Chuck Schumer Threatens SCOTUS Justices

https://www.nationalreview.com/news...rice-if-they-rule-against-abortion-advocates/

I thought you loved ridiculous hyperbole, or is that only for your tv show reviews?

Has he finally found the wiggle-proof smoking gun rape dirt on Kavanaugh?

No because there's nothing to find.

If you use the strategy, you legitimize the strategy for those who would use it against you.

You just know he's guilty, you just know it. Don't you?

If he raped you, you'd cover up for him.
So how do I know he didn't, and you didn't?

I find out the Fox News way.

*Screams right in your face*

CONFEEESSSS!!!!!!

CONFFFEEEEESSSS!!!!!!!

CONFFFFFFEEEESSS!!!!!!!!!

*FF tries to speak*

SHUT OFF HIS MIC!!!!!!!!!

In other words, you've got nothin'

That would have to mean Fox News has got nothin.

Well, look at all the evidence against him:
1. The location of the incident was unknown.
2. The date of the incident was unknown.
3. There were no witnesses to the incident.
4. There was no contemporary documentation of the event.
5. None of the victim's friends or family were told of the incident.
6. The accuser admitted to large gaps in her memory.
7. The accused's name was never mentioned by the victim until after his very public nomination to the SC.
8. The victim's story was shown to have false or improbable aspects.
9. The victim's close friend from high school, who did not recall the occasion on which the incident happened, said she had nonetheless been pressured to back the claim.
10. The incident occurred where teens were consuming alcohol to the point of inebriation.

A more open and shut case of attempted rape I can't imagine!

As for Chucky's threats, Chief Justice Roberts isn't having it.

Too bad he didn’t have a spine when it came to the ACA.

Well, that didn't come across as desperate at all.

Why overturn it? It keeps the black population down.

If Trump had made the statement, would you consider it so benign?

It came across to me that he was directly threatening those two justices. The fact that there is nothing politically that can be "the price" makes it come across as even more ominous.

Yep. SC justices are supposed to be beyond political pressureand retaliation.

Shill much?

It's not like Schumer couldn't simply suggest they both recuse themselves for any case re X, there's not been any precedent for such a benign suggestion (i.e. what fake news would consider armageddon). Schumer's threat, if not hollow, could only be to impeach (since even if he was Senate leader he'd have no other way to impose his wrath on two specific sitting justices) - unless Schumer somehow thinks "pay the price" could mean "you'll be stuck in the minority, hah!, assuming of course we Dems can effect a tidal change in politics in next 8 months and win control of both the Senate and the Presidency." What a putz.

Roberts' actions make sense if you assume it's even more important to him to 'protect the franchise' than produce defensible judicial opinions rationally based on the law as written.

Meh. Chuck's just looking for some free air time. He oughta save it for 2022.

What I'd like to know is what 'price' Schumer thinks the legislature can extract from the SCOTUS at any level. Sounds like a bunch of hot air to me, the petulant whine of a senator who knows he can no longer trust in judicial activism to move his party's agenda.

Oh, and if it's a veiled threat of mob violence he's hinting at, intimidating federal judges is a felony punishable by up to ten years imprisonment. Better watch your words, there, chucky.

You don't see the distinction between 'those two partisans should recuse themselves as biased on my cases based on biased statements they expressly made about me' VS 'you'll pay for it.' Which is why I called you a shill.

The two biased Justices should scoff at Trump's (fair) trash talking; of course they'll never recuse themselves (they're biased). They know it was a joke; Trump knows it was a joke.

What should the two Justices (unfairly) threatened by Schumer do, just laugh it off as trolling?

I really find it hard to keep things straight these days, I thought you were of the opinion it was a good thing for people to threaten government institutions if they don't like what they do? Or is that just when it involves waving guns at them?

The constitutional legality of abortion has been established for decades. Justices who grossly ignore judicial precedents are no proper judges at all and deserve to be replaced or have their power diluted through an expansion of SCOTUS seats.

That being said, I suspect these comments, and their context, are a whole lot of nothing.

This case does not make abortion illegal.

What else could he threaten them with? Of course it was just juvenile schoolyard bluster, but It was a really really stupid thing to say. He shouldn't be trying to out Trump Trump.

No, but I think "undue bourbon" is a thing. Personally, I think all bourbon is undue. I got ruined for the stuff in college. Just beer for me.