America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 3 years ago by DrafterX. 118 replies replies.
3 Pages123>
Supreme Court nomination
MACS Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,593
Trump should nominate Amy Coney Barret. That will at least drop the odds of having someone come out who was raped 38 years ago...
Whistlebritches Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 04-23-2006
Posts: 22,127
MACS wrote:
Trump should nominate Amy Coney Barret. That will at least drop the odds of having someone come out who was raped 38 years ago...



ThumpUp ThumpUp .....I like her
delta1 Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
wait a minute...only about a month and a half before the POTUS election...

remember what Mitch McConnell said in 2016, when Obama nominated Garland to a vacant seat....there was more than 9 months before election day, but McConnell said it was too close to the election, so there would be no Senate consideration of the nominee until after the American people weighed in and voted for the POTUS???

every con, including all the GOP Senators lined up and supported that view...some of them are up for re-election in November

was that just BS?

why not wait until after the result of the election...if Trump wins, he can nominate away the day after the result is settled and have the confirmation before his inauguration
ZRX1200 Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,476
You should sent your complaint to Chucky Schumer.
rfenst Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,100
Republicans are trying to distinguish the Garland nomination by Obama without a Senate consideration. The argument that things are different here because Trump and the Senate are from the same party, whereas Obama and the Senate were from different parties. A difference without distinction in my mind.

I wish McConnell and the Republicans would just tell the truth: That they will fill RBG's vacancy because they are simply in control right now and have the power to do so.

Personally, I feel Garland should have at least received a Senate hearing and vote (even though we know what the result would be). Similarly, I hate to admit it, but Trump should get the pick right now while in office, not after we decide who wins the Election.
MACS Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,593
Robert, do you believe the dems would do any different? Do you believe they'd tell the truth and say they did it simply because they were in control? Rhetorical questions... I don't believe it and I don't think you do either.

Delta - In 2016, Ruth Bader Ginsburg was asked by the NY Times if she felt the Senate had an obligation to consider Obama nominee Merrick Garland to replace Antonin Scalia. You know what she said??

"That's their job. There is nothing in the Constitution that says a President stops being President in his last year."

So... there you have it.

Oh, and in 2016 Chuck Schumer tweeted that the senate had confirmed a number of SCOTUS nominees in election years and that they should just, "do their job".
rfenst Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,100
MACS wrote:
Robert, do you believe the dems would do any different? Do you believe they'd tell the truth and say they did it simply because they were in control? Rhetorical questions... I don't believe it and I don't think you do either...


"That's their job. There is nothing in the Constitution that says a President stops being President in his last year."

So... there you have it.

No. No. And, I agree with you that I do not believe it.

RBG was right when she said what she did about the vacancy Obama wanted to fill. So, consistent with that I believe this is Trump's right to nominate someone and get them sworn in before the new Senate is sworn in, even even if before the Election.
ZRX1200 Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,476
I hope DJT picks Alex Jones.
DrafterX Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,508
I heard Kanye is in the running... Mellow
HockeyDad Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,065
I hope he picks that Hispanic woman from the Florida Supreme Court so we can watch the Democrats have to openly hate women and Hispanics.

I’ve already tired of all the RPG talk and they haven’t even taken her on tour and buried her yet.
Gene363 Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,669
Ted Cruz would my suggestion.
MACS Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,593
HockeyDad wrote:
I hope he picks that Hispanic woman from the Florida Supreme Court so we can watch the Democrats have to openly hate women and Hispanics.

I’ve already tired of all the RPG talk and they haven’t even taken her on tour and buried her yet.


Accurate.
frankj1 Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
Gene363 wrote:
Ted Cruz would my suggestion.

Trump would never nominate the son of the guy who killed JFK!
ZRX1200 Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,476
Joe Biden wrote:
Babe Ruth died?

frankj1 Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
awesome!
Gene363 Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,669
frankj1 wrote:
Trump would never nominate the son of the guy who killed JFK!


LOL!
rfenst Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,100
HockeyDad wrote:
I hope he picks that Hispanic woman from the Florida Supreme Court so we can watch the Democrats have to openly hate women and Hispanics.

I’ve already tired of all the RPG talk and they haven’t even taken her on tour and buried her yet.

Lagoa? Bad news for the little guy. Insufficient experience.
rfenst Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,100
Gene363 wrote:
Ted Cruz would my suggestion.

He is such an a-hole.
Supposedly extraordinarily smart per Alan Dershowitz, who was one of his law school professors.

I bet Bill Barr will be in the running. Oh, wait a minute. Trump said he is going to appoint a woman
rfenst Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,100
HockeyDad wrote:
... I’ve already tired of all the RPG talk and they haven’t even taken her on tour and buried her yet.

Jews burry the dead very fast. Usually just about two days after death, but sometimes/rarely three days after. She won't be embalmed either if she is getting a Jewish funeral. So, I'd be surprised if she is put on tour.
DrafterX Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,508
So, black peoples decompose slower..?? Huh
ZRX1200 Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,476
Than Jews yes, the Jews are eaten up by guilt.
gummy jones Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 07-06-2015
Posts: 7,969
I'd be okay waiting to nominate after the election

Let the November vote decide
DrafterX Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,508
Riots are scheduled if it happens before the election... seems to be the style of the times... Mellow
borndead1 Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 11-07-2006
Posts: 5,215
You know what would be absolutely f**king hilarious? If he nominated Kamala Harris. That would be some Ascended Master level trolling.

All joking aside, both parties pull crap like holding up nominations. The good thing is that in this day and age, 90% of what politicians say is recorded. So anyone espousing a hypocritical viewpoint on Supreme Court nominations should absolutely be shamed in the media.
HockeyDad Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,065
rfenst wrote:
Lagoa? Bad news for the little guy. Insufficient experience.


...and so it begins!
HockeyDad Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,065
ZRX1200 wrote:
Than Jews yes, the Jews are eaten up by guilt.


Kinda like being Catholic
Smooth light Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 06-26-2020
Posts: 3,598
Election's have consequences! Senate do your job now! Your in control now.😱
What you do is your campaign, voters are watching.💸

Babe Ruths are gone,💐
how about a Butterfingers!🍿

What! no parade,...
frankj1 Offline
#28 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
gummy jones wrote:
I'd be okay waiting to nominate after the election

Let the November vote decide

It would be the fair thing to do.
Proud to know ya.
HockeyDad Offline
#29 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,065
Nothing fair about that.
Smooth light Offline
#30 Posted:
Joined: 06-26-2020
Posts: 3,598
Yeah,I'm waiting to see pigs fly!

It's ok for them to procrastinate till we are all wet, and then give us the umbrella.

The parade of the fooled.

🎺🎺🎺📹📹📹🎷🎷🎷
ZRX1200 Offline
#31 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,476
Anyone gonna post RBG quotes about the Senate doing it’s job?


Or:


https://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/chuck-schumer-supreme-court-antonin-scalia-219392
Gene363 Offline
#32 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,669
ZRX1200 wrote:
Than Jews yes, the Jews are eaten up by guilt.


Most religions use guilt to keep you in line.
MACS Offline
#33 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,593
ZRX1200 wrote:
Anyone gonna post RBG quotes about the Senate doing it’s job?

Or:

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/chuck-schumer-supreme-court-antonin-scalia-219392


See post #6 homeslice... covered it.

It's only the "fair" thing to do because Trump has the con right now and the reps control the senate. Dems have Harry Reid to thank for the simple majority. Reap what you sow, f---ers.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#34 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,301
rfenst wrote:
Republicans are trying to distinguish the Garland nomination by Obama without a Senate consideration. The argument that things are different here because Trump and the Senate are from the same party, whereas Obama and the Senate were from different parties. A difference without distinction in my mind.

I wish McConnell and the Republicans would just tell the truth: That they will fill RBG's vacancy because they are simply in control right now and have the power to do so.

Personally, I feel Garland should have at least received a Senate hearing and vote (even though we know what the result would be). Similarly, I hate to admit it, but Trump should get the pick right now while in office, not after we decide who wins the Election.



You can thank the Kenyan King for that.

He really was the WORST President ever.
deadeyedick Offline
#35 Posted:
Joined: 03-13-2003
Posts: 16,957
The dems only need to persuade a couple of repubs in the Senate to block. (Collins) Going to be interesting how much money flows into Az to help Kelly (dem) as it's possible he could be confirmed as early as Nov 1st if he wins the seat and the polls have him ahead at this point.
Speyside Offline
#36 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Collins and Murcowski (SP? ) have already verbally flipped.
frankj1 Offline
#37 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
Collins looks like she will lose in Maine anyway.
I don't think Romney has made a statement yet, my be waiting out of respect for the dead.

Dems would need 3 more, unless Biden wins and the VP becomes the tie breaker...I think
ZRX1200 Offline
#38 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,476
Susan always has to try to keep her media friends happy.
delta1 Offline
#39 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
MACS wrote:
Robert, do you believe the dems would do any different? Do you believe they'd tell the truth and say they did it simply because they were in control? Rhetorical questions... I don't believe it and I don't think you do either.

Delta - In 2016, Ruth Bader Ginsburg was asked by the NY Times if she felt the Senate had an obligation to consider Obama nominee Merrick Garland to replace Antonin Scalia. You know what she said??

"That's their job. There is nothing in the Constitution that says a President stops being President in his last year."

So... there you have it.

Oh, and in 2016 Chuck Schumer tweeted that the senate had confirmed a number of SCOTUS nominees in election years and that they should just, "do their job".


yes, so why didn't they do the right thing then?

and more importantly, did YOU support McConnell's refusal to do his job then?
delta1 Offline
#40 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
rfenst wrote:
He is such an a-hole.
Supposedly extraordinarily smart per Alan Dershowitz, who was one of his law school professors.

I bet Bill Barr will be in the running. Oh, wait a minute. Trump said he is going to appoint a woman



he's so in love with Trump, he may do a sex change operation to qualify...
delta1 Offline
#41 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
DrMaddVibe wrote:
You can thank the Kenyan King for that.

He really was the WORST President ever.



Think ...but.... McConnell
delta1 Offline
#42 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
ZRX1200 wrote:
Anyone gonna post RBG quotes about the Senate doing it’s job?


Or:


https://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/chuck-schumer-supreme-court-antonin-scalia-219392


so why didn't they in 2016?


if the GOP pushes through a Trump SCOTUS nominee now, after ignoring a legitimate nominee in 2016...


prepare for a 13 member SCOTUS...
MACS Offline
#43 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,593
delta1 wrote:
yes, so why didn't they do the right thing then?

and more importantly, did YOU support McConnell's refusal to do his job then?


I did not follow that very closely, but as a conservative I can't say I'm upset with the outcome.
MACS Offline
#44 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,593
delta1 wrote:
so why didn't they in 2016?


if the GOP pushes through a Trump SCOTUS nominee now, after ignoring a legitimate nominee in 2016...


prepare for a 13 member SCOTUS...


So... temper tantrum because they don't get their way and lets change the constitution because of it? Typical lefty reaction.
nitro6526 Offline
#45 Posted:
Joined: 09-13-2010
Posts: 1,022
Court packing has been floated for years. Increase to 15 SCOTUS justices to make the court more liberal.
HockeyDad Offline
#46 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,065
delta1 wrote:
so why didn't they in 2016?


if the GOP pushes through a Trump SCOTUS nominee now, after ignoring a legitimate nominee in 2016...


prepare for a 13 member SCOTUS...



It’s only a matter of time before tyranny is established by the Democrats.
ZRX1200 Offline
#47 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,476
Advise and consent.


What ever happened to #metoo ?????
ZRX1200 Offline
#48 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,476
So we want to set precedents but not live by them when it hurts us.

Got it
Speyside Offline
#49 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Um you can not add to SCOTUS. Judicial circuits act.
rfenst Offline
#50 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,100
borndead1 wrote:
You know what would be absolutely f**king hilarious? If he nominated Kamala Harris. That would be some Ascended Master level trolling.

All joking aside, both parties pull crap like holding up nominations. The good thing is that in this day and age, 90% of what politicians say is recorded. So anyone espousing a hypocritical viewpoint on Supreme Court nominations should absolutely be shamed in the media.

You would think that those R's- having been recorded back in 2016 when the R's scuttled Obama's pick (Merrick Garland)- would choose the same course of action again this time based on immediate past precedent. Yet, even when shown their 2016 past recordings on the same issue during tv interviews over the last couple of days (most notably McConnell, Graham and others), would look at the issue the same way as they did in 2016 and wait until after the Election. But there is no room for intellectual honesty when it comes to high-stakes political drama. Looking for it is a waste of time and energy.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
3 Pages123>