Olbermann: States should ignore today's ruling and the U.S. should dissolve the Supreme Court

First, presidents get to nominate a Supreme Court justice but that justice is not APPOINTED unless approved with the "advice and consent" of the senate. That has always been the case and it hasn't changed.

Second, Republicans DID NOT change the filibuster rules prior to the Garland nomination. That change took place in 2017 and all it did was shut down debate as long as 51 senators decided debate should end. It DID NOT change the rule about a nominee only needing 51 votes to be confirmed. In fact, prior to Garland, both Thomas and Alito were confirmed with less than 60 votes.

 

olbermann loves this country, and is a victim of cancel culture of the same network that fired the great patriot phil donahue.

[LIVE] Dixie Chicks - Goodbye, Earl! - YouTube

 

republicans change the votes for SC picks to 50

 

Olbermann was fired from MSNBC

That ought to tell you what the left thinks of Olberman, but, of course, you failed to mention that.

he's an interesting person, we like him, but he goes way off the rails when it comes to politics. He doesn't represent the left, he's way too smug.

Let Olbermann stick to sports.

 

No. A nominee only needs 51 votes to be approved. The filibuster rules are with regard to ending debate on the nomination. That's two different functions. As an aside, eliminating the filibuster for debate on nominees is what allowed Jackson to be approved.

 

I don't see how Keith thinks this will work.

Someone will carry, they will be arrested, they will then appeal and be let go Scott free, while the department gets a hefty lawsuit.

 

only needs 50 votes, the vp can be #51, used to be 60, Republicans changed that and stole the SC

 

Yep, unlike Hannity and Trump, I don't think Biden and Olberman have each other on speed dial.

 

Harry Reid Rule.

 

THE KEY WAYS JUSTICE THOMAS VANQUISHED GUN GRABBERS IN HIS BRUEN DECISION.

"even in the Dred Scott decision, “Chief Justice Taney … recognized (albeit unenthusiastically in the case of blacks) that public carry was a component of the right to keep and bear arms—a right free blacks were often denied in antebellum America.”

No more.

"“We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need. That is not how the First Amendment works when it comes to unpopular speech or the free exercise of religion. It is not how the Sixth Amendment works when it comes to a defendant’s right to confront the witnesses against him. And it is not how the Second Amendment works when it comes to public carry for self-defense. New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment in that it prevents law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms. We therefore reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

~ Justice Thomas, Case released on his birthday. May God Bless this good man!

"It’s a generous man who gives everyone else a gift on his birthday!"​

 

You know, it's funny.

Repubs have to find our fringe to pick on, hoping that some of that fringe will make the mainstream of dems look bad.

But that's not true with us Dems, we don't have to pick on the repub fringe to find wackos.

Your leader and his allies are wacko. Wacko is the the mainstream, not the fringe, of the GOP.

 

He's mad that Ann Coulter was top of her class at Cornell and he barely passed. He's become mastered by his own mythology

 

you seem to have a sad.

 

Fake news. SCOTUS' decision isn't fringe at all, but consistent with the laws of 43 states. It's the 7 outliers that are fringe.

 

Keith is a moron.

 

who owned the seats and how did they steal them

Are you upset with what FDR did with the USSC that allows so much of this idiotic socialist swill we have today?

 

Alito Takes a Blow Torch to the Left Wing Fringe Justices’ Dissent.

"On Thursday morning the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to strike down restrictive "may issue" concealed carry laws in" New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. 86% of the mainstream states are in alignment with 2/3rds super-majority of the mainstream justices. The 14% fringe states are joined with the minority fringe justices.

"Justice Samuel Alito filed a separate, concurring opinion destroying the" Fringe Justices "claims. He took issue with their ignorance and arrogance surrounding the facts of lawful gun ownership vs. criminality."

​

 

So he's an insurrectionist. How quickly the turns have tabled.

 

A lot less since we found out he chooses to cry in his bathtub rather than show up for his job.

 

Thought terminating cliché = invalid argument.

I wasn't referring to the SCOTUS decision, I was referring to Trump, et al, as the mainstream of the party, though I disagree with their ruling. States can do what they want, and what they do is irrelevant.

 

nope, that was for lower courts, and shame on Reid for that one

the SC change was all Republicans doing

 

No, that was the Democrats that changed the vote.

 

The states can't overrule the Constitution.

 

Then you were off topic.

Wrong. We settled that disagreement in the Civil War when the Republicans whipped the Democrat's slave holding asses. And passed the 13th 14th and 15th amendments when it became clear that Democrats, as soon as they resumed statehood would still systematically violate the rights of minority groups within their States. With ratification of these three amendments a condition of resuming statehood, it is now perfectly clear that the States cannot do whatever they want. You should probably learn to pay more attention, this is 150 year old information. This has been true for nearly twice the time that Old Joe Biden has been alive.

Wrong again.

SCOTUS tosses "may issue" firearm carry permit laws in Bruen, 6-3

​

43 smart states already figured this out. 7 stupid states now have been informed. It is UNCONSTITUTIONAL for a state to require a demonstration of a need to carry a firearm. It is UNCONSTITUTIONAL for any state to demand "a special reason to grant access to the right to bear arms" as such UNCONSTITUTIONAL demands and requirements "violate both the Second and Fourteenth Amendments."

"a State may not prevent law-abiding citizens from publicly carrying handguns because they have not demonstrated a special need for self-defense."

"The right to keep and bear arms cannot be restricted to a grant of permission on the basis of need by the government.

"A government cannot legitimately demand that a citizen justify his exercise of an enumerated constitutional right before being allowed to do so."

 

Wrong: The Law Of Escalation is that when your opponent escalates, you go to the NEXT step of the escalation. The DEMOCRAT Senate under Reid supported his escalation and Cocaine Mitch was clear in his unheeded warning of where that would lead, and, here we are.

And Dems, other than Joe Manchin, learned nothing.