Interesting video, but I'm not sure how they can even do all that.  The courts would stop them,  unless they pack the courts cause they angry at amy.
I really hope they don't have full control of government 😕

Even if one does not understand all of what was discussed in the video, one thing I'm sure everyone will realize is that Biden the puppet and the ones who pull the strings are blatantly shifting the balance of power that government has over the citizens of this country.

After the "assault weapons", then they will come for the hunting rifles, the revolvers, the bolt guns, and shotguns, everything until there is nothing left.

They don't want citizens.  They don't want Americans.  They don't want free people.

They want sheep.  Baaaa......

If Biden wins, millions of Americans will not be free.  Because, like Nancy Pilau-see said:

We will feed them.....we will feed them.....

Biden won't do that because he not going get elected.

Interesting video, but I'm not sure how they can even do all that.  The courts would stop them,  unless they pack the courts cause they angry at amy.
I really hope they don't have full control of government 😕

they will pack the supreme court
they will add DC and PR to get 4 more dem senators
they will abolish filibuster

but that's ok if you feel they won't...

they will pack the supreme court
they will add DC and PR to get 4 more dem senators
they will abolish filibuster

but that's ok if you feel they won't...

They might,  I just hoping they don't.  Don't have any power to stop them.  Didn't vote for them. What else can I do.  I expressed my concerns about rushing amy through but I got no power.

They might,  I just hoping they don't.  Don't have any power to stop them.  Didn't vote for them. What else can I do.  I expressed my concerns about rushing amy through but I got no power.

What would slowing the Barrett confirmation down accomplish?  She was already vetted and confirmed 3 years ago for her nomination to the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit from 2017 to 2020.  We have her decisions as a matter of record.  The Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee didn't see fit to question her in person prior to the hearings, which was their right.  They must have already known everything they thought was relevant regarding her qualifications.

The entire argument against confirming her was political.  There was NO WAY ON EARTH to stop her confirmation unless (A) the Senate postponed the confirmation vote until after the election, AND (B) Joe Biden won, AND (C) the GOP majority Senate refused to confirm her between the election and Jan 2021 when Biden would be sworn in to have a chance to withdraw her as the nominee.  Even if the Senate flipped to a Dem majority, they would not have control until January.

First the Dems railed against Trump for making the nomination.  Then they railed against the Senate Republicans for holding hearings, Then they boycotted the judicial committee vote.  Then they spent 9 hours speaking on the floor of the Senate to delay the vote.  Then they took for-f-ing-ever to cast their votes in the full Senate vote.  Had the hearings been delayed by McConnell, they would have found something else to delay or derail the process after the election ESPECIALLY if Trump won and the Dems won back the Senate.

For all their rantings about process, the Dems sure didn't have any problem using every trick they could come up with to disrupt the process -- you know: the process outlined in the Constitution?

Stop with the "rushed it through"  BS.  She's not an unknown lawyer being made a judge to act as a partisan political activist Supreme Court justice.  The Dems are only mad because they were prevented from nominating a Liberal political activist Supreme Court justice.   

They might,  I just hoping they don't.  Don't have any power to stop them.

What a novel idea. Have we ever tried using hope? Sounds like a solid strategy.

What a novel idea. Have we ever tried using hope? Sounds like a solid strategy.

Hope and Change, Baby! 

Interesting video, but I'm not sure how they can even do all that.  The courts would stop them,  unless they pack the courts cause they angry at amy.
I really hope they don't have full control of government 😕

newsflash, they would have tried to increase the number of seats on the supreme court no matter who the nominee was...

What would slowing the Barrett confirmation down accomplish?  She was already vetted and confirmed 3 years ago for her nomination to the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit from 2017 to 2020.  We have her decisions as a matter of record.  The Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee didn't see fit to question her in person prior to the hearings, which was their right.  They must have already known everything they thought was relevant regarding her qualifications.

The entire argument against confirming her was political.  There was NO WAY ON EARTH to stop her confirmation unless (A) the Senate postponed the confirmation vote until after the election, AND (B) Joe Biden won, AND (C) the GOP majority Senate refused to confirm her between the election and Jan 2021 when Biden would be sworn in to have a chance to withdraw her as the nominee.  Even if the Senate flipped to a Dem majority, they would not have control until January.

First the Dems railed against Trump for making the nomination.  Then they railed against the Senate Republicans for holding hearings, Then they boycotted the judicial committee vote.  Then they spent 9 hours speaking on the floor of the Senate to delay the vote.  Then they took for-f-ing-ever to cast their votes in the full Senate vote.  Had the hearings been delayed by McConnell, they would have found something else to delay or derail the process after the election ESPECIALLY if Trump won and the Dems won back the Senate.

For all their rantings about process, the Dems sure didn't have any problem using every trick they could come up with to disrupt the process -- you know: the process outlined in the Constitution?

Stop with the "rushed it through"  BS.  She's not an unknown lawyer being made a judge to act as a partisan political activist Supreme Court justice.  The Dems are only mad because they were prevented from nominating a Liberal political activist Supreme Court justice.   

They angered democrats, who said if they did "put her through in a month and the fastest latest nomination in history"  they might consider packing the courts to get even.  Take that away and they lose that reasoning.  5-4 is better than 5-8.

Didn't this guy just give a run down of Hawaii state Laws?

newsflash, they would have tried to increase the number of seats on the supreme court no matter who the nominee was...

Not really crazy ones like AOC said they would but most moderates refused that idea unless republicans provoked them.

They angered democrats, who said if they did "put her through in a month and the fastest latest nomination in history"  they might consider packing the courts to get even.  Take that away and they lose that reasoning.  5-4 is better than 5-8.

Now with ACB, it's 6-3 against Liberal activist judges.  So, you're recommending that Trump should now pack the court with 4 more non-Liberal justices if Biden wins for a total of 13 justices, making the ratio 10-3 -- all because the Dems have threatened to do it?   I like it!

Then to reverse the 3 outnumbered Liberal justices, instead of 4 more as threatened (4 minimum to turn 6-3 into 6-7), the Dems would need an additional 8 justices on top of Trump's 4 new ones to make it 10-11.  That's 12 additional justices in less than a year! 

Instead of 9 justices, Dems would want 21 justices on the Supreme Court to keep the partisan Liberal advantage they've enjoyed all these years.

Makes perfect sense, because "angered" is justification enough for Trump to immediately start packing the court on Nov 4th.  Win or lose, Trump needs to follow your advice and PACK THE COURT!!

Now with ACB, it's 6-3 against Liberal activist judges.  So, you're recommending that Trump should now pack the court with 4 more non-Liberal justices if Biden wins for a total of 13 justices, making the ratio 10-3 -- all because the Dems have threatened to do it?   I like it!

Then to reverse the 3 outnumbered Liberal justices, instead of 4 more as threatened (4 minimum to turn 6-3 into 6-7), the Dems would need an additional 8 justices on top of Trump's 4 new ones to make it 10-11.  That's 12 additional justices in less than a year! 

Instead of 9 justices, Dems would want 21 justices on the Supreme Court to keep the partisan Liberal advantage they've enjoyed all these years.

Makes perfect sense, because "angered" is justification enough for Trump to immediately start packing the court on Nov 4th.  Win or lose, Trump needs to follow your advice and PACK THE COURT!!

Wait what?  Trump cant pack the court, he doesn't have the votes needed. Its the dems that can take that 6-3, add 4 more and get 6-7.  From all outlook it looks like trump is going to lose.  I am against all addition to the courts.  Its a slippery slope just like you said, both sides will start packing the courts when they control the government.  You forget democrats mostly are not logical about these things.  Pandora's box might be opened.  They are not without reason but same time agitating someone constantly don't be surprised if they hit you.  Even if its not right.   Emotions matter.  Just because you can doesn't always mean you should.  I just hope democrats have enough brains to not pack the court when they inevitable control the government.

Wait what?  Trump cant pack the court, he doesn't have the votes needed. Its the dems that can take that 6-3, add 4 more and get 6-7.  From all outlook it looks like trump is going to lose.  I am against all addition to the courts.  Its a slippery slope just like you said, both sides will start packing the courts when they control the government.  You forget democrats mostly are not logical about these things.  Pandora's box might be opened.  They are not without reason but same time agitating someone constantly don't be surprised if they hit you.  Even if its not right.   Emotions matter.  Just because you can doesn't always mean you should.  I just hope democrats have enough brains to not pack the court when they inevitable control the government.

 

You slept through 2016?   

All the polls are converging, many showing Trump ahead in key states.  The "shy" Trump voters will once again prove the polls to be VERY wrong.

The key states are FL and PA.  FL is reporting record LOW Dem turnout in early and mail-in voting in Miami-Dade County.  In 2016, Hillary won that county, and Trump still took the state.  His support from the Latino community is even stronger there now.  Unless cheating swings it, Trump has FL pretty much locked in.

Joe essentially gave PA to Trump with his debate answers on banning fracking and eliminating all fossil fuels.

Keep dreaming.  Trump is favored in many polls.  Joe might get the national "popular" vote, but that's not really a thing.  More of a metric to compare the electoral results to, but pretty much academic at best.

You think the Dems will play nice if the GOP doesn't do anything they don't like?  Read some history, PLEASE!  The Dem's reputation the last 40 years or more has been nothing but making the GOP compromise while doing the opposite of what they promised to do in return!

You slept through 2016?   

All the polls are converging, many showing Trump ahead in key states.  The "shy" Trump voters will once again prove the polls to be VERY wrong.

The key states are FL and PA.  FL is reporting record LOW Dem turnout in early and mail-in voting in Miami-Dade County.  In 2016, Hillary won that country, and Trump still took the state.  His support from the Latino community is even stronger there now.  Unless cheating swings it, Trump has FL pretty much locked in.

Joe essentially gave PA to Trump with his debate answers on banning fracking and eliminating all fossil fuels.

Keep dreaming.  Trump is favored in many polls.  Joe might get the national "popular" vote, but that's not really a thing.  More of a metric to compare the electoral results to, but pretty much academic at best.

You think the Dems will play nice if the GOP doesn't do anything they don't like?  Read some history, PLEASE!  The Dem's reputation the last 40 years or more has been nothing but making the GOP compromise while doing the opposite of what they promised to do in return!

No point in arguing, we will see in 5ish days.

You slept through 2016?   

All the polls are converging, many showing Trump ahead in key states.  The "shy" Trump voters will once again prove the polls to be VERY wrong.

The key states are FL and PA.  FL is reporting record LOW Dem turnout in early and mail-in voting in Miami-Dade County.  In 2016, Hillary won that country, and Trump still took the state.  His support from the Latino community is even stronger there now.  Unless cheating swings it, Trump has FL pretty much locked in.

Joe essentially gave PA to Trump with his debate answers on banning fracking and eliminating all fossil fuels.

Keep dreaming.  Trump is favored in many polls.  Joe might get the national "popular" vote, but that's not really a thing.  More of a metric to compare the electoral results to, but pretty much academic at best.

You think the Dems will play nice if the GOP doesn't do anything they don't like?  Read some history, PLEASE!  The Dem's reputation the last 40 years or more has been nothing but making the GOP compromise while doing the opposite of what they promised to do in return!

don't get him started derailing this thread even further
i feel he's against the electoral college...

don't get him started derailing this thread even further
i feel he's against the electoral college...

Actually no, I think popular vote is stupid.  States matter.