Should Kagan be removed from the bench?

Discussion in 'United States' started by onalandline, May 2, 2012.

  1. onalandline

    onalandline New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    9,953
    Likes Received:
    103
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Does Elena Kagan have a $20 million commitment to destroying the American Republic?

    What would you say if you learned that a member of the highest court in the land has spent the last 30 years openly advocating for the destruction of the US Constitution and even went so far as to accept $20 million from Shariah Law proponents to accomplish her goal?

    That Supreme Court Justice is Elena Kagan.

    The year after Ronald Reagan entered the Oval Office with the goal of restoring America to greatness; Elena Kagan penned a telling and disturbing senior thesis titled "To the Final Conflict: Socialism in New York City, 1900-1933." In that body of work, Kagan lamented that "a coherent socialist movement is nowhere to be found in the United States"; and that," no "radical party" had yet "attained the status of a major political force." Kagan went on to sound a rally cry for "those who, more than half a century after socialism's decline, still wish to change America."

    Apparently, this was no mere college dalliance, as the Elena Kagan has spent the rest of her career working to remove the underpinnings of freedom and destroy the American Constitution from within. And Kagan's grand plan has worked very well indeed.

    After graduate school Kagan went on to become Dean of Harvard Law, where she removed Constitutional Law classes from the curriculum, and replaced those necessary and time honored classes with required studies of international law. And in what appears to be a game of using a mutual enemy's resources to accomplish ones' true objective, Kagan also accepted a $20 million grant from Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal - a noted Shariah Law proponent - to implement an "Islamic Studies" program.

    Source
     
  2. leftysergeant

    leftysergeant New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2012
    Messages:
    8,827
    Likes Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Got a source for that?
     
  3. onalandline

    onalandline New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    9,953
    Likes Received:
    103
    Trophy Points:
    0
  4. jackson33

    jackson33 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2011
    Messages:
    2,446
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The 20m$ Grant, I assume was to Harvard and it's unlikely anyone could prove what written demands were made, if any. I'd further question if acceptance was her idea, the School or some combination.

    In any event to remove people in certain Federal positions, requires the
    "Impeachment Process" which must be used. I can't find anything during her "Confirmation Hearings" (on this issue), but for instance if this was mentioned and she lied to Congress under oath, it could be used for grounds.


    http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Can_a_US_Supreme_Court_justice_be_impeached_and_removed_from_office


    Off topic, but wouldn't it be interesting to have every Candidate for P/VP be question (pick a reason) by Congress, under oath prior to the National Elections.
     
  5. SFJEFF

    SFJEFF New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    30,804
    Likes Received:
    247
    Trophy Points:
    0
    http://dailycaller.com/2010/08/05/critics-allege-elena-kagan-is-sympathetic-to-sharia-law/

    Considering all of these claims were made prior to Elena's Supreme Court confirmation- exactly what of the provisions of impeachment has Elena Kagan violated as Justice? Has she committed treason? No. Has she committed a high misdemeanor or felony? You failed to mention that.

    Or are you just suggesting that Congress should ignore the Constitution and impeach her because you don't approve of her?
     
  6. SFJEFF

    SFJEFF New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    30,804
    Likes Received:
    247
    Trophy Points:
    0
  7. fmw

    fmw New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    1,314
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The question is moot because supreme court justices can't be removed from the bench.
     
  8. jackson33

    jackson33 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2011
    Messages:
    2,446
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    48
    YES, they can, read post number 4....
     
  9. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    54,648
    Likes Received:
    2,554
    Trophy Points:
    113
    is this a faux news report
     
  10. Mr_Truth

    Mr_Truth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    10,430
    Likes Received:
    344
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Remove sexual deviant Clarence Thomas and avowed fascist Scalia from the Supreme Court.
     
  11. Shiva_TD

    Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    45,324
    Likes Received:
    623
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The source quoted in the OP was Ib Jensen who, except for his own online self-description (of dubious accuracy) is a completely unknown blogger.

    No sources for the claims being made are provided and this appears to be nothing by political hyperbole which is not at all surprising these days. One blogger makes a claim and then other cite it as if it's a ligitmate source of information. Rarely as in this case of Kagen, is there any attempt at accuracy by the initial blogger.

    A nice try though but there is obviously nothing impeachable about Kagen's actions on the Supreme Court. Supreme Court decisions are not based upon political philosophy anyway. Supreme Court decisions are based upon interpreting the US Constitution and applying it to the laws and actions of government in the United States. We do have Supreme Court justices that have a broad interpretation of the US Constitution as well as justices that have a narrow interpretation of the US Constitution but that has absolutely nothing to do with political ideology or philosophy.
     
  12. toddwv

    toddwv Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    26,132
    Likes Received:
    1,817
    Trophy Points:
    113
  13. Catenaccio

    Catenaccio Banned

    Joined:
    May 12, 2012
    Messages:
    670
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No, she should not. Mere silliness.
     
  14. Mr_Truth

    Mr_Truth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    10,430
    Likes Received:
    344
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Why haven't the forum's RepubliCONs demanded that sexual deviant and pornography lover Clarence Thomas be removed from he Supreme Court???
     
  15. Shiva_TD

    Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    45,324
    Likes Received:
    623
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm so impressed. First the "Average College Idiot" asks a stupid question and then "Ginger" copies and pastes BS as a response. We must all be really impressed by these "unquestionable" sources being used by brain dead individuals.
     
  16. Alucard

    Alucard New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2015
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Elena Kagan is one of the best Justices on the Supreme Court.
     
  17. onalandline

    onalandline New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    9,953
    Likes Received:
    103
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If you are gonna troll, you can't be so obvious. Geesh!
     
  18. JakeStarkey

    JakeStarkey New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2016
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    concerning the OP is not sustainable as to allegations, the answer then is "no"
     

Share This Page