Ted Cruz busted on Twitter for huge lie about GOP never trying to pack the SCOTUS

Nomad said:
I know it doesn't mean the same thing as your favorite pastime of "packing the fudge" if that's what you're wondering.

Nobody will be bent over spreading their ass cheeks like you and your boyfriends do with each other.
Click to expand...

so no.....the board's homophobes admit they do not know what packing the courts actually means......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
so no.....the board's homophobes admit they do not know what packing the courts actually means......
Click to expand...

I explained it quite clearly to your fellow Trumpsucker W=P.

The fact that you and your fellow idiots like that one ^^ and anutter are reduced to playing little semantics games like you always do, is just proof of your usual disingenuousness.
 
Nomad said:
I explained it quite clearly to your fellow Trumpsucker W=P.

The fact that you and your fellow idiots like that one ^^ and anutter are reduced to playing little semantics games like you always do, is just proof of your usual disingenuousness.
Click to expand...

it was your "explanation" which made it obvious you haven't a clue what the term means.....buts its understandable.......you're a lib'rul and none of you have any concept of history......try googling FDR and the Supreme Court someday and have someone read it to you.....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
it was your "explanation" which made it obvious you haven't a clue what the term means.....buts its understandable.......you're a lib'rul and none of you have any concept of history......try googling FDR and the Supreme Court someday and have someone read it to you.....
Click to expand...

No, idiots like you are clinging to your narrow "definition" because it suits your idiotic narrative and defense of right-wing hypocrisy on the issue.

Same stupid, childish shit your low-class ilk always engages in.

Let me use this screen shot of a Rutgers University website article on the issue of court packing, to illustrate to you and everyone else reading this, just how full of shit you are....

courtpack.jpg



Link to article ---> https://www.rutgers.edu/news/what-court-packing


Now, I have no doubt that you will brush off Rutgers University as being some "lib'rul" institution whose information is not valid, etc, etc, blah blah blah.... but you and I both know I have once again, thoroughly bitch-slapped your ass as flat as a week old glass of warm beer.

So choke on it, bitch.
 
Nomad said:
I explained it quite clearly to your fellow Trumpsucker W=P.

The fact that you and your fellow idiots like that one ^^ and anutter are reduced to playing little semantics games like you always do, is just proof of your usual disingenuousness.
Click to expand...
word definitions are not semantic games.
either words have concrete definitions or they are meaningless -wern't you an English teacher?


https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pack
Definition of pack (Entry 3 of 4)
transitive verb
1 : to influence the composition of so as to bring about a desired result pack a jury "…
packing a court, increasing the number of justices so you can get a desired outcome. … "
 
Dutch Uncle said:
He's also not running again. No doubt he has some sweet corporate gig lined up and is just biding his time until cashing in on that sweet, sweet Congressional retirement and medical plan.
Click to expand...

He's not?

He might not be running for his seat based upon his last election, but he certainly seems to be keeping his goals as a 2024 contender in the conversation
 
Nomad said:
‘Gaslighting 101’: Sen. Ted Cruz Ripped For One Of His Biggest, Boldest Lies Yet

Ed Mazza·Overnight Editor, HuffPost
Fri, April 23, 2021, 3:04 AM

Twitter users called out Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) on Thursday over an easily debunked claim he made about Republicans and the Supreme Court.

During a press conference to urge President Joe Biden to reject any attempt to expand the Supreme Court, Cruz said:

"You didn't see Republicans when we had control of the Senate try to rig the game. You didn't see us try to pack the court."

Critics were quick to point out that in 2016, Senate Republicans, led by then-Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, blocked then-President Barack Obama’s appointment of Merrick Garland to a Supreme Court seat for almost a year. At the time, Republicans claimed that an open court seat could not be filled in an election year.

After Donald Trump won the 2016 election, Garland’s nomination died. Senate Republicans then nixed the filibuster for Supreme Court nominations in 2017 to confirm Neil Gorsuch instead, the first of three Trump appointments to the court.

In 2020, when Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died just weeks before the election, Senate Republicans forgot the McConnell Rule about keeping such seats open and rushed to confirm Amy Coney Barrett to the court.

Given those very recent events, Cruz’s critics weren’t buying his claim that Republicans hadn’t rigged the system to stack the court:

https://currently.att.yahoo.com/att...-070435678.html?.tsrc=daily_mail&uh_test=1_11
Click to expand...

You obviously do not understand the definition of the term "pack the court". The GOP did not change the law in order to change the number of justices to pack the court. The GOP use legal maneuvers that did not change the number of justices and did not change the law.

Cruez knows a WHOLE LOT more about the Supreme Court than you are some moron on Twitter. You just owned yourself with your lack of knowledge and stupidity.


What is court packing?
Simply put, court packing refers to the process of Congress adding more seats to the Supreme Court in an effort to secure a majority.
Click to expand...
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/culture/politics/a34493809/pack-the-court-explained/
 
anatta said:
word definitions are not semantic games.
either words have concrete definitions or they are meaningless -wern't you an English teacher?


https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pack
Definition of pack (Entry 3 of 4)
transitive verb
1 : to influence the composition of so as to bring about a desired result pack a jury "…
packing a court, increasing the number of justices so you can get a desired outcome. … "
Click to expand...

See the post right before yours, anutter.

Post #25, this page.

One post before the one I'm responding to now.

And BTW.... if you knew anything about the English language, you'd know that in fact, many words have multiple definitions.

Your own source which you linked to, must have two or three dozen definitions and ways of using the word "pack".

But that's even beside the point, because we are not talking about a single word here.

We are talking about a concept that was labeled with a convenient term to facilitate future references to the subject.

Give it up, goof-ball.

We all know you rwnj's are massive hypocrites on most subjects and issues.
 
ExpressLane said:
You obviously do not understand the definition of the term "pack the court". The GOP did not change the law in order to change the number of justices to pack the court. The GOP use legal maneuvers that did not change the number of justices and did not change the law.

Cruez knows a WHOLE LOT more about the Supreme Court than you are some moron on Twitter. You just owned yourself with your lack of knowledge and stupidity.
Click to expand...

Read post #25 on this page you knuckle-dragging drool bucket.

You'll have to gain many more years of education before you can even come close to holding your with me, Trumptard.
 
ExpressLane said:
You obviously do not understand the definition of the term "pack the court". The GOP did not change the law in order to change the number of justices to pack the court. The GOP use legal maneuvers that did not change the number of justices and did not change the law.

Cruez knows a WHOLE LOT more about the Supreme Court than you are his critics on Twitter do.. You just owned yourself with your lack of knowledge and stupidity.
Click to expand...

Becomes a matter of semantics, even "packing the court" is a straight political term employed against FDR when he came close to adding Justices, the term has no definitive definition in terms of reality.

If the Democrats did decide to add Justices, which they won't, it doesn't break any law, there is nothing in the Constitution regarding the set number of Justices, it is just a tradition, in fact, the number has gone as high as ten and low as five in the US's history

And what Mitch did, with Teddy's full support, was set a precedent, actually two, breaking tradition, in order to manipulate the make up of the Court, which he later, and Ted, went on to totally contradict themselves and prove themselves hypocrites with the quickie approval of Amy Coney Barrett
 
Nomad said:
Read post #25 on this page you knuckle-dragging drool bucket.

You'll have to gain many more years of education before you can even come close to holding your with me, Trumptard.
Click to expand...
I bet I already have TWICE as many of years of post high school education as you do you Moron. :laugh:.
 
Court packing definition

noun
the practice of changing the number or composition of judges on a court, making it more favorable to particular goals or ideologies, and typically involving an increase in the number of seats on the court:
Court packing can tip the balance of the Supreme Court toward the right or left.
U.S. History. an unsuccessful attempt by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1937 to appoint up to six additional justices to the U.S. Supreme Court, which had invalidated a number of his New Deal laws.
Click to expand...
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/court-packing

Definition of court-packing
: the act or practice of packing (see PACK entry 3 sense 1) a court and especially the United States Supreme Court by increasing the number of judges or justices in an attempt to change the ideological makeup of the court
"Court-packing adds new seats to a court in order to alter its partisan balance. …"
— Darrell West
What is court packing? Packing the courts is the idea of adding justices to the Supreme Court or lower courts to shift the balance in a liberal, conservative or other direction. And it wouldn't require changing the constitution, either.
Click to expand...
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/court-packing

https://www.mysuncoast.com/2020/10/09/history-behind-phrase-packing-court/

https://www.thecut.com/article/what-is-court-packing-what-it-means-to-expand-supreme-court.html
 
Last edited:
archives said:
Becomes a matter of semantics, even "packing the court" is a straight political term employed against FDR when he came close to adding Justices, the term has no definitive definition in terms of reality.

If the Democrats did decide to add Justices, which they won't, it doesn't break any law, there is nothing in the Constitution regarding the set number of Justices, it is just a tradition, in fact, the number has gone as high as ten and low as five in the US's history

And what Mitch did, with Teddy's full support, was set a precedent, actually two, breaking tradition, in order to manipulate the make up of the Court, which he later, and Ted, went on to totally contradict themselves and prove themselves hypocrites with the quickie approval of Amy Coney Barrett
Click to expand...

thanks for admitting that Nomad is dumber than shit.......
 
ExpressLane said:
noun
the practice of changing the number or composition of judges on a court, making it more favorable to particular goals or ideologies, and typically involving an increase in the number of seats on the court:
Court packing can tip the balance of the Supreme Court toward the right or left.
U.S. History. an unsuccessful attempt by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1937 to appoint up to six additional justices to the U.S. Supreme Court, which had invalidated a number of his New Deal laws.
Click to expand...

The "number or composition of judges on a court," which is exactly what Mitch, with Teddy's approval, did three times, first in ignoring Garland's nomination, second in make it a majority vote, and third by rushing thru Barrett's appointment
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top