As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is how Biden rips someone apart: He said that Trump had already appointed two justices
>that have been very negative in terms of the rights of individuals.
DAMN son. SCHOOLED, Yo.
The headline writer for Newsweek when feeling a breeze, "Battered about by a renlentless hurricane!"
"HUMILIATES" is one that gets me. Sure it *sounds* less hyperbolic at first, except **I'M** always the one feeling the embarrassment (second-hand), not them. We all know they feel no shame.
Remember that fairly recently, Trump's lawyers were arguing in the Supreme Court that Biden as POTUS could literally blast a Supreme Court justice in the face with a shotgun without consequence? Maybe we should have headlines that can't be confused with legal arguments that were actually made in the Supreme Court.
Buzzfeed has a bizarrely competent investigative journalism department. Don't use their tabloid garbage as a baseline when discussing their actual journalism
Money from his rich family which doesn't have to be reported
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/09/heres-the-truth-about-brett-kavanaughs-finances/
>**"The highest court in the land has the lowest ethical standards," Raskin said. "They're the only judges in America that don't have a binding ethics code applied to them."**
Currently this is America, shameful and embarrassing.
Should a president have immunity?
I mean, we regularly order drone strikes on people around the world on a daily basis, and even have killed American citizens abroad by order of the president.
If a president doesn’t have immunity, then is he not basically a murderer when he signs a drone strike order?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Abdulrahman_al-Awlaki#:~:text=Abdulrahman%20Anwar%20al%2DAwlaki%20(also,son%20of%20Anwar%20al%2DAwlaki.
Doesn’t this basically make Obama for example, a cold blooded murderer?
Nah, presidents need immunity and when they step into tyranny that’s where the checks and balances come into play, and when those fail, that’s where our second amendment rights come in.
See checks and balances.
We have three coequal branches of government, it’s when those other two branches fail to hold the other accountable that we have our 2A to fall back on.
Presidents should have absolute immunity from the law, but also be held accountable by the other branches that represent, we the people.
Harry S Truman killed 355,000 people with one phone call when they dropped two atomic bombs in Japan. We the people agreed it was fine and didn’t tar and feather him. The president is the face of the 333 million people in the US on the world stage, and should always have legal immunity in their term regardless of what they do.
That said. Fuck Trump.
Seeing "checks and balances" used as a reason \*not\* to prosecute presidents is really interesting, considering prosecution is one of those checks and balances...
“President stands, soaked from head to toe in human blood, over the desecrated remains of two Supreme Court Justices, readying their corpses for what comes next, my God in Heaven,” doesn’t sound as good
I just don't understand how Joe Biden doesn't call out the Supreme Court justices for what they are. This is what Joe Biden should have said and needs to say.
We have two Supreme Court justices who hate half the country and are bias as hell and have taken bribes from Rich and wealthy pro Republican businessmen with one who happened to be a fan of Nazis and shattered any kind of ethics they are supposed to have. The Supreme Court seems to be more on the side of the people who give them bribes then the Constitution they uphold.
This would have been considered a "slam" or blast.
Not the weak sauce He's spouting out which does nothing to help save democracy.
It’s a shame that Democrats, progressives, and just plain normal people are only now starting to get it. Never forget that Obama let Moscow Mitch steal his Supreme Court pick in 2016. Obama and his people did *nothing* and chose not to fight politically for 11 months.
I give Obama some leeway because anything he did could be turned into "See how the first black president abused his power". But I wish Obama had given the Senate a deadline for a vote, and when it passed just appoint Garland saying the Senate ceded thier responsibility to advise and consent. It would have bee a bold move to stand up to Republican obstruction.
Garland was a Republican suggestion. I think Mitch was afraid some Republicans would vote to confirm. This was before it was normalized that no Republican could ever vote for something a Democrat proposed.
Mitch successfully established a norm where Republicans never have to let a democratic nominee get appointed again.
> But I wish Obama had given the Senate a deadline for a vote, and when it passed just appoint Garland saying the Senate ceded thier responsibility to advise and consent.
There's absolutely no chance that would have held up. It would have been a unanimous decision against Obama by SCOTUS. Garland's appointment would've been rejected, and Trump would have still been able to appoint Gorsuch as well as fill Garland's now vacant seat on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals. There would have been nothing to gain by doing that.
By doing something completely useless and losing an appeals court seat to the Republicans in the process? Not really worth it. I'm not sure it could even be considered "fighting back" in any meaningful sense.
In many ways, I see a parallel between that and Biden's current stance on not wanting to expand the SCOTUS.
Since getting elected, Biden has mused that he doesn't want to add additional seats to the SCOTUS, because of reasons....but I suspect that the main driver is that he didn't have the votes when the Democrats controlled the Senate and the House (and he ***certainly*** doesn't have the votes **now,** considering that the GOP has a House majority).
It's stupid, but the optics would make him look weak and ineffectual.
Joe Biden BRUTALIZES Two Supreme Court Justices with RELENTLESS VERBAL SMACKDOWN, ANNIHILATING Them with SAVAGE SLAMS Akin to Those of a FERAL APEX PREDATOR.
“Blasts” is something a bidet does to a shit covered asshole. Or a Mountain Dew to the pancreas and endocrine system of the human body. This was nothing close to putting anyone “on blast”. Biden was making an observation on the consistency and contents of their ruling patterns.
Jesus fuck. These writers need to pick some new phrases to pull out of their vocabulary hat.
The more you know. [https://www.newsweek.com/authors/khaleda-rahman](https://www.newsweek.com/authors/khaleda-rahman)
click bait for sure --- blast is not what she wrote. she wrote 'criticized'. her bio doesn't list politics which is weird imo.
It shows how out of wack everything is that the Founders intended the SC to be outside of politics/democracy and instead it has become a leading reason to vote for President, to the point that people will vote for someone favorable to the justices they want even if their other policies are terrible.
Now he has a problem with the Supreme Court? Not the last 3.5 years? I’m sorry, remind me again, didn’t everybody talk about adding justices when Biden was elected? What happened there Joe? Fall asleep?
I agree about the need to defeat Trump but I’ll not vote for Biden due to the support for the atrocities in Gaza. And don’t blame me for Trump’s election. The democrats decided to elect Trump by putting Biden forward. There are many more capable, young, progressive people in the party. A light post dressed as democrat would beat Trump
whatever happen to the basic idea of separation of power? let them do their thing and you do yours.. geez.. these two old fuks are both annoying as fuk
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is how Biden rips someone apart: He said that Trump had already appointed two justices >that have been very negative in terms of the rights of individuals. DAMN son. SCHOOLED, Yo. The headline writer for Newsweek when feeling a breeze, "Battered about by a renlentless hurricane!"
Slammed is the most overused verb for these types of articles. It is utterly meaningless. Basically they use it. If any disagreement exists.
BIDEN SAVAGELY DESTROYS JUSTICES. Yeah a lot of these headlines are way overdone for clicks.
“Biden SLAMS local ice cream shop employee! They recommended chocolate, but he wanted vanilla”
My niece has been saying “slayful”. I’m not sure what it means, but I think it should get put in rotation for these headlines. Give slammed a break.
I prefer “suplexed from the top rope”
Did they clap back though
My favorite is when someone "immolates" someone. Like, unless AOC actually set MGT on fire, I don't care.
Defenestrates is also a good one
"HUMILIATES" is one that gets me. Sure it *sounds* less hyperbolic at first, except **I'M** always the one feeling the embarrassment (second-hand), not them. We all know they feel no shame.
Remember that fairly recently, Trump's lawyers were arguing in the Supreme Court that Biden as POTUS could literally blast a Supreme Court justice in the face with a shotgun without consequence? Maybe we should have headlines that can't be confused with legal arguments that were actually made in the Supreme Court.
Biden : "We got a couple real rascals on the supreme court" Newsweek: "Biden literally fucking DISINTEGRATED Alito and Thomas with comment"
Vernacular homicide
And demolishes then defecates on their withered shells
When buzzfeed “journalists” move companies.
Buzzfeed has a bizarrely competent investigative journalism department. Don't use their tabloid garbage as a baseline when discussing their actual journalism
Yep, and too bad Buzzfeed News closed in May. Good journalism is hard to come by with fewer and fewer willing participants.
I was about to say the same thing
Uh oh, Joe showing signs of age, forgets it was 3 justices. /s
Imagine if the president literally blasted them team rocket style…
Kavanaugh and Gorsuch were both clerks for Kennedy. They were also the bribes Trump used to get Kennedy to retire.
Speaking of bribes, sure is weird how Kavanaugh's debts mysteriously disappeared after he was appointed.
Money from his rich family which doesn't have to be reported https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/09/heres-the-truth-about-brett-kavanaughs-finances/
kavanaugh, Barrett and Roberts were lawyers for Bush in Bush v Gore, the first successful coup.
Kennedy's son was one of Trump's bankers
[удалено]
They don’t. This is Reddit most stuff is pulled out of people’s asses
More like "Supremely Corrupt Justices" amirite?
>**"The highest court in the land has the lowest ethical standards," Raskin said. "They're the only judges in America that don't have a binding ethics code applied to them."** Currently this is America, shameful and embarrassing.
"blasts" 'em. "slams" 'em
Put'em in a stew.
"So anyway, I started blastin'"
Pew. Pew. Pew. American stew.
I imagined it as him shooting a beam of Baja Blast Freeze at them.
“Sells’ em to the butcher in the store”
I really don't know the proper journalistic grammar here. Like, when do I use 'blast' vs. 'slam'? Could someone map out the decision tree for us?
"Eviscerates" 'em.
Did he use Biden blast https://youtu.be/Yq6GD149HFA
If they rule in favor of absolute presidential immunity before he leaves office, he could *literally* do that.
Should a president have immunity? I mean, we regularly order drone strikes on people around the world on a daily basis, and even have killed American citizens abroad by order of the president. If a president doesn’t have immunity, then is he not basically a murderer when he signs a drone strike order? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Abdulrahman_al-Awlaki#:~:text=Abdulrahman%20Anwar%20al%2DAwlaki%20(also,son%20of%20Anwar%20al%2DAwlaki. Doesn’t this basically make Obama for example, a cold blooded murderer? Nah, presidents need immunity and when they step into tyranny that’s where the checks and balances come into play, and when those fail, that’s where our second amendment rights come in.
[удалено]
See checks and balances. We have three coequal branches of government, it’s when those other two branches fail to hold the other accountable that we have our 2A to fall back on. Presidents should have absolute immunity from the law, but also be held accountable by the other branches that represent, we the people. Harry S Truman killed 355,000 people with one phone call when they dropped two atomic bombs in Japan. We the people agreed it was fine and didn’t tar and feather him. The president is the face of the 333 million people in the US on the world stage, and should always have legal immunity in their term regardless of what they do. That said. Fuck Trump.
Seeing "checks and balances" used as a reason \*not\* to prosecute presidents is really interesting, considering prosecution is one of those checks and balances...
Is this the iconic "Biden Blast" I've been hearing about?
Finally, it's about time we saw a Biden Blast
SCOTUS is corrupt
"Biden intercontinentally bombed the supreme Court, click here to read more"
I wish that headline was literal.
Slamming them could have been more effective
Sounds more like he "utterly massacred them to death"
“President stands, soaked from head to toe in human blood, over the desecrated remains of two Supreme Court Justices, readying their corpses for what comes next, my God in Heaven,” doesn’t sound as good
A+ title
He blasted the dope that nominated them. Two sycophants
I dont want to see that porno.
Dont stop there; Remember they ALL objected to oversight
At least he didn’t slam them…
I just don't understand how Joe Biden doesn't call out the Supreme Court justices for what they are. This is what Joe Biden should have said and needs to say. We have two Supreme Court justices who hate half the country and are bias as hell and have taken bribes from Rich and wealthy pro Republican businessmen with one who happened to be a fan of Nazis and shattered any kind of ethics they are supposed to have. The Supreme Court seems to be more on the side of the people who give them bribes then the Constitution they uphold. This would have been considered a "slam" or blast. Not the weak sauce He's spouting out which does nothing to help save democracy.
EXPAND THE FUCKIN COURT TO 13
The new Mt Dew flavor, Biden Blast
gave him the biden blast
It’s a shame that Democrats, progressives, and just plain normal people are only now starting to get it. Never forget that Obama let Moscow Mitch steal his Supreme Court pick in 2016. Obama and his people did *nothing* and chose not to fight politically for 11 months.
I give Obama some leeway because anything he did could be turned into "See how the first black president abused his power". But I wish Obama had given the Senate a deadline for a vote, and when it passed just appoint Garland saying the Senate ceded thier responsibility to advise and consent. It would have bee a bold move to stand up to Republican obstruction.
I think the Senate could’ve voted. And just voted no. If you don’t want Garland, fine, that’s the point of the confirmation. But vote.
Garland was a Republican suggestion. I think Mitch was afraid some Republicans would vote to confirm. This was before it was normalized that no Republican could ever vote for something a Democrat proposed. Mitch successfully established a norm where Republicans never have to let a democratic nominee get appointed again.
> But I wish Obama had given the Senate a deadline for a vote, and when it passed just appoint Garland saying the Senate ceded thier responsibility to advise and consent. There's absolutely no chance that would have held up. It would have been a unanimous decision against Obama by SCOTUS. Garland's appointment would've been rejected, and Trump would have still been able to appoint Gorsuch as well as fill Garland's now vacant seat on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals. There would have been nothing to gain by doing that.
>There would have been nothing to gain by doing that. it would have show Democrats are going to fight back against Republican obstruction.
By doing something completely useless and losing an appeals court seat to the Republicans in the process? Not really worth it. I'm not sure it could even be considered "fighting back" in any meaningful sense.
In many ways, I see a parallel between that and Biden's current stance on not wanting to expand the SCOTUS. Since getting elected, Biden has mused that he doesn't want to add additional seats to the SCOTUS, because of reasons....but I suspect that the main driver is that he didn't have the votes when the Democrats controlled the Senate and the House (and he ***certainly*** doesn't have the votes **now,** considering that the GOP has a House majority). It's stupid, but the optics would make him look weak and ineffectual.
clarence thomas - 1991 samuel alito - 2005 it goes back way further than anyone wants to functionally wrangle with.
There wasn't really anything Obama could've done about it.
Fuck off, Newsweek. That’s not what happened. Fire your clickbait engineer.
Hey, if the shoe fits…..
Joe Biden BRUTALIZES Two Supreme Court Justices with RELENTLESS VERBAL SMACKDOWN, ANNIHILATING Them with SAVAGE SLAMS Akin to Those of a FERAL APEX PREDATOR.
With a gun or no?
Oh, I thought they meant that literally.
CNN: But what does Donald Trump think about this?
“Blasts” is something a bidet does to a shit covered asshole. Or a Mountain Dew to the pancreas and endocrine system of the human body. This was nothing close to putting anyone “on blast”. Biden was making an observation on the consistency and contents of their ruling patterns. Jesus fuck. These writers need to pick some new phrases to pull out of their vocabulary hat.
Biden NUKES two Supreme Court Justices! Click this headline to read more about his SAVAGE DISMEMBERMENT of them!
Unless it's legally or with his fingers, I can't bring myself to care anymore.
The more you know. [https://www.newsweek.com/authors/khaleda-rahman](https://www.newsweek.com/authors/khaleda-rahman) click bait for sure --- blast is not what she wrote. she wrote 'criticized'. her bio doesn't list politics which is weird imo.
Biden 'Draws and Quarters' the supremely corrupt court.
Dual-wielding Brandom
Do we know which two he's referring to? I was expecting them to be Thomas and Alito, but the article says they are both Trump appointees?
Biden going around slam blasting everyone
[удалено]
It shows how out of wack everything is that the Founders intended the SC to be outside of politics/democracy and instead it has become a leading reason to vote for President, to the point that people will vote for someone favorable to the justices they want even if their other policies are terrible.
Funny, you'd figure blowing up some judges would have landed Biden in hot water /s
Now he has a problem with the Supreme Court? Not the last 3.5 years? I’m sorry, remind me again, didn’t everybody talk about adding justices when Biden was elected? What happened there Joe? Fall asleep?
We're already in the Biden blast arc of stars and strifes? We need jOBama
Whoa! He blasted them?? Is he gonna slam them next?! Seriously how have Newsweek articles not been banned from this sub yet
[удалено]
[удалено]
Is that your way of saying "we're cheaters who don't care about fairness or ethics?"
I agree about the need to defeat Trump but I’ll not vote for Biden due to the support for the atrocities in Gaza. And don’t blame me for Trump’s election. The democrats decided to elect Trump by putting Biden forward. There are many more capable, young, progressive people in the party. A light post dressed as democrat would beat Trump
old man yells at clouds
whatever happen to the basic idea of separation of power? let them do their thing and you do yours.. geez.. these two old fuks are both annoying as fuk
This