We will IMPEACH her bony ass!

[LaMouffette]

Miracles do happen, but it looks like Crazy-Eyes Coney Barrett will get ram-rodded through the Supreme Court Justice nomination and confirmation process and end up on the Supreme Court despite our Democratic Congressmen and Congresswomen's best efforts to block this monumental act of hypocrisy and sweep-the-leg, do-anything-to-win power grab on the part of Republicans.

But Supreme Court Justices can be removed by Congress through impeachment. A good article on this is found on the Brennan Center for Justice website:

[link:https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/impeachment-and-removal-judges-explainer|

The article describes the grounds for impeachment:

The United States Constitution provides little guidance as to what offenses constitute grounds for the impeachment of federal judges: as with other government officials, judges may be removed following impeachment and conviction for “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors,” otherwise, under Article III, Section 1, judges “shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour.”

The article does add that impeachment of judges is very rare:

Impeachment of judges is rare, and removal is rarer still. With respect to federal judges, since 1803, the House of Representatives has impeached only 15 judges – an average of one every 14 years – and only 8 of those impeachments were followed by convictions in the Senate. Justice Samuel Chase is the only Supreme Court Justice the House has impeached, and in 1805 the Senate acquitted Chase.

But if Coney Barrett is the wild-eyed religious fanatic that she appears to be, AND we win the Senate and keep the House, then we just need to catch her in an act of “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors,” (perhaps helping her lawyer husband get a case dismissed for one of his corporate criminal clients) and impeach her bony ass (with a nod to that climactic scene in the movie Working Girl when Melanie Griffin sends her evil boss Sigourney Weaver packing).

So what if a Supreme Court Justice has only been impeached once in our nation's history, and one has never before been removed? We have been taught by none other than our "favorite" president (sarcasm) that one must never shy away from violating norms and standards in pursuit of one's goals (sarcasm).

Let's find an excuse (a legitimate excuse; after all, we ARE still Democrats) and impeach her. AND Kavanaugh. AND expand to 11 justices. AND make DC and Puerto Rico states. AND eliminate the filibuster. AND, most importantly, get rid of the Electoral College. The Republican Party must pay a political price for what they have done to our country.

[Raven]

1. Did you pick your name or did they assign it to you?

[LaMouffette]

5. Ha! I picked it!

I know calling oneself "The Skunk" may seem odd, but I think skunks are super cute, and I love their name in French: La Mouffette. It sounds like a term of endearment!

[StarryNite]

25. Pep Le Pew approves.

[LaMouffette]

30. Thanks!

I adored Pepe Le Pew growing up! Today, my view has changed a bit, realizing now that Pepe would be considered a sexual predator!!!

[rzemanfl]

6. Excellent response.

Googling that name leads to a website "Beastly Couture" that has cosplay stuff.

BTW, I am going with assigned.

[LaMouffette]

32. Uh oh! That La Mouffette is not me!

But I did just google "La Mouffette" and found a French kid's book: "Lucie, La Mouffette qui pète quand elle rit" ("Lucie, the Skunk Who Farts When She Laughs&quot ! I don't fart when I laugh, either! Ha, ha. I guess I should have googled "LaMouffette" when I picked it for a username. Oh, well!

[lunatica]

37. I love odd names

as you can see by the one I chose!

[cwydro]

36. Indeed.

I agree.

[NightWatcher]

2. Get her on the record lying. Then come back with that after the election

Brett "I like beer" should be an easy one to remove as well.

[dware]

12. Exactly how is it going to be easy to remove him?

it takes 67 Senators voting to convict and remove a sitting SCJ, even when we win back the Senate, we'll be nowhere near the magic 67.

[MineralMan]

3. No, we probably won't. Let's impeach Justice Thomas, instead.

How does that sound. He has conflicts of interest that are well-known.

[malaise]

11. One of the reasons I am less worried than many is that

Clarence already has health issues. Permanent is often flexible. People die.

[MineralMan]

14. Well, I'm worried enough for both of us.

Bad things can happen quickly with an unbalance SCOTUS, and what we will have in 2021 will be a very unbalanced SCOTUS.

Things should never have gotten to this point. Trump should never have been able to appoint even one Justice. We dropped the ball in 2016 and are suffering the consequences of that. Some of us tried to sound the alarm, but we were ignored because people didn't like Hillary Clinton.

So, we have Donald J. Trump. Feh!

[LuvNewcastle]

13. It seems like I read here years ago that

he and his wife neglected to claim hundreds of thousands in income one year and got caught. He should have been impeached and removed then. They claimed they forgot about the income or some other huge lie to cover up their cheating. I'm sure they're still doing shady shit today.

[MineralMan]

15. It would be far more likely for Thomas to be impeached than

a brand new Justice.

[LuvNewcastle]

18. I agree.

With Thomas we have a lifetime of bad behavior to bring up.

[dware]

19. Impeach yes, convict and remove, not likely. nt

[MineralMan]

21. However, we will not have a 2/3 majority in the Senate, so...

I'm hopeful that we will have majority, but we're still a ways from 67 votes.

[LuvNewcastle]

26. Yes, it looks like we might be crippled by

a lopsided Court for a while. Thomas is old and I hear his health isn't good, so it might take less time to wait for him to quit or die than it would take to impeach and remove, even if we have the votes. Adding Justices might be our only hope. It hasn't been done in a very long time and besides, we probably need more to handle the caseload they have today.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

4. No, "we" won't, unless she commits a crime.

Having crackpot ideas isn't a crime.

[onenote]

35. +1

[Wednesdays]

38. And we have to stop acting like we're guaranteed to win every future election

Does anybody remember what happened in 1994, Clinton's first midterm? 2020, Obama's first midterm?

If Biden wins this year, I predict a terrific Repug blitz trying to win back the house and senate in 2022! Never let up on vigilance!

[malaise]

8. She has no principles or ethics

Anyone who will accept a nomination 38 days before an election from a party that denied a hearing for a similar appointment months before another presidential election has no fucking ethics or principles. Further she is on tape supporting the blocking of Obama's candidate.
One more by any means necessary fucking hypocrite. May she rot in her own version of hell along with the Killa Con and Moscow Mitch.

[SharonClark]

9. Highly unlikely she'll commit a crime that would warrant impeachment.

Afterall, Thomas and Alito are still there.

[Autumn]

10. No. we won't impeach her bony ass. We haven't impeached Kavanagh have we? When she's on the SC

she will remain on the SC.

[PatSeg]

16. Well, its high unlikely if she is confirmed,

that she will be impeached, but referring to her as "her bony ass" is unnecessarily offensive. What was the point of that subject line?

[dware]

17. I suspect this "member" is somewhat east of us. nt.

[PatSeg]

23. It would seem

[former9thward]

20. No, she won't be impeached if she is confirmed.

Impeachment and removal of opposite party Supreme Court Justices is a fantasy dreamed of by partisans of both parties since almost the founding. It is used by various cause groups to raise money. But it is not reality and behind the doors of the Senate it is laughed at by the very Senators who would have the power to do it.

Just a side note: PR does not want to be a state. Referendums have been defeated on the subject and there is no evidence those feelings have changed. Are you going to force them to become one? PR does not want to start paying federal income tax. Better to set them free, if anything.

[dware]

24. +100. nt

[PTWB]

22. In what world are 67 senators going to vote to remove her?

Not this one. We are stuck with her. It would be far, far more likely that we pack the Supreme Court than impeach and remove RW justices.

[sweetloukillbot]

27. What does her ass have to do with anything?

[LaMouffette]

34. Just feeling angry at this latest act of hypocrisy from Repubs and lashing out this morning.

Your point is well taken, though! God knows, I don't want to stoop to Trump's level of personal attacks.

[Fiendish Thingy]

28. No chance of impeachment- expanding SCOTUS is the only way to balance power on the court

The larger the court, the less power and influence a single justice has, and the less likelihood of a consistent, predictable voting bloc.

I favor expanding SCOTUS to 15 seats, so Biden can appoint 6 young, new RBG’s. Some have argued for as many as 27 seats.

[bullimiami]

29. There are grounds to impeach kavenaugh for his lies in his confirmation.

Maybe there will be grounds to impeach coney as well.

But.

There is no chance of removal. You need 67 votes in the Senate.

The repugs are so far gone they wouldnt impeach anything with an R label.


So impeach. Not a bad idea. Get the proof out there.

First. Statehood for DC and PR and add to SCOTUS.

Then fix the damn voting infrastructure.

Then move on to the rest.

[brooklynite]

39. You have evidence of that?

"We know he did" isn't a basis for charges.

[bullimiami]

45. Any reasonable investigation should provide sufficient evidence.

[irisblue]

31. Last time that happened was in 1805. The men who wrote the constution were still there

The only Justice to be impeached was Associate Justice Samuel Chase in 1805. The House of Representatives passed Articles of Impeachment against him; however, he was acquitted by the Senate.

source---https://www.supremecourt.gov

It is never going to happen.

[Statistical]

33. It takes 67 votes to convict. No Republican will vote in favor. Didn't we just see this with Trump?

The last time the Democratic party had sufficient votes in the Senate to convict an impeached official without Republican support was 1967 and that would assume 100% of Democratic senators would go along.



Nobody is ever getting removed from office by impeachment in modern politics. The fact that Trump is still here is living proof to that.

[TwilightZone]

42. Agreed.

Talk of any impeachment of anyone in the current political environment is a waste of time.

Ditto Constitutional amendments, like getting rid of the Electoral College.

[cwydro]

40. I think you're getting WAY ahead of things.

As my father used to say: not bloody likely.

[not_the_one]

41. LOVE your logic. On ALL points.

Democrats need to telegraph far and wide that we are the NEW Democratic Party, the one that takes names and KICKS ass.

All legally, of course.

[DavidDvorkin]

43. Whatever else she may be, she's not bony

She's slender and fit, remarkably so for her age and for having had kids. Let's be willing to give credit where it's due.

[Baked Potato]

44. Sweep-the-leg, hmmmmm.

[Takket]

46. she'll have to do something worthy of impeachment first

on the other hand............ Kavanaugh IMO, if we ever get the investigation the rethugs shut down, could probably easily be impeached on the grounds of perjury.