Home | About | Donate

Cementing GOP Takeover of Courts, Senate Confirms 'Anti-Voting Rights Extremist' as Trump's 200th Federal Judge

Originally published at http://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/06/24/cementing-gop-takeover-courts-senate-confirms-anti-voting-rights-extremist-trumps


The Rule of the Uber-Rich Means Tyranny or Revolution----Chris Hedges.

I hope Chris Hedges (or ??) can now focus his pieces on what “revolution” will more specifically look like because it looks like we are up to our necks now in tyranny.


On the off chance that Chuckles Schumer becomes the Majority Leader next year, how much do you want to bet that he doesn’t get half as many judges appointed as Mitch. And that those he does manage to get appointed are mostly old folks.

The r-party plays to win, the d-party plays with themselves.


End this nightmare.
We will be plagued by this administration for decades.
I like the idea of abolishing lifetime appointments for 18 year terms, at least in the Supreme Court, staggered so each president appoints 2 per term.
Perhaps these recent loser judge appointments will be so bad they will be impeached


It would be helpful to explore what options there are for removal of these judges----if there are any options? If not, what to do?

I posted this on another thread and am going to toss it out here as well:


So here is a question that maybe one of the smart commenters of CD’s will be able to answer----

Let’s say trump loses to the other horrid candidate. I’ve heard trump will then be open to prosecution for crimes committed while in office having lost the protection offered while being president (which is crazy).

If he is convicted (long shot I know) is there a way to nullify some of his judicial appointments given the fact that he was engaging in criminal behavior at the time of the appointments?

This may seem like a pie in the sky question/notion but you would think there would be some protective measures in place to undo the damage done by a criminal in office. And I know there have been many (most?) presidents/politicians who commit crimes while in office.


The d-party also plays to win, only their version of winning looks exactly the same as the r-party’s version of winning, not what the morons who vote for the d-party think winning should look like.


Thank you everyone who voted for Jill Stein. Your idealism made this possible.


Obama’s stint effectively being Dubya’s thrid and fourth terms with a corporate welfare program disguised as health care reform thrown in, and the Democrats putting an unabashed insider at the top of a ticket when everybody not locked in a closet knew that outsiders, real or faux were favored in 2016 races across the US, boosted Trump to the throne, not the few votes Jill Stein got. Libertarian candidate Johnson got 4x the votes Stein got, mostly from right leaning voters. Many rural voters who went for Obama in 2008 and 2012 voted for Trump.

Also, with a platform similar to mid century Democratic Party centrists, Stein was not idealistic. Voters who thought dynastic insider Clinton could win in 2016 were the idealistic ones.

“Progressives have warned that the disproportionate number of young right wing judges COULD have an impact on US society for decades to come” ? COULD ? This is a goal the GOP has been working toward for nearly half a century. There is no “could”. Thanks to the GOP’s well oiled machine combined with the constitutional law expert predecessor POTUS who really wasn’t, it WILL !


That’s partly because Schumer is a Mitch wannabe and partly because all of the vacancies at the district level have been filled.

Appellate level may be different.

One of the things I have a hard time understanding is that We the People seem so willing to accept that the evil this criminal gang has done and is doing will be with us for decades, or perhaps forever. If Al Capon(e) and his gang had taken over the government, stolen everything they could get their hands on, put his lieutenants into the courts for life, same for the “Supreme” Court, put every regulatory agency under the direct control of his own gang, would We the People accept that as a fait accompli? I say NO! Sooner or later by legal means or revolution, we would have gotten rid of Big Al and his gang. Our new government of We the People would have simply declared null and void all the actions of that criminal gang, then proceeded to rebuild our Constitutional Republic and resurrect the laws and regulatory agencies that once offered protection to We the People. Science and humane philosophies would work to do what the Constitution was written to accomplish, that is to protect We the People, our families, our jobs, wages, health, food and the environment.
** We would have done that to get rid of Big AL and his evil machinations. Can We the People of the twenty-first century do less when we finally rid ourselves of the sewer rats raping and robbing our nation and the world, just to swell it’s own profits? I think we would have investigators, accountants, real lawyers and judges (as opposed to party hacks) go over every thing these criminals have done and enacted, and rule them illegal and cancelled. I am also certain that we would not allow this criminal Oligarchy to keep their ill gotten gains. Those would be returned to the people and the legal government of, by and for We the People of the resurrected United States of America, which would proceed to right the wrongs pointed out by thousands or millions of We the People every day.** UP THE PEOPLE! Off the Oligarchy and it’s toady sock puppets!


Corrupt autocrats are often among the most popular politicians around the world. Think Berlusconi in Italy, Franco in Spain. When I worked in Germany three decades after Hitler killed Hitler a significant number of Germans’ only beef with Hitler was that he lost the war.

1 Like


"Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior… " (Article 3, Section 1)

That’s their good behavior, not Trump’s.

1 Like

Yes, even an impeached POTUS retains his authority to nominate judges.

I’m not opposed to the idea of judicial term limits, but I can’t figure out how to make them apply only to Republican appointees.

If trump loses to the other horrid candidate —- the other candidate ( like a predecessor ) will want to look “forward”. Besides, the other candidate does NOT want to set a precedent where he can be on trial.

1 Like

Excellent point which actually made me laugh even though none of this is funny but rather dark absurdity. Thank you!
The question I know was a tad naive. Looking for options other than Hedge’s “Tyranny or Revolution”.
Widespread societal and ecological collapse . . may be upon us in any case.

Oh my god. You can’t honestly believe that’s the problem here, right? Blame Hillary for being such an awful nomination.


Elephants play to win at any cost, where as donkeys are content with finishing second. Just watch, should and if the repugs lose in November, before mcconnell loses control of the Senate he’ll change the vote requirement for judges to be approved to 60 votes. And if that does happen, don’t hold your breath expecting the Democrats to then change it back to a simple majority. At least not as long as the kick the can down the road Democrats run the things.

1 Like

There is room for multiple reasons, and Jill Stein is one of them.

1 Like

The comments here are often rife with the remarks of dunderheads and trolls. So many see no difference between d and r. Looks like you’re right in there with the same fools. RBG or Alito. Same difference, blah,blah… We will have decades of horrible judges because some folks did not think Hillary was pure enough. It makes me sick.

1 Like