Reporters Laugh at White House Defense of Joe Biden’s Prior Supreme Court Remarks

Stephanie

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2004
70,230
10,865
2,040
I don't how anyone supports this progressive/dem party that is filled with nothing but Two Faced Hypocrites and liars. If they weren't such a danger to us all we could just sit here and laugh at them.
unbelievable how they play games with all of our lives for their agenda and dirty politics. and more unbelievable is people (their base) falls for it.
Video at the site
snip:

White House spokesman Josh Earnest’s artful dodge on Tuesday about Vice President Joe Biden’s 1992 argument against the president nominating a Supreme Court justice during an election year prompted laughter from the press corps.

In the wake of the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, the debate over whether President Obama should nominate his replacement in a contentious election year has flared up in Washington. Obama has pledged to choose a replacement in the coming weeks, while Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee are determined not to hold hearings.

Biden helped the GOP case when newly unearthed video from 1992 showed him arguing President George Bush should consider holding off on a nomination until after the election.

“Should Senate Republicans take the advice of Joe Biden from 1992 when he said action on a Supreme Court nomination must be put off until after the election campaign is over, or Joe Biden of 2016 who insists the president’s nominees should get full consideration?” reporter Kevin Freking asked.

“Kevin, I’d go with both,” Earnest said, as some reporters sitting around him laughed. “Because Vice President Biden in 1992 in the same speech that you noted said if the president consults and cooperates with the Senate, or moderates his selections absent consultation, then his nominees may enjoy my support as did Justices Kennedy and Souter.”

However, Earnest’s words are countered by the fact that Obama already rejected the idea that he would nominate a moderate justice. His prior picks, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, are two of the left-leaning members of the Court.

Earnest went on to defend Biden’s tenure as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“He wasn’t just in the United States Senate so that he could confirm Supreme Court justices appointed by Democrats,” Earnest said. “I know there’s often this old adage that sometimes politicians are reduced to the expression that people should do as I say, not as I did. In this instance, we actually want the Republicans in the Senate to do precisely as Vice President Biden did when he served in the Senate.”

Freking asked if Earnest would acknowledge that Biden’s prior words had made it more difficult for Obama’s nominee to get a hearing this year.

“I would not, precisely because of Vice President Biden’s record when he served on the Judiciary Committee,” Earnest said.

The line of questioning showed how tough Biden’s prior rhetoric will be for the White House to wave off.

“It is my view that if a Supreme Court justice resigns tomorrow or within the next several weeks, or resigns at the end of the summer, President Bush should consider following the practice of a majority of his predecessors and not, and not, name a nominee until after the November election is completed,“ Biden said at the time.

Biden repeated the argument later on, according to an old Washington Post article

all of it here:
Reporters Laugh at White House Defense of Joe Biden’s Prior Supreme Court Remarks
 
This is not even debatable anymore. Republicans should NOT consider a nominee until after the election season. Democrats have made the argument for them. Case closed.
 
I don't know how many times (or we should say: years), the Clintons has used this LIE for all their corruption, lies, blowjobs and it goes on and on and on. The character of these people (democrat snakes) don't seem to matter in this day and age. that's why we have a Monster Overbearing Government now steamrolling over US. Video at the site

SNIP:

Hillary Aide Claims ‘Right Wing Conspiracy’ Behind Judge’s Decision To Force Hillary To Testify Under Oath, But Judge Was Appointed By Bill Clinton



Via The Blaze:

Hillary Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook said a federal judge’s ruling that Clinton and her top aides should be questioned under oath about the candidate’s private email server is part of the ring wing’s effort to hurt her chances of becoming president — he was then confronted with an inconvenient fact.

Asked by CNN anchor Jake Tapper about the latest development in the months-long email scandal, Mook tried to dismiss the judge’s ruling as a “right-wing” group’s attempt to hurt Clinton’s chances of becoming president.

Tapper was quick to point out that Judge Emmett Sullivan, who sits on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, was appointed by Clinton’s own husband, Bill Clinton.

“It’s the judge’s decision to make,” Mook responded. “My point is this was promulgated by a right-wing group.”

Indeed, Sullivan was appointed to his current position in 1994 by then-President Bill Clinton.

all of it here:
Hillary Aide Claims ‘Right Wing Conspiracy’ Behind Judge’s Decision To Force Hillary To Testify Under Oath, But Judge Was Appointed By Bill Clinton | Weasel Zippers
 
This is not even debatable anymore. Republicans should NOT consider a nominee until after the election season. Democrats have made the argument for them. Case closed.
Yes...an excellent idea. The GOP shouldn't do anything. Shut it down again. That's a winning ticket.

Because based on comments by prominent Democrats in the past they wouldn't do the exact same thing? LOL Please, don't even try denying it. Besides, this way you and I get a say on who makes the pick with our vote in November. Don't you want a say in this?
 
"But Biden’s full speech undermines their claim. Rather than urging his colleagues to deny Bush’s potential nominee a hearing, Biden was bemoaning the politicization of the confirmation process — hence his suggestion of not holding a hearing in the heat of a presidential election — and what he saw as Bush’s refusal to properly consult with the Senate in selecting a nominee. In fact, just 10 minutes after calling for temporary inaction on Bush’s candidate, Biden actually promised to consider a moderate Supreme Court nominee." No, Joe Biden Didn’t Say That The Senate Should Block Supreme Court Nominees During An Election Year
 

Forum List

Back
Top