Trump claims Senate has a Constitutional duty to vote on Presidential nominees.......what about Garland?

[Syriusly]

Today Trump said. “The Constitution provides a mechanism for the president to fill positions in such circumstances, the recess appointment it’s called. The Senate’s practice of gaveling into so-called pro forma sessions where no one is even there has prevented me from using the constitutional authority that we’re given under the recess provisions. The Senate should either fulfill its duty and vote on my nominees or it should formally adjourn so that I can make recess appointments.”

Remember the Senate refused to hold hearings, or vote on Obama's appointment of Garland for 293.

So does the Senate have an obligation to vote on a President's nominees as Trump claims? Or doesn't it?

 

[OldLady]

Today Trump said. “The Constitution provides a mechanism for the president to fill positions in such circumstances, the recess appointment it’s called. The Senate’s practice of gaveling into so-called pro forma sessions where no one is even there has prevented me from using the constitutional authority that we’re given under the recess provisions. The Senate should either fulfill its duty and vote on my nominees or it should formally adjourn so that I can make recess appointments.”

Remember the Senate refused to hold hearings, or vote on Obama's appointment of Garland for 293.

So does the Senate have an obligation to vote on a President's nominees as Trump claims? Or doesn't it?

Maybe we should wait and let the people decide.
lol

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

Today Trump said. “The Constitution provides a mechanism for the president to fill positions in such circumstances, the recess appointment it’s called. The Senate’s practice of gaveling into so-called pro forma sessions where no one is even there has prevented me from using the constitutional authority that we’re given under the recess provisions. The Senate should either fulfill its duty and vote on my nominees or it should formally adjourn so that I can make recess appointments.”

Remember the Senate refused to hold hearings, or vote on Obama's appointment of Garland for 293.

So does the Senate have an obligation to vote on a President's nominees as Trump claims? Or doesn't it?

3 years and 3 months into his presidency, he chooses now to make a fuss about it? Wonder why? The need for a distraction..perhaps?
Oh and good luck with that adjournment thing.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Trump hasn't had any trouble with judges.....gotta be for other positions

 

[Syriusly]

Trump: The current practice of leaving of town while conducting phony pro forma sessions is a dereliction of duty that the American people cannot afford during this crisis. It is a scam what they do.”

I don't remember anyone on the right having any problem with the Senate doing just that in order to block Obama from making recess appointments.

I look forward to pointing out the hypocrisy of each poster here who attacked Obama for attempting to bypass the Senate with recess appointments- but is supporting Trump's attempts to do the exact same thing.

 

[Rambunctious]

Send them all home and make "temporary appointments"...if government in the house and senate is not working for the people at a time like this then send the worthless aholes home....

 

[my2¢]

So does the Senate have an obligation to vote on a President's nominees as Trump claims? Or doesn't it?

Just as with the Garland nomination, my position is that our elected officials have a moral obligation to get off their butts and perform the job we taxpayers are paying them for.

 

[The VOR]

Trump hasn't had any trouble with judges.....gotta be for other positions

You mean moscow mitch hasn't had any trouble with judges.

He's the one who tells the idiot-in-chief who to nominate, and then he pushes these incompentent ideologues through.

trump is too lazy and stupid to even know who these people are that moscow mitch tells him to nominate.

I bet if the idiot was asked on the spot who the 2 supreme court judges he nominated were, he wouldn't be able to tell you off the top of his head.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Today Trump said. “The Constitution provides a mechanism for the president to fill positions in such circumstances, the recess appointment it’s called. The Senate’s practice of gaveling into so-called pro forma sessions where no one is even there has prevented me from using the constitutional authority that we’re given under the recess provisions. The Senate should either fulfill its duty and vote on my nominees or it should formally adjourn so that I can make recess appointments.”

Remember the Senate refused to hold hearings, or vote on Obama's appointment of Garland for 293.

So does the Senate have an obligation to vote on a President's nominees as Trump claims? Or doesn't it?

Maybe we should wait and let the people decide.
lol

They already have.

 

[westwall]

Today Trump said. “The Constitution provides a mechanism for the president to fill positions in such circumstances, the recess appointment it’s called. The Senate’s practice of gaveling into so-called pro forma sessions where no one is even there has prevented me from using the constitutional authority that we’re given under the recess provisions. The Senate should either fulfill its duty and vote on my nominees or it should formally adjourn so that I can make recess appointments.”

Remember the Senate refused to hold hearings, or vote on Obama's appointment of Garland for 293.

So does the Senate have an obligation to vote on a President's nominees as Trump claims? Or doesn't it?

Mitch employed the "biden" rule. Take your complaint to Joe

 

[Syriusly]

Today Trump said. “The Constitution provides a mechanism for the president to fill positions in such circumstances, the recess appointment it’s called. The Senate’s practice of gaveling into so-called pro forma sessions where no one is even there has prevented me from using the constitutional authority that we’re given under the recess provisions. The Senate should either fulfill its duty and vote on my nominees or it should formally adjourn so that I can make recess appointments.”

Remember the Senate refused to hold hearings, or vote on Obama's appointment of Garland for 293.

So does the Senate have an obligation to vote on a President's nominees as Trump claims? Or doesn't it?

Mitch employed the "biden" rule. Take your complaint to Joe

I notice you refused to even address what Trump said.

I am sure you had an opinion when Garland was nominated and the Senate refused to consider him.

Do you agree with Trump- that the Senate had an obligation to vote on Obama's nominees?

Or do you disagree with Trump?

 

[Pogo]

Today Trump said. “The Constitution provides a mechanism for the president to fill positions in such circumstances, the recess appointment it’s called. The Senate’s practice of gaveling into so-called pro forma sessions where no one is even there has prevented me from using the constitutional authority that we’re given under the recess provisions. The Senate should either fulfill its duty and vote on my nominees or it should formally adjourn so that I can make recess appointments.”

Remember the Senate refused to hold hearings, or vote on Obama's appointment of Garland for 293.

So does the Senate have an obligation to vote on a President's nominees as Trump claims? Or doesn't it?

Mitch employed the "biden" rule. Take your complaint to Joe

CLASSIC Tu Quoque.

That's Latin for "But Mo-om, he started it!"

 

[westwall]

Today Trump said. “The Constitution provides a mechanism for the president to fill positions in such circumstances, the recess appointment it’s called. The Senate’s practice of gaveling into so-called pro forma sessions where no one is even there has prevented me from using the constitutional authority that we’re given under the recess provisions. The Senate should either fulfill its duty and vote on my nominees or it should formally adjourn so that I can make recess appointments.”

Remember the Senate refused to hold hearings, or vote on Obama's appointment of Garland for 293.

So does the Senate have an obligation to vote on a President's nominees as Trump claims? Or doesn't it?

Mitch employed the "biden" rule. Take your complaint to Joe

CLASSIC Tu Quoque.

That's Latin for "But Mo-om, he started it!"

And?

 

[Jitss617]

Today Trump said. “The Constitution provides a mechanism for the president to fill positions in such circumstances, the recess appointment it’s called. The Senate’s practice of gaveling into so-called pro forma sessions where no one is even there has prevented me from using the constitutional authority that we’re given under the recess provisions. The Senate should either fulfill its duty and vote on my nominees or it should formally adjourn so that I can make recess appointments.”

Remember the Senate refused to hold hearings, or vote on Obama's appointment of Garland for 293.

So does the Senate have an obligation to vote on a President's nominees as Trump claims? Or doesn't it?

What about ism lol

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The wise man takes advantage where he finds it.