Justice Ginsburg Refers To Lindsey Graham As One Of The ‘Women Of The Senate’

originally posted by: essentialtremors
a reply to: Krazysh0t

You really don't see the problem here?

She can't even stay awake anymore.

Most people exhibiting her signs of old age don't even get charge of their own finances at this point, yet she's granted the responsibility of interpreting our Constitution?!?!

No. I don't see the problem with misspeaking once. You need a BIT more evidence to convince me that she is suffering from dementia or some other mind related illness.

a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

fun fact you dont have to be a US citizen to be on scotus

well that depends on how you look at it.
here are some more fun facts

Citizenship Requirements for Employment in the Judiciary

Current appropriations law prohibits the use of appropriated funds to pay the compensation of any employee of the U.S. federal government where the duty location is in the continental U.S. unless such person:
1.is a U.S. citizen;
2.is a person who owes allegiance to the U.S. (i.e., nationals of American Samoa, Swains Island, and the Northern Mariana Islands, and nationals who meet other requirements described in 8 U.S.C. 1408 (link is external));
3.is a person admitted as a refugee or granted asylum who has filed a declaration of intention to become a lawful permanent resident and then a citizen when eligible; or
4. is a lawful permanent resident who is seeking citizenship as outlined in 8 U.S.C. 1324b(a)(3)(B).
Citizenship Requirements for Employment in the Judiciary

and to follow up on my earleir post if he does go for it of the current justices :anthony kennedy 80, Ruth bader Ginsberg 84 and Bryer (78) could be subject to it if he goes with FDR plan under first term, IF he got it passed and made it to a second term it would add Tomas currently 68 so 3 in theory for first term and one for second for total of 5 which i dont see going over well but hey know knows he got goursh in quickly guess it would depend on how senate and house favor him

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

www.history.com...

There are no official qualifications for becoming a Supreme Court justice. The Constitution spells out age, citizenship and residency requirements for becoming president of the United States or a member of Congress but mentions no rules for joining the nation’s highest court. To date, six justices have been foreign born; the most recent, Felix Frankfurter, who served on the court from 1939 to 1962, was a native of Vienna, Austria. The youngest associate justice ever appointed was Joseph Story, who was 32 years old when he joined the bench in 1811. Associate Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., who served from 1902 to 1932, retired at age 90, making him the oldest person ever to sit on the court. One thing every justice who’s served shares in common is that all were lawyers prior to joining the court. During the 18th and 19th centuries, before attending law school was standard practice, many future justices got their legal training by studying under a mentor. James Byrnes, who served on the court from 1941 to 1942, was the last justice who didn’t attend law school (Byrnes, who also didn’t graduate from high school, worked as a law clerk and later passed the bar exam.) Harvard has produced more members of the court than any other law school; to date, 20 justices have attended or graduated from the venerable institution, which was established in 1817 and is America’s oldest continually operating law school.

unsure if they were citizens at time of appointment but the whole born here part dosent seem to come in to effect

Aha ha ha ha !!!!!!!


I did some work in Graham's house in Charleston, SC many years ago.
He is a little fruity, you might say.

originally posted by: Groot
Aha ha ha ha !!!!!!!


I did some work in Graham's house in Charleston, SC many years ago.
He is a little fruity, you might say.

Since we're also discussing Graham...Do tell more.

Honest mistake...he seems a bit light in the loafers...not that it matters...

a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

unsure if they were citizens at time of appointment but the whole born here part dosent seem to come in to effect

you are correct just like being a Congress person.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

When trump misspoke about a"wiretap" it was a big deal
When anyone else misspeaks "it isnt the end of the world"


Must be the whole public/private thing with you guys

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Krazysh0t

When trump misspoke about a"wiretap" it was a big deal
When anyone else misspeaks "it isnt the end of the world"


Must be the whole public/private thing with you guys

Well Trump was misspeaking about an actual crime while he was accusing the former President of said crime. Ginsburg misspoke when describing a Senator. I believe that the situations you are trying to compare here are VERY different. One requires evidence and proof, the other just merely requires a recognition of mistake and an apology.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Trump using the wrong nomenclature is no different than rbg using the wrong nomenclature.

wiretap-surveillance
crappy male senator-crappy woman senator

but hey she just misspoke right.....

a reply to: shooterbrody

Which instance of misspeak resulted in an investigation into criminality again?

ETA: Here let me give you a more comparable situation to this misspeak. Spicer misspeaking about Assad and Hitler today. That misspeak isn't going to end the world and is just boneheaded.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I would wager the investigation you speak of was ongoing previous to trumps tweet,or am I mistaken?

That said, it is an apples to apples comparison. Very funny to see such different responses, some almost 180 out.

a reply to: IAMTAT

Maybe Ginsberg doesn't keep up with who's who? It is a predominately female name.

LOL, she was all, "Lindsey Graham? Haven't heard of her."

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: IAMTAT

This thread is desperation pure and simple. So Ginsburg misspoke. It isn't the end of the world...

There is no desperation in a discussion about the mental capacity of a Supreme Court Justice. But soon it will be solved as the court takes a major right turn. (double entendre intended)

So there was an update, this is what she was saying: Here

UPDATE (2:55 p.m.): Steve Aaron, a spokesman representing Allegheny College, told the Washington Examiner that Ginsburg was not referring to Lindsey Graham as one of the "women of the Senate." Instead, Aaron said Ginsburg was using mutually exclusive terms — referring to Graham and Feinstein as award winners from 2013 and the phrase "women of the Senate" to refer to the award winners of 2014.


Yup, that cleared it right up.

a reply to: IAMTAT

Actually she was trying to use a title given dianne feinstein her mistake was pluralizing senator. It should have read like this.

“Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. John McCain” and the “women of the Senate, Senator Dianne Feinstein and (senator) Lindsey Graham.”

a reply to: IAMTAT
I always thought Lindsey Buckingham was one of the girls in the band.

Wait... Stevie's the girl?

Honest mistake. Everyone knows Lindsey Graham is McCain's bitch.