Trump's SCOTUS Nominee

Pres. Trump just announced - he picked Neil Gorsuch as his nominee to replace the late Antonin Scalia. Gorsuch is a staunch Conservative, and 49 years old. Stand by for a stiff fight during his confirmation.



Aren't you folks glad Hillary didn't win?

Ddawg wrote:
Aren't you folks glad Hillary didn't win?

Abso-tootin'-lutely.

snoscythe wrote:

Aren't you folks glad Hillary didn't win?

Abso-tootin'-lutely.

However - for all you Hillary fans (and I know you are a HUGE Hillary fan Sno' ;) ), there is still hope. If California secedes, Hillary could be elected president of the new nation of California. Simply precious.

:whistle:

Ddawg wrote:

Ddawg wrote:
Aren't you folks glad Hillary didn't win?

Abso-tootin'-lutely.

However - for all you Hillary fans (and I know you are a HUGE Hillary fan Sno' ;) ), there is still hope. If California secedes, Hillary could be elected president of the new nation of California. Simply precious.

:whistle:

Are they still talking about secession? Perhaps now they understand why federalism is a good thing. Live in the state that best matches how you want to live rather than forcing your views on everyone else. The founders wisely understood the importance of state's rights.

Cougarfan87 wrote:

snoscythe wrote:

Aren't you folks glad Hillary didn't win?

Abso-tootin'-lutely.

However - for all you Hillary fans (and I know you are a HUGE Hillary fan Sno' ;) ), there is still hope. If California secedes, Hillary could be elected president of the new nation of California. Simply precious.

:whistle:

Are they still talking about secession? Perhaps now they understand why federalism is a good thing. Live in the state that best matches how you want to live rather than forcing your views on everyone else. The founders wisely understood the importance of state's rights.

In a word - "Yes". I am proud to report the wonderful Socialist state of California is so angry over Trump's election, yes, they are talking about secession. They are also talking about legislatively making California a "Sanctuary" state. Fire up the bong, take another hit dude! :bug:

Extremely grateful Hillary didn't win.

hawkwing wrote:
Extremely grateful Hillary didn't win.

this is a new, and welcome tune from you hawk!



I know there was a lot of concern about trump being president (hillary plant, non conservative at heart etc), but so far I've been impressed with how much of his word he has kept and what he's been able to do.



his scotus pick appears to be a great one. hopefully better than the backstabbing traitor roberts.

BroncoBot wrote:

Extremely grateful Hillary didn't win.

this is a new, and welcome tune from you hawk!



I know there was a lot of concern about trump being president (hillary plant, non conservative at heart etc), but so far I've been impressed with how much of his word he has kept and what he's been able to do.



his scotus pick appears to be a great one. hopefully better than the backstabbing traitor roberts.

I'm extremely disappointed that Trump is president and I think he will do more to set back the Conservative cause than any other possible scenario. It will be devastating to the Conservative movement.



But I still am extremely grateful Clinton isn't president.

BroncoBot wrote:

Extremely grateful Hillary didn't win.

this is a new, and welcome tune from you hawk!



I know there was a lot of concern about trump being president (hillary plant, non conservative at heart etc), but so far I've been impressed with how much of his word he has kept and what he's been able to do.



his scotus pick appears to be a great one. hopefully better than the backstabbing traitor roberts.

President Trump has fiercely and aggressively kept his campaign promises. He is showing a solid commitment to being a Conservative. Even Ted Cruz is happy, and was at the Neil Gorsuch in the White House tonight.



Of note, the Dem opposition has released a 78 page opposition paper against Neil Gorsuch. That alone tells me he is a great Trump nomination. I'm looking forward to a great fight - and confirmation.

Nancy Pelosi tonight on Neil Gorsuch -



Pelosi made the claim that Gorsuch has come down on the side of corporate America, and that he has come out against “clean air, clean water, food safety, safety in medicine, and the rest,” and finished by saying he would be harmful for your children."



Gorsuch is definitely the right guy.

Ddawg wrote:

Ddawg wrote:

Ddawg wrote:
Aren't you folks glad Hillary didn't win?

Abso-tootin'-lutely.

However - for all you Hillary fans (and I know you are a HUGE Hillary fan Sno' ;) ), there is still hope. If California secedes, Hillary could be elected president of the new nation of California. Simply precious.

:whistle:

Are they still talking about secession? Perhaps now they understand why federalism is a good thing. Live in the state that best matches how you want to live rather than forcing your views on everyone else. The founders wisely understood the importance of state's rights.

In a word - "Yes". I am proud to report the wonderful Socialist state of California is so angry over Trump's election, yes, they are talking about secession. They are also talking about legislatively making California a "Sanctuary" state. Fire up the bong, take another hit dude! :bug:

They do understand where most of their water for Southern California comes from, right? After secession, I am sure the rest of the U.S., even if it allowed it...remember the Civil War, or War of Northern Agression...would let L.A. dry up into the desert it once was by choking off the water supply.

Cougarfan87 wrote:

...... let L.A. dry up into the desert it once was by choking off the water supply.

Perfect. Nice "reset."

Ddawg wrote:
I know you are a HUGE Hillary fan Sno'

Ever since she attended my 7th Birthday party, she has graced my every dream....



http://hillaryclinton.trendolizer.com/assets_c/2015/10/1916994-thumb-300xauto-1665278.jpg" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

snoscythe wrote:

I know you are a HUGE Hillary fan Sno'

Ever since she attended my 7th Birthday party, she has graced my every dream....



http://hillaryclinton.trendolizer.com/assets_c/2015/10/1916994-thumb-300xauto-1665278.jpg" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Suhweeeeeeet!!!! What a lucky guy! :lol: :D :lol:

(Great post) ;)

Ddawg wrote:
Nancy Pelosi tonight on Neil Gorsuch -



Pelosi made the claim that Gorsuch has come down on the side of corporate America, and that he has come out against “clean air, clean water, food safety, safety in medicine, and the rest,” and finished by saying he would be harmful for your children."



Gorsuch is definitely the right guy.

The proper response to Nancy is, "We have to approve Gorsuch as a SCOTUS justice so we can see what kind of justice he will be."

Good one.

SpiffCoug wrote:

Nancy Pelosi tonight on Neil Gorsuch -



Pelosi made the claim that Gorsuch has come down on the side of corporate America, and that he has come out against “clean air, clean water, food safety, safety in medicine, and the rest,” and finished by saying he would be harmful for your children."



Gorsuch is definitely the right guy.

The proper response to Nancy is, "We have to approve Gorsuch as a SCOTUS justice so we can see what kind of justice he will be."

Excellent choice of words. Nancy P. would choke on that response. ;)

Ddawg wrote:
Nancy Pelosi tonight on Neil Gorsuch -



Pelosi made the claim that Gorsuch has come down on the side of corporate America, and that he has come out against “clean air, clean water, food safety, safety in medicine, and the rest,” and finished by saying he would be harmful for your children."



Gorsuch is definitely the right guy.

Haw haw! Can you imagine believing much of what she says?

He may not be as conservative as you think regarding the 2nd amendment.



http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/01/judge_neil_gorsuch_some_cause_for_concern.html

jvquarterback wrote:
He may not be as conservative as you think regarding the 2nd amendment.



http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/01/judge_neil_gorsuch_some_cause_for_concern.html

Interesting article. In a state that allows concealed carry permits, I struggle to see the logic that having a concealed handgun presents probable cause, or falls under the Terry stop and frisk. I hope some 2A senators do question him on joining in the opinion. He probably is more of a 2A supporter, and this case falls under one of the many I learned about in criminal procedure during law school called the "guilty as hell rule." If the criminal was truly guilty, the courts will find a way to justify the conviction, regardless of what the Constitution says...unless it is a really, really egregious Constitutional violation.



In this case, a man in New Mexico had an unlawful concealed carry weapon that a police officer noted. The officer disarmed and arrested the man. The police officer had no way of knowing if the gun was illegally carried, but the court upheld the conviction under the Terry stop and frisk logic. There are some facts missing that would be interesting to know. Did the officer ask him if he had a permit? Did the man voluntarily answer the question? The article states the officer disarmed first, and asked questions later, but I would like to know more about the case before I concluded that the Nominee is not a second amendment supporter.