Liberal journalists and Democrats responded to news of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy’s retirement with loud moans of grief and curse words on Wednesday.
“Oh my g-d,” one man says in audio of the moment the news broke inside a Democratic National Committee meeting. A woman can be heard moaning in the background. “Not that he’s done us any good on these recent decisions, but he was the one that was usually persuadable,” he adds. The woman who broke the news continues, “This is not good news, for anyone.”
How it sounded inside a DNC committee meeting the moment Justice Kennedy’s retirement was announced pic.twitter.com/6S9uO2JGzQ
— David Siders (@davidsiders) June 27, 2018
Kennedy’s retirement from the Supreme Court was a jolt to liberals and conservatives, as it provides President Trump the opportunity to put a fifth conservative on the bench. Kennedy was the usual swing vote and often sided with the liberal justices.
The liberal site Splinter tweeted the f-word in all caps over and over in response to the news.
Alternate headline: FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK https://t.co/23wjlvJn5h
— Splinter is on Bluesky (@splinter_news) June 27, 2018
“F-ck. You. Justice Kennedy,” tweeted ThinkProgress editor Ian Millhiser. “I think Roberts probably won’t overrule Obergefell, but religious conservatives just won the right to discriminate,” he added in a follow-up tweet.
Lefties are probably already talking about assassinating Conservative Justices as soon as we get another Lefty President.
Of course, none of them will have the courage to try and do it themselves.
As usual it will be in the form of:
“Someone (else) should do something!”
See Peter Fonda, etc.
Senator Dianne Feinstein’s response:
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer responded—including a video of the statements republicans made in 2016, in case anyone has forgotten what they said:
We’re only four months away from an election that will determine the balance of power in the Senate, and whether Trump’s next Supreme Court nominee is confirmed. American voters are divided on the question of his judgement with regard to this matter, and deserve to have their voices heard. So just how hypocritical are these republicans regarding the precedent they recently set?
Stay tuned. You’ll see for yourselves. Unless, of course, Trump nominates a highly qualified moderate, as Barack Obama did with Merrick Garland, and the Senate quickly comes to a majority agreement. I wouldn’t place any bets on that happening.
@Petercat, #1:
To paraphrase Bilbo Baggins: More than half of you are half nuts, and less than half of you are only half as crazy as I think you are.
@Greg: A Presidential election is a wee bit different than midterms when the new seats are not ready til January, no the seat should not stay empty to appease the insane.
There were no worries that was Hillarys seat to fill it was all going to be soooo historic. You know the FBIs influence and insurance policy…HE PROMISED!
Schumer has floated the idea of preventing Republicans from forming a quorum until after the election.
All Dem senators need to do is refuse to vote on everything.
From what Schumer’s been saying up until now, it seems he already had hit upon that line of (in)action.
Now, who wants to predict if Reps or Dems would gain seats in the Senate if Dems refuse to do any work between now and the election?
@Nanny G: OMG the Dem senators in WI did that they ran away to Illinois, we couldnt think of a nicer place for them. That was 2011, much of what they are pulling on Trump is straight from the John Doe case, gawd cant they come up with anything new? The 14 fleebaggers snicker.
@Greg: Wasn’t Kagan confirmed in an election year? But it wasn’t a Presidential election year and neither is this one. Fuss all you want Trump will get to pick.
All we get from liberals is WHINE WHINE WHINE ever since Trump was elected the left has become unhinged over it all Mad Madame Maxine(Waters)needs to see a mental institution before she loses her mind completly and the owner of the Red Hen has Resigned from a buisness group
No, it is not different.. Someone recently told me that this is a republic, wherein representative democracy is paramount. Would that not make the people’s chosen representatives of greater import than a Chief Executive, whose constitutional function is only to execute the laws that the people’s directly elected representatives enact? In this case, we’re talking about only 4 months until the relevant critical election—only around one-half the delay that republicans imposed.
What Feinstein and Schumer are advocating is consistency—which, of course, they are doing to make a point: They knew the republican argument was complete bullshit in 2016, and they know perfectly well that republicans will disown it and drop it like a hot potato this time around.
That’s a entirely valid point, which the republican leadership previously rejected.
@Mully, #7:
He will pick wisely or he will be a one-term president at most, and simultaneously blow the keel out of the GOP.
I strongly recommend that he appoint someone who will refuse to protect Roe v. Wade, and do so as quickly as humanly possible.
A very smart move on his part would be to renominate Garland Merrick. It would also be funny, proving he has a sense of humor.
@Greg: Well I don’t have a crystal ball like you do. All I can say is I believe he will get his pick and Merrick is not his list. I don’t think Obama was concerned for pro life people with his picks. Even if at some time in the future Roe V Wade is overturned it will then go back to the states to decide. One may be ok with it others may not. Federalism.
Someone’s crystal ball was off last time. I recall Hilliary had a 100% chance of winning. If Trump were elected the economy would crash. The stock market would drop and never recover. Instead she lost. The economy is looking pretty good and the market is doing what it does. Fluctuate.
Funny thing during Obama’s last year or two liberals were pushing for Ginsburg to retire so he could make another pick. Didn’t work out that way. Now they want her there forever. Probably giving her taxidermy recommendations right now. ..Stay tuned.
Not only has not one shred of evidence to that effect been found, but there was never any evidence to support the SUSPICION it was true. Liberals have GOT to be the stupidest people on the planet if they think anyone but other stupid liberals believe that crap. Reading through those comments, is there any longer any doubt about the dangerous threat of violence the left poses? No. There isn’t.
We’re only four months away from an election that will determine the balance of power in the Senate, and whether Trump’s next Supreme Court nominee is confirmed.
Stay tuned. You’ll see for yourselves. Unless, of course, Trump nominates a highly qualified moderate, as Barack Obama did with Merrick Garland
To paraphrase Bilbo Baggins: More than half of you are half nuts, and less than half of you are only half as crazy as I think you are.
No, it is not different.
What Feinstein and Schumer are advocating is consistency
He will pick wisely or he will be a one-term president at most, and simultaneously blow the keel out of the GOP.
A very smart move on his part would be to renominate Garland Merrick. Yeah, right. Why not nominate Obama? Get f**king real. Your biggest problem is continuing the “Weekend at Bernie’s” routine with Ginsburg.
@Greg:
. The constitution gave The President the power to appoint with approval of the Senate as he was voted in by ALL the people not just 1 state. Its the same reason he signs legislation into law or vetoes it. Damn citizenship class didnt do you any good did it
Did Mitch McConnell not obstruct? Yes, he most certainly did. He held off Senate hearings, debate, deliberation, and any vote on Garland Merrick’s nominee to fill an empty Supreme Court seat for a full 10 months. The reason why the marginally senile old dinosaur held them off was because he knew that such well-respected and a fully qualified nominee would most likely be confirmed. There’s your “representative democracy” in action.
Of course, if Schumer were to do the same thing—as minority leader, no less—it would instantly become proof positive of a pervasive deep-state socialist conspiracy against Truth, Justice, Jesus, The Flag, and Mom’s Apple Pie.
Have I got that about right?
@Greg: The assessment of McConnell is spot on other than that tough sh!t, He was trying to give Hillary a gift, but like in the swing states she didnt show up, no fireworks show, no concession speech, no SCOTUS appointment.
Its a miracle Kennedy retires and the MSM has a new reason to cry, and come up with worst case scenerios fear mongering so the kiddies at the borders are poof.
@Greg:
But that was before a PRESIDENTIAL election and it was BIDEN’S rule. Playing by leftist rules is no fun, is it?
No, it only confirms, again and more fully, what a cabeza del Richardo Schumer is which, of course, requires no further confirmation.
I think Trump might be considering nominating Obama… if he qualifies.
Nobody who wants to change The Constitution should be in charge of defending it.
The ‘Living, breathing document’ argument just means they don’t like The Constitution.
The job as written requires Constitutional Conservatives.
The Constitution as written provided for interpretation and clarification by the court, not to mention providing a built-in mechanism for amendments. The institution of slavery was abolished by that constitutional process.
The Constitution is not a dead, unchanging fossil. It’s a living, evolving, self-guided process.
@Greg: Yet nowhere does it say killing babies for convenience is OK and gun ownership is only OK if you NEED one. The point being, liberal broad interpretations need to be kept OUT of the Supreme Court.
@Greg: Slavery was never in the constitution, only those that have little knowledge of the cherished document call it living or breathing, it is the highest law in the land, should be interpreted as the framers intended, not twisted for agenda driven fools. A book does not live or breathe a document does not live or breathe. Its like a man picking up his marriage certificate and saying, it says right here you have to make me dinner cause he is hungry, Dred Scott v. Sanford, Hammer v. Dagenhart, Kelo v. City of New London all agenda driven
@Greg: The Democrats can do all they want, but they owe their situation to Harry Reid for changing the requirements for judges, Comey and friends for bungling the Clinton investigation, The Democratic party for sticking it to Sanders and the lefty media. As the investigations continue, all of those who tried to gig the election for Clinton are whining while the rest of us laugh. It looks like everyone is getting their just deserts!
@Randy: The left can also thank Susan Rice for their “Russian collusion” fantasy.
@Deplorable Me:
The constitution has no qualifiers for a supreme court judge, he could nominate
Judge Judy. I think guilty of treason might be stretching it.
@kitt: That would give Obama the opportunity to screw up all three branches of government.
@kitt: Did you open the link? It’s a meme.
@kitt, #20:
Of course they were agenda-driven. Human activity is agenda-driven.
One of my several-times-great grandfathers owned 18 slaves, which upon his death passed on to a son and a grandchild. The Constitution might not have endorsed such a travesty, but it didn’t forbid it either, until a Constitutional amendment ended it once and for all. Similarly, the 19th amendment guaranteed women the right to vote. This is such an important and fundamental principle that it had to be clearly and permanently set out by carving it in stone at the foundational, bedrock level. That’s a living Constitution, flexing its muscles. There’s nothing dead about it.
@Greg: Contrary to liberal contention, this was what the Civil War was about; the “right” of the individual states to engage in activities that are not specifically prohibited by the Constitution. The only “living” the Constitution does is when it is, according to the Constitution, amended. It is not there for interpretation depending upon what political agenda you want to promote.
Interpretation is the constitutionally assigned function of the Supreme Court. That’s why it exists.
@Greg: It simply must be interpreted correctly. For instance, “shall not be infringed” is already interpreted. Likewise, a fine to compel citizens to buy something is not a tax. Liberal activism has no place within the Supreme Court. In fact, it has no place anywhere.
You can kiss that crap goodbye.
@Greg: Its actually to take a court case and interpret that case to determine if the case before them is constitutional.
Amendments should be very carefully considered and are difficult the supreme court doesnt amend the constitution.
@Deplorable Me:Gloria Allred already has proof of sexual misconduct for whom ever Trump nominates, including Yearbook forgeries and onion extract for cry on demand me to statements.
Senator Mike Lee is an avowed anti-choice republican. He’d be an excellent Supreme Court nominee, Donnie. Go for him.
Of course Trump is just jerking people around by floating that particular rumor. He’s most likely not quite that stupid.
@Greg: Fear mongering Lee would be an excellent choice.
@kitt:
Any good liberal is always prepared. Lies for every occasion.
@Greg:
Apparently not, or the liberal fools would be dancing on his strings, like they always do when he pulls them.
@Deplorable Me: I would love Sen Lee on the court
@kitt: Don’t you love it when liberals, who wake up every day eyeing some right of the citizens they can begin chipping away at, liberals who, while too cowardly to try, would love to rip up the 1st and 2nd Amendments, think one of THEIR privileges is threatened? OMG!!! The world is stopping spinning and orbiting, it is the end of the Constitution (which they hate) and an end to the country!!
Good Lord, those are some truly despicable America-hating hypocrites.