Hank, I know it is virtually impossible for any Trump Magargler, and probably doubly so for you, but what's the chances of ever approaching a topic or question about Trump...

EVER

...without answering "Clinton" or "Obama"?

Nevermind with an answer, I already know it's "no", but just wanted to point it out.

Again.

Fish on...

Todd

So how do we like the SCOTUS pick?

What I like:
-He's competent (that's a big deal in this administration)
-He's experienced
-He is well-liked by just about everyone he's worked with (again, rare in this administration).

What I don't like:
He's a corporate shill (but we knew that, because he's a conservative).

Personally, I fear what the next pick might be a lot more than this one. Kavanaugh seems about as good as we can hope for, all things considered. Might as well approve him, IMO.

Good work. Good effort.

Ruth will outlive Trump.

And you.

You looked into 85 ten years ago, and if pancreatic cancer didn't kill her, nothing's going to.

You probably will outlive her.

Trump...it's about 50/50. That morbidly obese pile of cowshit stuffed in a garbage sack is a walking cardiac arrest.

Fish on...

Todd

First off, anyone with at least one functioning eyeball knows that Trump's claim to be 6'3" and 238 or whatever he said is a flat out lie...of almost as epic of proportions as his gigantic fat torso has.

If that fatfuckk is anywhere less than 270 then he is made of helium.

I was going to post a couple of pics of what Trump looks like, and what 6'3" 238 looks like, but everyone knows that Trump is kind of Newt-like...they both look like 50 pounds of rancid mashed potatoes stuffed in a 40 pound sack...and everyone who watched professional sports knows what 6'3" 238 looks like...it looks like an athlete, not a gross blob of disgusting, like Trump.

Fish on...

Todd

How much you reckon a 6'3 pile of $hit weighs? About 238?

Trumps true health is classified.....



































...fat a$$

An attorney for former FBI lawyer Lisa Page says she will not appear for a private interview Wednesday with two House committees, despite a subpoena.

Page's lawyer says she didn't have enough time to prepare and had asked the House Judiciary and Oversight and Government Reform Committees to schedule another date. Because they would not, "Lisa is not going to appear for an interview at this time," Amy Jeffress said in a statement Tuesday evening.

The committees are interested in Page as part of their investigation into what they say is bias at the Justice Department. Page exchanged text messages critical of Donald Trump with FBI agent Peter Strzok, who will testify publicly before the panel Thursday. Page and Strzok both worked on the FBI investigation into Democrat Hillary Clinton's emails and, later, special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation.

House Judiciary Chairman Robert Goodlatte said Page has known for months that the panel has sought her testimony, and the committee will use "all tools at our disposal" to obtain it. If a witness does not respond to a subpoena, the full House can vote to hold her in contempt of Congress.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/attorney-ex-fbi-lawyer-page-wont-show-house-012323535--politics.html

With all the angst over Roe v Wade I’m wondering how a case to overturn it even makes it to SCOTUS. If someone sued the Feds to get it overturned doesn’t the lower court just say, “Fine. Have the baby. Next.”

???

Wouldn’t Congress first have to make it illegal to even have a case to go to SCOTUS?

Seems to me that the abortion rights crowd is the liberal version of they’re coming after our guns crowd. Ain’t happening but scary enough to raise a lot of money.

The way it happens is that a pile of mysoginistic redneck bassawkward religious authoritarians in some shithole state like Mississippi pass a law making abortion illegal, and then it gets challenged and makes its way up to the Supreme Court, and the Court overturns Roe v. Wade and says that it's ok, states can decide to be mysoginistic Sharia law loving religious fundamentalist fruitcakes if they want.

Fish on...

Todd

The laws are already written, the day that a Trump nominee is confirmed you will see those laws be introduced in at least half a dozen Sharia Law States.

Fish on...

Todd

No. The Sharia Law states like Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Tennessee, Kentucky...the right wing religious authoritarian GOP base states.

Fish on...

Todd

Thanks. That makes sense. State v. Feds.

Still in that scenario the lower courts would have to rule in favor of the state. So even if it made it to SCOTUS wouldn’t they ignore the whole abortion issue and just rule that state law cannot overrule federal law?

And in not hearing the case, thus making abortion illegal in said state, doesn’t that make this Court an activist Court, which, ironically, is sort of a liberal idea?

This leads me to two more questions. Is there any case history where a lower court ruling was allowed to stand thus overturning a previous SCOTUS ruling? And if SCOTUS did hear the case are there any examples where SCOTUS has overturned a previous SCOTUS ruling just because they didn’t like it?

At the end of the day I hope it’s never overturned. One flawed ruling is not nearly the mess that two flawed rulings would become.

Of course Congress could just write a law but, yea never mind.

Brood, all the courts could rule against the law, but it would just keep getting appealed until it makes its way up...and if the Supremes choose to hear it, then there we are.

Hank, no I don't. Anti-woman, anti-science, think laws should be based on religious principles, establishment of a state religion...that is the GOP social contract in a nutshell, they are every bit as Sharia as any Muslim state.

Fish on...

Todd

In that scenario I’d be very surprised to see SCOTUS hear that case. It just doesn’t make sense to me that SCOTUS would hear a case already won by the Feds.

But......

If the lower courts ruled in favor of the Feds and then SCOTUS ruled in favor of the state then yea may as well just name it Sharia’s law.

I don’t see that happening though.

Hank, you are either stupid or purposely changing the topic, as usual. You can decide which.

Fish on...

Todd

Brit Hume.

Any insight from Sean Hannity or Alex Jones to really round out your objective analysis?

Fish on...

Todd