Blumenthal, The Liar, Says He Won't Legitimize Barrett's Nomination

[buckeye45_73]

He made a FALSE STATEMENT , he said the process was illegitimate, meaning Unconstitutional, that is a LIE, it is untrue and the Senator KNOWS it. And so do you.

Illegitimate according to the McConnell rule.

There is NO RULE dumb ass. Or perhaps you can post for us the Senate rules and the link to the specific rule in question? And he meant it was Constitutional.

He didn't mention the constitution. You're trying REALLY hard to mash those two puzzle pieces together.

BE SPECIFIC FUCKWAD and explain what he menat when he said nominating her was illegitimate? What Law what bill what process makes it so?

Someone sounds cranky.

Show me where he mentioned the constitution, specifically.

HE didn't, he called it a sham.....but if it's constitutional, it's not a sham........see it's not hard to figure out......

 

[RetiredGySgt]

He made a FALSE STATEMENT , he said the process was illegitimate, meaning Unconstitutional, that is a LIE, it is untrue and the Senator KNOWS it. And so do you.

Illegitimate according to the McConnell rule.

There is NO RULE dumb ass. Or perhaps you can post for us the Senate rules and the link to the specific rule in question? And he meant it was Constitutional.

He didn't mention the constitution. You're trying REALLY hard to mash those two puzzle pieces together.

BE SPECIFIC FUCKWAD and explain what he menat when he said nominating her was illegitimate? What Law what bill what process makes it so?

Someone sounds cranky.

Show me where he mentioned the constitution, specifically.

Answer the question RETARD. In order for it to be illegitimate it has to violate some law or the Constitution. Since no law is involved he means the Constitution, I suspect even an 8 year old can grasp that concept.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

I'm telling all of you.

This fucker can die for all I care.

You are wasting your time as he is only interested in playing obtuse roles just to irritate you.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

It is fun showing just how stupid IGNORANT and retarded his games are though, any one not drinking the koolaid knows exactly what he is doing and are laughing their asses off every time we call him on it and he tries to shuck and chive his way out.

 

[XponentialChaos]

What is it about "shall" that you don't understand?

Article 2, Section 2, Clauses 2 and 3​

and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court,

.

The part where you guys said that we shouldn't nominate supreme court judges in the last year prior to an election.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

The bitch from Hawaii is not going to see her either.

But, at least she didn't demonstrate her stupidity.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

What is it about "shall" that you don't understand?

Article 2, Section 2, Clauses 2 and 3​

and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court,

.

The part where you guys said that we shouldn't nominate supreme court judges in the last year prior to an election.

buckeye45_73 & RetiredGySgt

Don't say I didn't warn you.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

What is it about "shall" that you don't understand?

Article 2, Section 2, Clauses 2 and 3​

and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court,

.

The part where you guys said that we shouldn't nominate supreme court judges in the last year prior to an election.

BUT Mitch never said that. He said if the Senate is not controlled by the President then the nomination is dead on arrival. And it is NOT a law, nor a rule, or perhaps you can link us to the senate rule in question?

 

[toobfreak]

Sen. Blumenthal said he refuses 'to treat this process as legitimate.'

He must mean the process that a few years ago, his party ostentatiously demanded was the DUTY OF THE PRESIDENT.

Good. Let him step aside and be counted out. He can sit in the back of the room eating Kentucky Fried Chicken with the rest of the A-holes.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

the Blumethal who said he fought in Vietman and it was a lie?

that piece of crap?

THAT PIECE OF CRAP?????????

Really, in many ways.....I am O.K. with it.

1. It shows Blumenthal as someone who isn't interested in his duties as a member of the judiciary committee.
2. Why would we want to put a wonder woman in the same room with a lying prick.

I guess maybe this is better.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

What is it about "shall" that you don't understand?

Article 2, Section 2, Clauses 2 and 3​

and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court,

.

The part where you guys said that we shouldn't nominate supreme court judges in the last year prior to an election.

BUT Mitch never said that. He said if the Senate is not controlled by the President then the nomination is dead on arrival. And it is NOT a law, nor a rule, or perhaps you can link us to the senate rule in question?

He knows it.

You know it.

I know it.

He's just trying to piss you off.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

What is it about "shall" that you don't understand?

Article 2, Section 2, Clauses 2 and 3​

and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court,

.

The part where you guys said that we shouldn't nominate supreme court judges in the last year prior to an election.

BUT Mitch never said that. He said if the Senate is not controlled by the President then the nomination is dead on arrival. And it is NOT a law, nor a rule, or perhaps you can link us to the senate rule in question?

He knows it.

You know it.

I know it.

He's just trying to piss you off.

BUT he isn't I am having fun at HIS expense.

 

[buckeye45_73]

What is it about "shall" that you don't understand?

Article 2, Section 2, Clauses 2 and 3​

and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court,

.

The part where you guys said that we shouldn't nominate supreme court judges in the last year prior to an election.

Dude, you didn't get the nominee because the R said no....it's that easy......Obama nominated somone, and now so has Trump......but the same guys are in charge and they are going to pass this one. WHY? Because they want to.......it's not a sham, it's Constitutional.....


and like I said...after the way Kavanaugh was treated (And Thoms and Bork).....I just laugh about it and do not care, McConnell fucked you.....he did.....but you deserve it....what you put Kavanaugh through was beyond shameful and I couldn't care any less of what the democrats think...they are psycho nutjobs........

 

[XponentialChaos]

What is it about "shall" that you don't understand?

Article 2, Section 2, Clauses 2 and 3​

and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court,

.

The part where you guys said that we shouldn't nominate supreme court judges in the last year prior to an election.

BUT Mitch never said that. He said if the Senate is not controlled by the President then the nomination is dead on arrival. And it is NOT a law, nor a rule, or perhaps you can link us to the senate rule in question?

It's inconsistent. That's the issue and you know it.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Now FuckyChuckySchumer is going to make this about health care.

He does not realize we confirm judges who care about his social programs.

We care about judges who uphold the consitution.

Unlike the Dyke patrol (Kagen, Sotomeyer, and Ginsburg), Barrett will focus on the constitution.

I look forward to the day I can piss on Chucks grave.

He's totally unAmerican.

 

[OKTexas]

Sure it does, but it's politics.....Blumenthal gains nothing by being tacky, McConnell gains a USCJ......

Oh ok. So you think it's ok when Mitch is tacky, but it's not ok when Blumenthal is tacky. Thanks for clarifying.

Fuck off.

Really. Get off the thread. You want to defend Blumenthal's ignorance of the constitution, go ahead. Otherwise STFU.

What ignorance of the constitution is he demonstrating?

Oh right, nothing. Every one of his actions is perfectly compliant with the constitution and you just have no idea what you're talking about.

From the link in the OP:

Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee and will play a role in confirmation hearings, said he would oppose her confirmation “as I would any nominee proposed as part of this illegitimate sham process, barely one month before an election as Americans are already casting their votes.”

Is the nomination and confirmation of a supreme court justice an illegitimate sham process? Last I read, it is mandated by the Constitution. That shows the blooming idiot ignorant of the Constitution.

.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

What is it about "shall" that you don't understand?

Article 2, Section 2, Clauses 2 and 3​

and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court,

.

The part where you guys said that we shouldn't nominate supreme court judges in the last year prior to an election.

BUT Mitch never said that. He said if the Senate is not controlled by the President then the nomination is dead on arrival. And it is NOT a law, nor a rule, or perhaps you can link us to the senate rule in question?

It's inconsistent. That's the issue and you know it.

There is no arbitration of this one.

You are right.

And guess what.....

We don't give a shit.

She's in. Your fucked.

Why don't you do us a favor and catch Covid.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

What is it about "shall" that you don't understand?

Article 2, Section 2, Clauses 2 and 3​

and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court,

.

The part where you guys said that we shouldn't nominate supreme court judges in the last year prior to an election.

BUT Mitch never said that. He said if the Senate is not controlled by the President then the nomination is dead on arrival. And it is NOT a law, nor a rule, or perhaps you can link us to the senate rule in question?

It's inconsistent. That's the issue and you know it.

NO it is not RETARD. Mitch said that the Republican Senate would not vote on a Democrats Nominee in an election year. It is now a Republican President and a republican Senate. Nothing inconsistent about it.

 

[XponentialChaos]

What is it about "shall" that you don't understand?

Article 2, Section 2, Clauses 2 and 3​

and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court,

.

The part where you guys said that we shouldn't nominate supreme court judges in the last year prior to an election.

Dude, you didn't get the nominee because the R said no....it's that easy......Obama nominated somone, and now so has Trump......but the same guys are in charge and they are going to pass this one. WHY? Because they want to.......it's not a sham, it's Constitutional.....


and like I said...after the way Kavanaugh was treated (And Thoms and Bork).....I just laugh about it and do not care, McConnell fucked you.....he did.....but you deserve it....what you put Kavanaugh through was beyond shameful and I couldn't care any less of what the democrats think...they are psycho nutjobs........

Has that ever happened before? Where the

Sure it does, but it's politics.....Blumenthal gains nothing by being tacky, McConnell gains a USCJ......

Oh ok. So you think it's ok when Mitch is tacky, but it's not ok when Blumenthal is tacky. Thanks for clarifying.

Fuck off.

Really. Get off the thread. You want to defend Blumenthal's ignorance of the constitution, go ahead. Otherwise STFU.

What ignorance of the constitution is he demonstrating?

Oh right, nothing. Every one of his actions is perfectly compliant with the constitution and you just have no idea what you're talking about.

From the link in the OP:

Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee and will play a role in confirmation hearings, said he would oppose her confirmation “as I would any nominee proposed as part of this illegitimate sham process, barely one month before an election as Americans are already casting their votes.”

Is the nomination and confirmation of a supreme court justice an illegitimate sham process? Last I read, it is mandated by the Constitution. That shows the blooming idiot ignorant of the Constitution.

.

I'm pretty sure his issue with the nomination isn't due to the constitution, but due to the hypocrisy in the rules from the Senate.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

He is right. According to McConnell’s rule of 2016 ....and Republican statements.

Blumenthal’s not the problem...you lot are.

What every Republican senator has said about filling a Supreme Court vacancy in an election year

Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death leaves a vacancy on the Supreme Court just before the presidential election, as Justice Antonin Scalia's did in 2016, when Barack Obama was president. Here’s what Senate Republicans said in 2016, and what they’ve said publicly now.

www.pbs.org

Bullshit.

Everyone knows what 2016 was about.

Why don't you do some real reading before posting and making an ass of yourself.

Yes. It was about preventing a president from legitimately filling a vacancy by creating a brand new “rule” that was promptly abandoned in 2020. I don’t know why you act ignorant.

Oh right, opposing parties in the WH and Senate have only filled two such vacancies in US history. It was nothing unprecedented or even unusual for that matter.

.

Yes, and everyone knows that too.

Except, apparently Coyote