October 12, 2020; Update 16:04 HRS.
written by Net Advisor™
WASHINGTON, DC. Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden has refused to state whether he would seek to stack the U.S. Supreme Court. His radicalized party base seems to demand it and more.
Mr. Biden has been a federal government insider for about 44 years (since 1973). He has seen a lot, but has no major legislative accomplishments he initiated and signed into law. Biden has voted a lot, but mostly been part of the establishment.
[1] Biden’s Secrets?
Biden refuses to provide a list of people whom he would consider nominating to the U.S. Supreme Court. In fact, Biden said that voter’s don’t deserve to know who he would pick for the Supreme Court.
Biden is again asked why voters don’t deserve to know his views on court packing. He responds: “The only court packing going on right now is going on with Republicans packing the court right now … I’m going to stay focused on it so we don’t take our eyes off the ball here." pic.twitter.com/E9H5rIXMX2
— Jennifer Epstein (@jeneps) October 10, 2020
“Voter’s don’t deserve to know (who I’d pick for the Supreme Court…until after the election).
— Source: Joe Biden, Democrat candidate for president said Oct. 10, 2020.
We don’t think that Biden has the mental capacity to know who he’d pick. We think that Biden’s radical handlers would do the picking and decision making, then tell Biden who ‘he’ should pick.
In contrast, 2016 Presidential candidate Donald Trump provided America with a list of potential Supreme Court nominees in May 2016. This gave the public and the media about six months to vet Trump’s list before the November 2016 election. This was due because many people were not sure who Trump might select. Trump previously had been a registered Reform Party (1999-2001), as a Democrat (2001-09), and Independent (2011-12).
Like Biden today, during the 2016 election, Hillary Clinton also refused to provide a Supreme Court nominee list. Lydia Wheeler, a reporter at The Hill, created a list for Clinton, but the Hillary Campaign never recognized the list. Clinton lost the election in 2016.
Trump added to his Supreme Court nominee list September 9, 2020, which just so happened to be nine days before Justice Ginsburg’s death.
Other Democrats have either suggested, hinted, or called outright to stack the Supreme Court.
Note: The terms, packing or stacking in this case, the Supreme Court has the same meaning. Stacking is a legal term referring to “the process of recovering benefits from a second policy on a same claim when recovery from the first policy is inadequate.”
Example: ‘I don’t agree with someone. So let’s change the law, the court, (‘burn down‘ or ‘blow up‘) the system; so it thus falls in-line with our (political) view; Even if that view is immoral, unlawful or not shared by the majority.
Biden’s VP candidate, Kamala Harris (D-CA) admitted on video in 2019, that she was open to the discussion about stacking the Supreme Court.
New York Times Reporter: “Are you open to expanding the Supreme Court?”
Senator Harris: “I am open to that discussion.”— Source: The Sun (website w video) (PDF with notations)
New York Times Reporter with Kamala Harris in 2019. Senator Harris (D-CA) admitted she is open to the idea of stacking the Supreme Court (This video source: Twitter).
Current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said she has options (ideas) (about court stacking) but won’t discuss them.
Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-NY) said “nothing is off the table” if Trump appoints a successor to the High Court.
House Judiciary Chair Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) said Democrats should “immediately move to expand the Supreme Court if the GOP filled Justice Ginsburg’s now vacant seat.
Former President Obama’s Attorney General Eric Holder (D) who resigned two years after being charged with Contempt of Congress; also said there needs to be “Additional Justices” on the Supreme Court if a new Justice is confirmed under President Trump.
The political Marxist, Rep. Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) told her followers, “Let This Moment Radicalize You.”
[2] History Fact Check.
This isn’t the first time, or the last time a justice was appointed to the Supreme Court in an election year.
“…there were 16 vacancies, including Ginsburg’s, that occurred before Election Day during an election year.
Another 10 vacancies occurred in the months after the presidential election and before the inauguration…
…There were another five vacancies from 1789 to 2020 that occurred before the start of the election year…
—Source: CBS News, Sept. 23, 2020
So we’ve had 26 vacancies in the Supreme Court prior to the start of an election year; 16 before an election, and 10 after an election, but before inauguration.
[3] Legal Fact Check.
Addressing REP. Nadler’s tweet (above). Rep. Nadler makes the assumption that Joe Biden will win the Presidency. Nadler also assumes the Senate will flip toward a Democrat majority. At this point, both are unknown events. Thus, technically we currently do not have a “Lame-Duck Session.”
Let’s pretend that REP. Nadler is correct on both assumptions. The terms of office are set at fixed dates both for the Legislative Branch (Congress) and the Executive Branch (President/ VP). These specified terms of office dates are set within U.S. Constitutional law under the Twentieth Amendment.
There is nothing is the Constitution that says, ‘in the event a Supreme Court Justice experiences a death; the Senate or the President may not act to fill a vacant seat.’
There is nothing is the Constitution that says, ‘in the event a Supreme Court Justice or their family member claims (hearsay), that a Justice has a dying wish; such wish is Supreme law, and must be followed by all members of U.S. government.’
Likewise, there is nothing is the Constitution that says, ‘in an election year, if the majority party loses an election, they must immediate cease doing any work until the new party is sworn in.’
Thus we can conclude that REP. Nadler and others want to ignore Constitutional law; and yet they threaten to stack the Supreme Court as their revenge for not following their dictatorial demands.
If one is for the party of absolute power, we recommend reading our report of what happened to a very wealthy country that went in for free healthcare, gun bans, free education and who tried to control food prices.
- Report: When Socialism Took Venezuela
[4] Risks of a Totalitarian Government.
In March 2019, well over a year before Justice Ginsberg’s death, Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) unsuccessfully sought a Constitutional Amendment to maintain the Supreme Court with nine justices.
The last time an American president tried to stack the Supreme Court to favor the Party’s own political policies was in 1937. That was the New York Democrat President Franklin Delano Roosevelt or “FDR.” The foundation of FDR’s New Deal Socialism has impacted the U.S. national debt ever since.
Senator Rubio said that FDR didn’t like the outcome of a particular 1935 Supreme Court case, so FDR thought, just change the court to change the outcome?
Fortunately, this move was extremely unpopular by voters as it still is today and FDR’s stacking of the High Court failed.
FDR served four terms in office. The public’s concern of court stacking threats, and potentially unlimited presidential terms (monarchy/ dictator/ totalitarian gov risks), led to the Twenty-Second Amendment that limited a President’s term in office.
We discussed how stacking the Supreme Court would allow Democrats to overturn any and every Supreme Court case they never liked or agreed with.
This would include key Supreme Court decisions, such as when Democrats effectively tried to make hand guns useless for self-defense. Democrats required guns to be disassembled, trigger locked and unloaded in the home; in re: District of Columbia v. Heller 554 U.S. 570 (2008). The ‘right to bear arms’ was barely upheld (5-4) in re: McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2012).
[5] Foundation of the Constitution.
The U.S. Constitution provides the framework that three branches of government was necessary for a reason. That reason is for checks and balances. Our Forefathers understood that two branches (Executive and Legislative – Congress with two Houses) could be controlled for a time by a one party majority. However the third branch of government, the Judiciary, would hopefully rein any unconstitutional actions by the other two branches.
“The Constitution was specifically constructed to promote gridlock. That’s because the Founding Fathers greatly feared majoritarian tyranny — legalized mob rule by which simple majorities could cram down violations of rights on minorities.”
— said Ben Shapiro, conservative political commentator, lawyer & media host
[6] Rise of the Totalitarians:
Democrat’s Coup d’état Threat on SCOTUS.
Democrats, once again feel that their totalitarian *agenda* is threatened. So, the only way to fix it; is to stack the Supreme Court, and forever control all three branches of government.
We say “forever control” because once gaining control of the Senate and the Executive Branch (Presidency), they can make court appointments, and even change the number of justices on the High Court to suit their political goals.
In the tweet by Jennifer Epstein (video near page top), Biden is confused between court stacking, and replacing a vacant SCOTUS seat.
There is a difference between filling in a seat from a deceased justice; and adding extra seats because one doesn’t like the judges that are already there.
As discussed, stacking the court risks undoing laws that Democrats disagree with.
Can you imagine if President Trump said, I am going to add 4 to 6 new Justices to the Supreme Court because I don’t like one or more of the rulings I got from that same court?
We playfully guesstimate 90% of Liberal Democrats would die immediately from having a heart attack at that kind of news. The politically-driven (Democrats) on TV would die too from a heart-attack, but only after their eyes popped out from shouting, ‘Trump is like Hitler’ or ‘Mussolini,’ or ‘a Totalitarian’ for stacking the Supreme Court; and they would be correct.
Note: Not a single Democrat, nor TV political-driven media called Biden, Harris or any other Democrat, “Hitler,” or “Mussolini” or “totalitarians” for threatening, advocating, ‘being open to the idea,’ or refusing to denounce the idea of court stacking as a method to seize the Supreme Court in order to gain permanent political power?
Why is the politically-driven Left media not challenging Biden on this? Under Totalitarianism, including Socialists, Social-Marxists, and Communism, you are not allowed to disagree with the state. Anyone disagreeing is arrested, censored, and punished; or like what all dictators have done in history; imprison and ultimately kill those who disagree with them.
Not sure about this?
Go to North Korea, China, Russia, Cuba or Venezuela and organize public protests against those governments. Be sure to try and riot and burn stuff. We’ll give it about five minutes or less before one is arrested, put in prison, or a re-education camp, or shot and killed on site by the anti-free speech government-controlled forces. Good luck at getting out.
[7] Forever Control:
Democrats Seek to Seize More Power by Creating More States; Granting Amnesty & Open Borders.
Democrats threatened to make DC and possibly other Democrat-driven U.S. territories into states. This would give Democrats two (2) more Senate seats in every new state. This would give them greater control of power in the Senate.
In fact in June 2020, the Democrat-controlled House already unanimously voted to make Washington DC a state. Because the Senate is currently controlled by Republicans, the bill died.
If Democrats controlled both Houses, Democrats clearly have demonstrated intent to seek permanent voting power, just like all totalitarians have done.
Democrats also believe that by granting Amnesty (U.S. citizenship) to the 22 million+ illegal aliens in the U.S., plus anyone else who wants to come in, gives Democrats another block of permanent voters. This is part of the Biden Immigration Plan.
Current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) first agreed with this Bernie Sanders plan to give illegal aliens the right to vote in U.S. elections just last year.
.@SpeakerPelosi – We Should Not Be ‘Suppressing the Vote of Our Newcomers to America’ #tcot #ccot #TuesdayThoughts #TuesdayMotivation https://t.co/kTKwondtvL
— CNSNews (@cnsnews) March 5, 2019
Democrats don’t care that massive new legal labor would drive down wages; or that American citizens and permanent resident minorities would be competing for fewer jobs, so long as Dems get permanent power?
Dems also have threatened to end the filibuster in the Senate, so a minority party could never block any legislation in the Senate. Democrats have a history to trying to silence their opposition since 1917.
Now you know why we call these Democrats, Totalitarians. They seek to have permanent control in every part of government; block any opposition including existing American citizen voters from stopping them.
And here is the funny part: These people call Trump the “fascist?”
Democrats seek absolute authority of all government including controlling the highest Court so nothing can stop their agenda – but maybe voters in the 2020 election?
Images/ graphics/ videos may be copyright by their respective owners.
Original article content, Copyright © 2020 NetAdvisor.org® All Rights Reserved.
Views and opinions are solely of NetAdvisor.™
NetAdvisor.org® is a non-profit organization providing public education and analysis primarily on the U.S. financial markets, personal finance and analysis with a transparent look into U.S. public policy. We also perform and report on financial investigations to help protect the public interest. Read More.
