Sen. Blumenthal makes threats on Senate floor if ACB is confirmed to SC.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Turtlesoup

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2020
Messages
3,186
Reaction score
3,788
Points
1,893
Everything in life has Consequences

Those consequences could be adding judges to the court or ending the filibuster

Another consequence will be an end of cooperation with Republicans
What cooperation with republicans? the only time that the dems won't to compromise is when they are completely out of power.

It doesn't matter if the republicans put the SC in or not-----the dems are still going to pack the court at the first chance they get. It's about power and money---and they are being paid to chose SC.
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
70,466
Reaction score
12,367
Points
2,210
I
STFU you stolen valor POS.

How is this Crypt Keeper looking asswipe even in the Senate?

Elections have consequences.
Yes. One of those consequences is the president nominates Supreme Court justices.
Another consequence is that the senate confirms the nominee.
Well...you know, when you change the norms and rules, there will be consequences.

If the Dems get the Senate and Executive, why shouldn't they take a page from your playbook and add justices? Any good reason not to now that you've set precedents?
Republicans didn't add justices, they filled open seats. If dems regain control I support them filling any open seats that come available. But ADDING seats? Oh hell no.

And if you want to start that game, when republicans regain control they'll stack the court again.
Democrats will fill open seats that were created by a Constitutionally elected Congress

Who could object to Congress doing its job?
Run it up to 15 seats and enjoy your 9-6 Libtard majority.

Once Republicans get control there is nothing preventing them from running it down to 6 and throwing all 9 libs off the court.

6-0 Majority.

:oops8:
LOLOL

You're such a fucking imbecile, putz ... the Constitution is preventing them, ya moron, which only allows for impeachment to remove a SC justice.
Impeach them. We are in power, Putz.

Nwxt?
LOLOL

You think you control the House???

What part of “ once Republicans get control” is confusing to you, Simpleton?
Good Lord, you have the reading comprehension skills of a box of retarded hair.
Putz, your words, "Impeach them. We are in power, Putz."

Are you ever not a flaming imbecile?

Ever??
 

Turtlesoup

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2020
Messages
3,186
Reaction score
3,788
Points
1,893
If you and yours want to increase the number of justices IF you have the power, do it. But remember the worm always turns and someday, probably soon, the Republicans will control the White House and Senate again and two can play your game. Ending the judicial filibuster already bit you on the ass with Barret. Are you really sure that you want to double down on a losing hand?
Republicans knew that their new rule of an opposition party does not confirm SCOTUS judges would someday bite them in the ass.......But they lived in the present and did it anyway.

Same thing with adding judges to the court. Dems will live in the present and expand the court. They are willing to bank that it may be decades before Republicans win the White House and all of Congress
It's not a new rule. In hte entire history of out country there have been only ten nominations when control of the Senate and White House were split during an election year and eight of those ten failed to be confirmed. The first nomination not to be confirmed under these circumstances happened in 1828.
Tell the rest of the story

Was the President ultimately allowed to fill the seat or not?
Nope. The President nominates. That’s where his power ends, Stupid.

He nominated.
He sure did and the Senate left the seat vacant for a year

That same Constitution says Congress can decide the size of the court
Obama had the ability to nominate any number of potential justices until he found one that was an acceptable compromise with the Senate. He simply chose not to do that. He's the one who left the seat open for nearly a year.
You might actually have a point if that is what happened

Mitch McConnell proclaimed he would not allow Obama to fill that seat before Scalias body was even cold
Because Obama wanted to change the "polarity" of the seat. Up until that point there had been a gentlemen's agreement to keep the court balanced to reduce the politicicalization of the court. That's why most justices were easily confirmed with near unanimity before the Democrats decided to legislate from the bench.
So it's ok for Republicans to flip the "polarity" of a seat, but not for Democrats?
What goes around comes around. You guys broke the gentleman's agreement, why should we be bound by it any more? You guys wanted bare-knuckle politics when you held all the House, Senate and Presidency, you can't complain when we play by your rules.
Great, then you'll be onboard when Democrats #PackTheCourt.
I can’t stress enough how bad of an idea it is to go down this path.
Republicans wanted to politicize that bench, now the toothpaste is out of the tube.

#PackTheCourt
all because the position should be filled by now. so revert back to kindergarten and waa--waaa--waaaa
Nope, now thanks to McConnell, there is no rush to fill a vacancy. The Senate can now even tell a president they will never fill a vacancy. Meaning if Democrats win the Senate and Impeached Trump wins the presidency and yet another SC seat opens up in January, 2021, Democrats can tell him to fuck off and leave the seat open for 4 years until the next president is seated.
The McConnell Rule now says that an opposition Senate will not fill SCOTUS seats
What RULE are you blabbing about---there is no RULE just laws in congress.
 
OP
Nostra

Nostra

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
18,306
Reaction score
13,844
Points
2,415
I
STFU you stolen valor POS.

How is this Crypt Keeper looking asswipe even in the Senate?

Elections have consequences.
Yes. One of those consequences is the president nominates Supreme Court justices.
Another consequence is that the senate confirms the nominee.
Well...you know, when you change the norms and rules, there will be consequences.

If the Dems get the Senate and Executive, why shouldn't they take a page from your playbook and add justices? Any good reason not to now that you've set precedents?
Republicans didn't add justices, they filled open seats. If dems regain control I support them filling any open seats that come available. But ADDING seats? Oh hell no.

And if you want to start that game, when republicans regain control they'll stack the court again.
Democrats will fill open seats that were created by a Constitutionally elected Congress

Who could object to Congress doing its job?
Run it up to 15 seats and enjoy your 9-6 Libtard majority.

Once Republicans get control there is nothing preventing them from running it down to 6 and throwing all 9 libs off the court.

6-0 Majority.

:oops8:
LOLOL

You're such a fucking imbecile, putz ... the Constitution is preventing them, ya moron, which only allows for impeachment to remove a SC justice.
Impeach them. We are in power, Putz.

Nwxt?
LOLOL

You think you control the House???

What part of “ once Republicans get control” is confusing to you, Simpleton?
Good Lord, you have the reading comprehension skills of a box of retarded hair.
Putz, your words, "Impeach them. We are in power, Putz."

Are you ever not a flaming imbecile?

Ever??
Yep, that was the scenario we were talking about.

Learn to read for comprehension you blithering idiot. Try to follow a conversation for once in your life, Ignoramus.
 

Pete7469

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2013
Messages
23,414
Reaction score
8,007
Points
900
Location
The Real World
LOL dumbass since when have they ever cooperated. Dayum I didn't think it possible but you seem to be getting even stupider everyday now. How do you manage it, drugs?
I think a lot of these bed wetters use aerosols, or glue.

The idea that the democrooks have "compromised" or "cooperated" with the GOP is ridiculous. They started the civil war for Christ's sake, terrorized the country with the KKK and dragged us into every global conflict they could find, embraced every enemy we had from the soviets to the chinese and radical jihadists, and have opposed everything that created or protected prosperity. They have been nothing but a treasonous political mafia for the last 160 years.


.
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
70,466
Reaction score
12,367
Points
2,210
I
STFU you stolen valor POS.

How is this Crypt Keeper looking asswipe even in the Senate?

Elections have consequences.
Yes. One of those consequences is the president nominates Supreme Court justices.
Another consequence is that the senate confirms the nominee.
Well...you know, when you change the norms and rules, there will be consequences.

If the Dems get the Senate and Executive, why shouldn't they take a page from your playbook and add justices? Any good reason not to now that you've set precedents?
Republicans didn't add justices, they filled open seats. If dems regain control I support them filling any open seats that come available. But ADDING seats? Oh hell no.

And if you want to start that game, when republicans regain control they'll stack the court again.
Democrats will fill open seats that were created by a Constitutionally elected Congress

Who could object to Congress doing its job?
Run it up to 15 seats and enjoy your 9-6 Libtard majority.

Once Republicans get control there is nothing preventing them from running it down to 6 and throwing all 9 libs off the court.

6-0 Majority.

:oops8:
LOLOL

You're such a fucking imbecile, putz ... the Constitution is preventing them, ya moron, which only allows for impeachment to remove a SC justice.
Impeach them. We are in power, Putz.

Nwxt?
LOLOL

You think you control the House???

What part of “ once Republicans get control” is confusing to you, Simpleton?
Good Lord, you have the reading comprehension skills of a box of retarded hair.
Putz, your words, "Impeach them. We are in power, Putz."

Are you ever not a flaming imbecile?

Ever??
Yep, that was the scenario we were talking about.

Learn to read for comprehension you blithering idiot. Try to follow a conversation for once in your life, Ignoramus.
Yeah, "we are in power" is present tense. Guess what, Spunky, you are not in power of the House.
 
OP
Nostra

Nostra

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
18,306
Reaction score
13,844
Points
2,415
I
STFU you stolen valor POS.

How is this Crypt Keeper looking asswipe even in the Senate?

Elections have consequences.
Yes. One of those consequences is the president nominates Supreme Court justices.
Another consequence is that the senate confirms the nominee.
Well...you know, when you change the norms and rules, there will be consequences.

If the Dems get the Senate and Executive, why shouldn't they take a page from your playbook and add justices? Any good reason not to now that you've set precedents?
Republicans didn't add justices, they filled open seats. If dems regain control I support them filling any open seats that come available. But ADDING seats? Oh hell no.

And if you want to start that game, when republicans regain control they'll stack the court again.
Democrats will fill open seats that were created by a Constitutionally elected Congress

Who could object to Congress doing its job?
Run it up to 15 seats and enjoy your 9-6 Libtard majority.

Once Republicans get control there is nothing preventing them from running it down to 6 and throwing all 9 libs off the court.

6-0 Majority.

:oops8:
LOLOL

You're such a fucking imbecile, putz ... the Constitution is preventing them, ya moron, which only allows for impeachment to remove a SC justice.
Impeach them. We are in power, Putz.

Nwxt?
LOLOL

You think you control the House???

What part of “ once Republicans get control” is confusing to you, Simpleton?
Good Lord, you have the reading comprehension skills of a box of retarded hair.
Putz, your words, "Impeach them. We are in power, Putz."

Are you ever not a flaming imbecile?

Ever??
Yep, that was the scenario we were talking about.

Learn to read for comprehension you blithering idiot. Try to follow a conversation for once in your life, Ignoramus.
Yeah, "we are in power" is present tense. Guess what, Spunky, you are not in power of the House.
Yep, present tense in the context of the conversation we were having before you butted in to make a fool of yourself.

Your colossal inability to follow the simplest of conversations is astounding.......until one realized what a complete moron you are.
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
70,466
Reaction score
12,367
Points
2,210
I
STFU you stolen valor POS.

How is this Crypt Keeper looking asswipe even in the Senate?

Elections have consequences.
Yes. One of those consequences is the president nominates Supreme Court justices.
Another consequence is that the senate confirms the nominee.
Well...you know, when you change the norms and rules, there will be consequences.

If the Dems get the Senate and Executive, why shouldn't they take a page from your playbook and add justices? Any good reason not to now that you've set precedents?
Republicans didn't add justices, they filled open seats. If dems regain control I support them filling any open seats that come available. But ADDING seats? Oh hell no.

And if you want to start that game, when republicans regain control they'll stack the court again.
Democrats will fill open seats that were created by a Constitutionally elected Congress

Who could object to Congress doing its job?
Run it up to 15 seats and enjoy your 9-6 Libtard majority.

Once Republicans get control there is nothing preventing them from running it down to 6 and throwing all 9 libs off the court.

6-0 Majority.

:oops8:
LOLOL

You're such a fucking imbecile, putz ... the Constitution is preventing them, ya moron, which only allows for impeachment to remove a SC justice.
Impeach them. We are in power, Putz.

Nwxt?
LOLOL

You think you control the House???

What part of “ once Republicans get control” is confusing to you, Simpleton?
Good Lord, you have the reading comprehension skills of a box of retarded hair.
Putz, your words, "Impeach them. We are in power, Putz."

Are you ever not a flaming imbecile?

Ever??
Yep, that was the scenario we were talking about.

Learn to read for comprehension you blithering idiot. Try to follow a conversation for once in your life, Ignoramus.
Yeah, "we are in power" is present tense. Guess what, Spunky, you are not in power of the House.
Yep, present tense in the context of the conversation we were having before you butted in to make a fool of yourself.

Your colossal inability to follow the simplest of conversations is astounding.......until one realized what a complete moron you are.
LOLOL

Suuure, Spunky. Uh-huh...

Nope. Never used the word "mortality", idiot.
Quote my post using "mortality", or admit you can't read on a second grade level.
My G-d, you're even more rightarded than I ever gave you credit for....

Mortality rate we are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay down the list, Dummy.
[emphasis added to highlight Nostra's dementia]
G'head, talk to me about following a conversation.

:abgg2q.jpg:
 
Last edited:
OP
Nostra

Nostra

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
18,306
Reaction score
13,844
Points
2,415
I
STFU you stolen valor POS.

How is this Crypt Keeper looking asswipe even in the Senate?

Elections have consequences.
Yes. One of those consequences is the president nominates Supreme Court justices.
Another consequence is that the senate confirms the nominee.
Well...you know, when you change the norms and rules, there will be consequences.

If the Dems get the Senate and Executive, why shouldn't they take a page from your playbook and add justices? Any good reason not to now that you've set precedents?
Republicans didn't add justices, they filled open seats. If dems regain control I support them filling any open seats that come available. But ADDING seats? Oh hell no.

And if you want to start that game, when republicans regain control they'll stack the court again.
Democrats will fill open seats that were created by a Constitutionally elected Congress

Who could object to Congress doing its job?
Run it up to 15 seats and enjoy your 9-6 Libtard majority.

Once Republicans get control there is nothing preventing them from running it down to 6 and throwing all 9 libs off the court.

6-0 Majority.

:oops8:
LOLOL

You're such a fucking imbecile, putz ... the Constitution is preventing them, ya moron, which only allows for impeachment to remove a SC justice.
Impeach them. We are in power, Putz.

Nwxt?
LOLOL

You think you control the House???

What part of “ once Republicans get control” is confusing to you, Simpleton?
Good Lord, you have the reading comprehension skills of a box of retarded hair.
Putz, your words, "Impeach them. We are in power, Putz."

Are you ever not a flaming imbecile?

Ever??
Yep, that was the scenario we were talking about.

Learn to read for comprehension you blithering idiot. Try to follow a conversation for once in your life, Ignoramus.
Yeah, "we are in power" is present tense. Guess what, Spunky, you are not in power of the House.
Yep, present tense in the context of the conversation we were having before you butted in to make a fool of yourself.

Your colossal inability to follow the simplest of conversations is astounding.......until one realized what a complete moron you are.
LOLOL

Suuure, Spunky. Uh-huh...

Nope. Never used the word "mortality", idiot.​
Quote my post using "mortality", or admit you can't read on a second grade level.​
My G-d, you're even more rightarded than I ever gave you credit for....​
Mortality rate we are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay down the list, Dummy.
[emphasis added to highlight Nostra's dementia]

G'head, talk to me about following a conversation.​
:abgg2q.jpg:
:a​
Let me help you out, lil fella.....

I was talking about what the Republican response to Dimwingers packing the S.C. could be........so tell all of us how that could possibly be referencing the “present”, you raving lunatic.
 

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
50,544
Reaction score
9,781
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
If you and yours want to increase the number of justices IF you have the power, do it. But remember the worm always turns and someday, probably soon, the Republicans will control the White House and Senate again and two can play your game. Ending the judicial filibuster already bit you on the ass with Barret. Are you really sure that you want to double down on a losing hand?
Republicans knew that their new rule of an opposition party does not confirm SCOTUS judges would someday bite them in the ass.......But they lived in the present and did it anyway.

Same thing with adding judges to the court. Dems will live in the present and expand the court. They are willing to bank that it may be decades before Republicans win the White House and all of Congress

Only twice of 20 occasions has an opposition party confirmed a justice, that's wasn't living in the present, it was following historical norms. That seems to be something you commies know very little about.

.
Oh? How many of them were denied a hearing with almost a year left in a president's term?

Almost only counts in hand grenades, horseshoes and atom bombs child. Opposition senates don't tend to confirm justices in the last year of a presidents term.

.
 

BluesLegend

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2014
Messages
49,657
Reaction score
16,000
Points
2,630
Location
Trump's Army
Elections have consequences.
If Trump wins and Republicans retain control of the Senate we can pack the court and Dems won't oppose it?
They will need the House also

If Dems take all three, why should they not use their power?
Because it would be stupid and appear to the centrists to be a open move to grasp political power at any cost. That would cost the Democrats in the next election in 2022.
You think appointing Barrett doesn't look like an open move to grasp political power?
It looks like another HUGE win for president Trump to me! :eusa_dance:
 

toobfreak

Tungsten/Glass Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2017
Messages
32,262
Reaction score
16,505
Points
1,915
Location
On The Way Home To Earth
What a piece of shit. Nothing is worse than stolen valor.

Democrats, ever the bad losers. Elections have consequences! Imagine that-- -- Trump used his authority as Prez to fill vancancies on the bench with the best of the best! :omg: Can you imagine if the GOP had acted this way when Obumma filled his two vacancies? Still glad you put that floppy-eared racist commie bastard in the White House?!
 

ColonelAngus

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2015
Messages
27,778
Reaction score
14,400
Points
1,415
Schumer said it was the darkest day in the history of our government.

I bet he screams if he sees a mouse.
 

ColonelAngus

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2015
Messages
27,778
Reaction score
14,400
Points
1,415

BULLDOG

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2014
Messages
67,972
Reaction score
10,795
Points
2,030
Elections have consequences.
If Trump wins and Republicans retain control of the Senate we can pack the court and Dems won't oppose it?
They will need the House also

If Dems take all three, why should they not use their power?
Because it would be stupid and appear to the centrists to be a open move to grasp political power at any cost. That would cost the Democrats in the next election in 2022.
You think appointing Barrett doesn't look like an open move to grasp political power?
We already have the power. Elections have consequences, Halfwit.
For now, and later, we will have the power. I doubt you will enjoy that as much as you do now.
 

DJT for Life

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2017
Messages
3,306
Reaction score
765
Points
195
STFU you stolen valor POS.

How is this Crypt Keeper looking asswipe even in the Senate?

Elections have consequences.
You are correct. The GHOP held the Senate when Zero tried to put Garland on the Bench in 2016 and stopped
that in its tracks.

We held the Senate when Gorsuch filled Scalia's seat.

We held the Senate when Kavanaugh was approved to take Kennedy's place on the Court. And because how
piss-poor the dems reacted we picked up 2 more seats in the Senate in 2018.

But those were swap-out judges. Tonight, because we still hold the Senate we swore in a true
Constitionalist to replace "A living constitution Justice in Ginsberg.

It's now 6-3.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top