The Dems may not like what the GOP Senators consider "disqualifying" going forward

[DOTR]

Ask Garland why he was disqualified

Garland wasn't "disqualified" for personal behavior, McConnell simply used the "Biden Rule" not to confirm a nominee in a presidential election year. Trump won and picked Gorsuch. If Hillary had won she could have re-named Garland or pick someone else. Who do you think she would have nominated? Probably not Garland.

No! Garland was disqualified for being nominated by President Obama!

Reason enough.

 

[Faun]

There is now a McConnell Rule that says a Senate controlled by an opposition party is under no obligation to consider his Supreme Court picks

Odd, that sounds JUST like the Biden Rule, which he created, while he was Chair of the Judiciary Committee.

It does? Then it should be no problem for you to quote Biden saying no nominee Bush names will get a confirmation hearing for the remainder of his presidency...

that's it - make people look for a specific quote and try to lie about what the intent was.

there needs to be a law/rule in place clear as day around this and the games around these nominations on both sides needs to end. this escalation of bullshit needs to stop.

LOLOL

Thanks for proving Biden never said what McConnell did.

 

[Hiryuu]

they don't seem to understand this however. in each case, the reason they went to "bullshitland" was different. they never understand there's a lot of reasons to do something wrong, but it's still wrong.

the left doesn't want a compromise. they want it all.

Yeah, they thought their excuse for changing the rules mattered, never recognized that using parliamentarian procedures to circumvent the vote is what they did, and their excuse doesn't make a difference.

 

[Faun]

Great.
By your logic then, no appointment should be made until the American people have decided which party will control congress in five weeks.

The fact the Senate Majority Leader has the ability to block a vote, because enough Americans have elected Senators in his party, or that caucus with his party, is a fact. It doesn't matter when the election occurs, the Senate Majority Leader can decide what gets voted on , at any time during their term, because they are the Senate Majority Leader.

If the Democrats, or other Senators that caucus with the Democrats, win enough seats in Congress during the Fall Elections, they could then be the Majority. At that point, If they win the Majority, they can decide on a Senate Majority Leader, who will then have the power to determine what's brought to the Senate floor for a vote.

We aren't talking about if's, could's and should's. We are talking about who actually has the power to do something based on how many Americans have voted one way or another, and it's a fact, no matter what your logic is.

Or..... if you don’t win enough seats, you block a nominee by levying an unconscionable accusation against him or her from decades ago. Either way, the nominee gets blocked.

 

[iceberg]

they don't seem to understand this however. in each case, the reason they went to "bullshitland" was different. they never understand there's a lot of reasons to do something wrong, but it's still wrong.

the left doesn't want a compromise. they want it all.

Yeah, they thought their excuse for changing the rules mattered, and never recognized that using parliamentarian procedures to circumvent the vote is what they did, and their excuse doesn't make a difference.

doesn't matter what the reasons or excuses are - "they're different" for all sides and they don't seem to get that. the ONLY thing they are doing is validating these as proper moves politically.

as if we were going downhill fast enough these days.

 

[Pop23]

Great.
By your logic then, no appointment should be made until the American people have decided which party will control congress in five weeks.

The fact the Senate Majority Leader has the ability to block a vote, because enough Americans have elected Senators in his party, or that caucus with his party, is a fact. It doesn't matter when the election occurs, the Senate Majority Leader can decide what gets voted on , at any time during their term, because they are the Senate Majority Leader.

If the Democrats, or other Senators that caucus with the Democrats, win enough seats in Congress during the Fall Elections, they could then be the Majority. At that point, If they win the Majority, they can decide on a Senate Majority Leader, who will then have the power to determine what's brought to the Senate floor for a vote.

We aren't talking about if's, could's and should's. We are talking about who actually has the power to do something based on how many Americans have voted one way or another, and it's a fact, no matter what your logic is.

Or..... if you don’t win enough seats, you block a nominee by levying an unconscionable accusation against him or her from decades ago. Either way, the nominee gets blocked.

Wow, if you can’t win, throw a cuck like hissy fit?

Damn, I’m glad I ain’t you.

 

[Hiryuu]

Or..... if you don’t win enough seats, you block a nominee by levying an unconscionable accusation against him or her from decades ago. Either way, the nominee gets blocked.

If the Senate Majority Leader, or enough Senators in the Majority, decide to play along, or not exercise the power they actually have, then it doesn't matter what the excuse is. The opposition will have blocked the vote absent the necessity to be in the Majority.

 

[hadit]

Ask Garland why he was disqualified

Oh, yes, the feeble Garland defense. What was he accused of again?

Being an Obama nominee.

That's enough to destroy a life, for sure, but how's that the Republican's fault?

 

[Faun]

Great.
By your logic then, no appointment should be made until the American people have decided which party will control congress in five weeks.

The fact the Senate Majority Leader has the ability to block a vote, because enough Americans have elected Senators in his party, or that caucus with his party, is a fact. It doesn't matter when the election occurs, the Senate Majority Leader can decide what gets voted on , at any time during their term, because they are the Senate Majority Leader.

If the Democrats, or other Senators that caucus with the Democrats, win enough seats in Congress during the Fall Elections, they could then be the Majority. At that point, If they win the Majority, they can decide on a Senate Majority Leader, who will then have the power to determine what's brought to the Senate floor for a vote.

We aren't talking about if's, could's and should's. We are talking about who actually has the power to do something based on how many Americans have voted one way or another, and it's a fact, no matter what your logic is.

Or..... if you don’t win enough seats, you block a nominee by levying an unconscionable accusation against him or her from decades ago. Either way, the nominee gets blocked.

Wow, if you can’t win, throw a cuck like hissy fit?

Damn, I’m glad I ain’t you.

LOL

You reveal more about yourself than I suspect you intended.

 

[evenflow1969]

After the dems put up such a circus against Kavanaugh, one of the most qualified candidates in history, what repercussions can the dems expect from the GOP going forward. IMHO any "sexual misconduct" (including bringing the big dog out) is one, any "juvenile transgression" (theft, underage drinking, etc.), any drug use, including marijuana, any DUI, any PFA, any felony, etc.

I'm sure the FBI or Senate investigators could find something disqualifying on any and all democrat nominees going forward. If they can even find anyone to run that gauntlet.

None! The republicans have played dirtier pool than this for a while. So realy there is no threats to be made. Oh what more of the same big deal!

 

[Faun]

Ask Garland why he was disqualified

Oh, yes, the feeble Garland defense. What was he accused of again?

Being an Obama nominee.

That's enough to destroy a life, for sure, but how's that the Republican's fault?

Who blocked his confirmation hearings if not Republicans?

 

[Darkwind]

Ask Garland why he was disqualified

Elections have consequences.

Obama was elected, dope.

So was Trump.

 

[Pop23]

Great.
By your logic then, no appointment should be made until the American people have decided which party will control congress in five weeks.

The fact the Senate Majority Leader has the ability to block a vote, because enough Americans have elected Senators in his party, or that caucus with his party, is a fact. It doesn't matter when the election occurs, the Senate Majority Leader can decide what gets voted on , at any time during their term, because they are the Senate Majority Leader.

If the Democrats, or other Senators that caucus with the Democrats, win enough seats in Congress during the Fall Elections, they could then be the Majority. At that point, If they win the Majority, they can decide on a Senate Majority Leader, who will then have the power to determine what's brought to the Senate floor for a vote.

We aren't talking about if's, could's and should's. We are talking about who actually has the power to do something based on how many Americans have voted one way or another, and it's a fact, no matter what your logic is.

Or..... if you don’t win enough seats, you block a nominee by levying an unconscionable accusation against him or her from decades ago. Either way, the nominee gets blocked.

Wow, if you can’t win, throw a cuck like hissy fit?

Damn, I’m glad I ain’t you.

LOL

You reveal more about yourself than I suspect you intended.

You wish gayboy.

 

[Hiryuu]

None! The republicans have played dirtier pool than this for a while. So realy there is no threats to be made. Oh what more of the same big deal!

You mean like in 1970, when the Republicans attempted to impeach Associate Supreme Court Justice William Douglas (President Franklin D. Roosevelt nominated), using his bankruptcy, ties to outside political organizations, accusations of participation in the production of pornographic material, and allegations of sexual abuse regarding a flight attendant in his judicial chambers?

If so, you must agree Democrat House Judiciary Committee Chairman Emanuel Celler did the correct thing when he decided there was nothing in the allegations that warranted investigation or impeachment, and blocked the attempt to take Impeachment any further.

 

[iceberg]

Great.
By your logic then, no appointment should be made until the American people have decided which party will control congress in five weeks.

The fact the Senate Majority Leader has the ability to block a vote, because enough Americans have elected Senators in his party, or that caucus with his party, is a fact. It doesn't matter when the election occurs, the Senate Majority Leader can decide what gets voted on , at any time during their term, because they are the Senate Majority Leader.

If the Democrats, or other Senators that caucus with the Democrats, win enough seats in Congress during the Fall Elections, they could then be the Majority. At that point, If they win the Majority, they can decide on a Senate Majority Leader, who will then have the power to determine what's brought to the Senate floor for a vote.

We aren't talking about if's, could's and should's. We are talking about who actually has the power to do something based on how many Americans have voted one way or another, and it's a fact, no matter what your logic is.

Or..... if you don’t win enough seats, you block a nominee by levying an unconscionable accusation against him or her from decades ago. Either way, the nominee gets blocked.

Wow, if you can’t win, throw a cuck like hissy fit?

Damn, I’m glad I ain’t you.

LOL

You reveal more about yourself than I suspect you intended.

that he's tired of adults acting like kids who want their binky back?

that's been revealed about most of us long ago. and no you can't have your binky back.

 

[iceberg]

After the dems put up such a circus against Kavanaugh, one of the most qualified candidates in history, what repercussions can the dems expect from the GOP going forward. IMHO any "sexual misconduct" (including bringing the big dog out) is one, any "juvenile transgression" (theft, underage drinking, etc.), any drug use, including marijuana, any DUI, any PFA, any felony, etc.

I'm sure the FBI or Senate investigators could find something disqualifying on any and all democrat nominees going forward. If they can even find anyone to run that gauntlet.

None! The republicans have played dirtier pool than this for a while. So realy there is no threats to be made. Oh what more of the same big deal!

who have they made up lies about to keep them from SCOTUS? or anything else? we're not talking random assholes - we're talking party politics. gimme your facts. this should be fun.

 

[rightwinger]

Or..... if you don’t win enough seats, you block a nominee by levying an unconscionable accusation against him or her from decades ago. Either way, the nominee gets blocked.

If the Senate Majority Leader, or enough Senators in the Majority, decide to play along, or not exercise the power they actually have, then it doesn't matter what the excuse is. The opposition will have blocked the vote absent the necessity to be in the Majority.

And that is the new McConnell Rule

Leave a seat infiled until you gain the Presidency. It will forever change the function of the court as one or more seats remain unfilled

 

[iceberg]

Or..... if you don’t win enough seats, you block a nominee by levying an unconscionable accusation against him or her from decades ago. Either way, the nominee gets blocked.

If the Senate Majority Leader, or enough Senators in the Majority, decide to play along, or not exercise the power they actually have, then it doesn't matter what the excuse is. The opposition will have blocked the vote absent the necessity to be in the Majority.

And that is the new McConnell Rule

Leave a seat infiled until you gain the Presidency. It will forever change the function of the court as one or more seats remain unfilled

i'm not about to deny this was wrong for them to do. however, again we go back to the biden rule and biden NEVER should have tried to get cute. why?

cause shit like this will happen because of it. you create a stupid rule, expect people to take advantage of it when their turn. the left is now creating the "throw hissy fits, lob in paid protestors into the hearings, attack the other side w/o mercy anywhere they sit and make up any lie you need to in order to get what you want".

yea, this can't go south and against the dems at all. can it?

if the biden rule was stupid and mconnell was a "hold my beer" escalation, this crap going on now is a "hold my dozen kegs and watch this shit" moment.

and the right will escalate cause we *all* let them.

you really wanna see what the left is doing now escalated and handed back to you?

 

[Pop23]

Or..... if you don’t win enough seats, you block a nominee by levying an unconscionable accusation against him or her from decades ago. Either way, the nominee gets blocked.

If the Senate Majority Leader, or enough Senators in the Majority, decide to play along, or not exercise the power they actually have, then it doesn't matter what the excuse is. The opposition will have blocked the vote absent the necessity to be in the Majority.

And that is the new McConnell Rule

Leave a seat infiled until you gain the Presidency. It will forever change the function of the court as one or more seats remain unfilled

And what party instituted the nuclear option?

Brett Kavanaugh has Democrats in ‘nuclear option’ regret

Oh well. Right?

 

[Care4all]

Who would that be, professor?

The elected representatives in Congress necessary to stop the vote.

Great.
By your logic then, no appointment should be made until the American people have decided which party will control congress in five weeks.

Nothing changed with the election with congress, or senators.... the Republicans were the majority before the election and after the election??