / -3

It specifically states "If the Dems scrap the filibuster..."

Supreme Court can't stop them from doing that. That's what I was mentioning.

13
aqua27 13 points ago +13 / -0

Another Trump bad pick

10
MasonJoe777 10 points ago +10 / -0

As soon as I saw her adopted vibrants I knew what we were getting.

3
JohnVoight 3 points ago +3 / -0

I was spamming Lagoa’s name on this board heavily around that time. Thought it was fairly obvious ACB wasn’t our girl.

1
Tartarian-Kingtwo 1 point ago +1 / -0

Lagoa was just as bad.

1
JohnVoight 1 point ago +1 / -0

I liked her intangibles more (parents fleeing communist Cuba).

1
ca18det 1 point ago +1 / -0

Lagoa is a gun grabber.

8
AbrahamLincoln 8 points ago +8 / -0

Hasn't she sided with the dems on literally every single important issue?

7
alienjesus 7 points ago +7 / -0

She likes BBC

4
Slugbert 4 points ago +4 / -0

The eyes always give the batshit crazy away. In the beginning I really wanted to like her and decided to give her the benefit of the doubt, but something in the eyes made me unsure. Always trust your gut I guess is what I’m trying to say.

4
Testosteroneape2000 4 points ago +4 / -0

Yeah those eyes were a dead giveaway but I wanted so much to believe.

2
Ballind 2 points ago +3 / -1

We all agree women shouldn't vote based on history but they're making a case that they shouldn't be judges either

2
Testosteroneape2000 2 points ago +2 / -0

Worthless biatch.

2
NoFucks2Give 2 points ago +2 / -0

Her stare is fucking psychotic. Not sure WTF Trump saw in her.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
SaltyKrakenBalls 1 point ago +1 / -0

Mitch yitch

1
Txiribiton 1 point ago +1 / -0

Why do you expect a traitor to your country to save you?

1
LINDIESUE 1 point ago +2 / -1

I agree, but do you have any names to call the male justices?

5
GibsonDawg 5 points ago +5 / -0

Sure. Pussies? Cucks? Dickless scumbags? Any of those good? Maybe we could reverse this and use their names for awful things. When you take a really wet splattery poop and it splashes a mixture of shit and toilet water back up onto your taint? That's a Gorsuch from now on.

-9
LINDIESUE -9 points ago +1 / -10

You are well versed, I see. Hmmm. Must have taken years to learn to become the scum bag you are.

2
GibsonDawg 2 points ago +2 / -0

Talent recognizes talent.

-5
LINDIESUE -5 points ago +1 / -6

You got me scum bag.

5
GibsonDawg 5 points ago +5 / -0

So you ask me to call out the male Supreme court justices, and I did, and you called me a scumbag. Did you come here with the express purpose of being an asshole to anybody that was going to respond to you? Was there ever a proper response do not set your bitch gear in motion? Or are you just a shitty troll? Nah, probably just a dumb as shit hormonal woman who misunderstood and lashed out in all your female fragility. Grow some thick skin before you have a stroke, Karen.

-6
LINDIESUE -6 points ago +1 / -7

You've spoken for yourself. Nuff said.

1
Greenhills 1 point ago +1 / -0

It’s happening. The only non violent recourse left...the convention of states.

1
LostIdentityStudios 1 point ago +1 / -0

Wow, we sure did a 180 on her pretty quick.

-1
giantrabbit1 -1 points ago +2 / -3

Senate makes its own rules.

Filibuster isn't written into the Constitution, it's in Rule XXII of the Senate. So Senate could abolish or set a new precedent by simple majority vote any time and the courts can't do anything about it. It's outside their jurisdiction.

Stop blaming her for nothing.