Oh no She better let Bernie have some or else he’s going to be mad ! Turbo tax works bae @Os Trigonum @King1 https://katu.com/amp/news/nation-wo...y-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-brook-avenue-press AOC, known for 'tax the rich' slogan, past due on taxes 5 years after warrant for payment
House Democrats ask Senate to take position on whether justices lied during confirmation hearings https://thehill.com/homenews/house/...r-justices-lied-during-confirmation-hearings/ excerpt: Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) are asking that Senate Democrats take a stand on whether conservative Supreme Court justices who voted to overturn the Roe v. Wade decision lied to the Senate Judiciary Committee during their confirmation hearings. The letter argues that conservative Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh “directly lied” to members of the Senate and that they and others on the bench “misled the American people during their confirmation hearings.” “We request that the Senate make its position clear on whether Justices Kavanaugh and Gorsuch lied under oath during their confirmation hearings,” the letter from the two progressive House members said. “We must call out their actions for what they were before the moment passes, so that we can prevent such a mendacious denigration of our fundamental rights and the rule of law from ever happening again,” it concluded. more at the link. kudos for their use of "mendacious denigration" in a sentence
(Having posted what my obvious opinion on this topic.... don't be surprised if he ends up being quite popular. A lot of people, especially women under 35 identify with her..... the Democrat Trump is coming)
I imagine the wording all the Trump justices used in their confirmation hearings was extremely particular, thought out and non-committal.
These are the alleged "lies" under oath: Ocasio-Cortez and Lieu argued in their letter that Kavanaugh and Gorsuch expressed no such sentiments during their confirmation hearings, quoting Kavanaugh’s 2018 assertion that Roe “is settled as a precedent” and Gorsuch’s 2017 claim that he would have “walked out the door” if former President Trump had asked him to overturn Roe. Of course, the Democrat Senators knew when these statements were made that they were carefully crafted statements that don't preclude overturning the case. From the linked Kavanaugh confirmation article: Given that contemporaneous statement by Schumer, it is hard to argue that Justice Kavanaugh misled the Senate in his confirmation hearings. Clearly Senator Schumer was not misled and was able to see exactly what Justice Kavanaugh was saying. The Gorsuch statement wasn't even some sort of support of precedent, he was demonstrating his contempt for the idea of the President telling a Supreme Court Justice how to rule on a case.
That was her fiancée walking with her and he didn't do anything. Is she low-key calling for someone to do something to that dude?
AOC shouldn’t be harassed like that. SCOTUS Justices should be able to go out in public without having organizations track them and send people to harass them. Not sure what AOC wants done? People have freedom of speech. They can call you sexy or ugly or pretty much whatever. Is there grounds for removal from the premises? Maybe. Idk.
all of the harassment is bad, that's kind of the point being made by Stein. The irony here is that AOC has far less ground for complaint: she at least is being harassed at her place of employment. The Supreme Court justices are being harassed at their homes and in privately-owned establishments like restaurants. Her hypocritical/inconsistent position on harassment is what is being exposed and ridiculed here
The reason for the harassment has no value? Just want to know if you have a certain threshold where harassment of political figures is justified? Like for example in the most extreme sense, would you be upset if a group of Jewish people harassed Hitler's residence back in the day or harassed him if they saw him at a restaurant? Women believe their bodily autonomy is being infringed on and to me that's a very basic human right that is being taken away from them and I think it's rational to harrass those who stripped those rights away from them. Isn't harassment of people in power a core foundation of our nation? Isn't that second Amendment part of the check on power?
I thought it was wrong, but funny. And yes, it's far less bad than harassing Supreme Court justices at their private homes. And that was exactly his point. Also, would probably hit.
And pro-life people have sincerely held beliefs that a state sanctioned genocide against the unborn has been occurring in the United States since Roe vs. Wade. They, would, presumably, think it is rationale to harass those who granted/defend that right. While some pro-lifers have gone to extremes over the last 50 years, they are widely condemned, and afaik none have created organizations to systematically stalk and harass politicans/scotus justices who oppose their ideology. I don't care to see AOC harassed, I don't care to see Brett Kavanaugh harassed. Are people within their rights to do it? Perhaps. Does that mean its something I think is ok and want to see? No. Plenty of things are unpleasant and unsavory but still legal. I don't think it's good for society that we conduct ourselves in that way. Marches/protests? That's cool. Stalking and harassing people at every turn or using nasty language to troll someone? No, not a fan.
