Little chance he stands by that I’d guess. Doing so would hurt him in a very close race.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Little chance he stands by that I’d guess. Doing so would hurt him in a very close race.
A U.S. Supreme Court justice being nominated by a President who has just been elected out of office and confirmed by a U.S. Senate that has just had its majority changed in that same election would be the most egregiously abusive horse-sh*t move by any part of the U.S. government in history. It is literally the exact opposite of representing the people. If they try pulling that it I hope Biden and company take off the gloves and crush their nuts into oblivion over the next 4 years (Loading the Court to 15 justices and admitting D.C. and Puerto Rico as States would just be tip of the iceberg).They can have their cake and eat it too. Just pass the nominee in the lame duck session.
No ducking way this pos actual follows his own words. Not if cheetolini has any say.
No, I don’t think they would. If they did they’d deserve massive criticism for it.Yes, yes they would. It’s called politics.
You mean like the ACA? It was pushed through a Dem controlled Congress. You know, the 4 months that Obama had total control. Don't sit here and say the Democrats don't do the same thing because it's a flat out lie you hypocrite.NO they would not have. But you're scumbag Mitch is setting the rules...which is there are no rules. Payback will be a bitch so just remember your gloating about this. Pick the rules and play by them. McConnell plays both sides. Just remember this...because the Democrats will eventually be able to do what they want. When they do...shut your damn mouth.
Legislation that can be undone or modified at any time is very different from a lifetime Supreme Court nomination. Surely you can appreciate that?You mean like the ACA? It was pushed through a Dem controlled Congress. You know, the 4 months that Obama had total control. Don't sit here and say the Democrats don't do the same thing because it's a flat out lie you hypocrite.
You're grasping at straws, it's no different. Using the power at your disposal is and has been used by both sides. To say any different is a lie. And yes, had the Democrats had control of the Senate in 2016 Garland would have been confirmed. To deny is is also a lie.Legislation that can be undone or modified at any time is very different from a lifetime Supreme Court nomination. Surely you can appreciate that?
Fortunately the Republicans have since brought a lot of great ideas to healthcare since the ACA was passed. Like making sure people with pre existing conditions can get insurance. That was a great idea they had apparently.You mean like the ACA? It was pushed through a Dem controlled Congress. You know, the 4 months that Obama had total control. Don't sit here and say the Democrats don't do the same thing because it's a flat out lie you hypocrite.
This is a nice Saturday morning treat from someone who has almost certainly remarked about how he wishes these immigrants would learn the language. You'd just assume, huh??I'd just assume wait until after his re-election so the bickering about this ends.
Nice comparison of apples and earthworms.You mean like the ACA? It was pushed through a Dem controlled Congress. You know, the 4 months that Obama had total control. Don't sit here and say the Democrats don't do the same thing because it's a flat out lie you hypocrite.
And he wasn’t nominated <60 days before the election was he?You're grasping at straws, it's no different. Using the power at your disposal is and has been used by both sides. To say any different is a lie. And yes, had the Democrats had control of the Senate in 2016 Garland would have been confirmed. To deny is is also a lie.
This is a nice Saturday morning treat from someone who has almost certainly remarked about how he wishes these immigrants would learn the language. You'd just assume, huh??
Fill your Bloody Mary cup, not words for someone else.
1/10I’m surprised Schumer had the energy to issue a statement, after spending hours giving CPR to RBG.
The statement was confirmed in an election year. Which he was.
It doesn't matter. McConnell arbitrarily pulled a justification out of his ass because he could. There was no precedence.
Of course, that’s not the reason he stated in 2016. Then, he said...in February that the voters should have their say. Now, less than 50 days before the election, all of a sudden that doesn’t matter?
Stop with the “lie” garbage.You're grasping at straws, it's no different. Using the power at your disposal is and has been used by both sides. To say any different is a lie. And yes, had the Democrats had control of the Senate in 2016 Garland would have been confirmed. To deny is is also a lie.
Voting on legislation that requires both houses of Congress to pass and can be undone or modified at any time is NOT exactly the same as one chamber approving a lifetime SCOTUS appointee. You know it, so don't be stupid.You're grasping at straws, it's no different. Using the power at your disposal is and has been used by both sides. To say any different is a lie. And yes, had the Democrats had control of the Senate in 2016 Garland would have been confirmed. To deny is is also a lie.
I don't think they would have actually. But they should if a nominee is confirmed.
A U.S. Supreme Court justice being nominated by a President who has just been elected out of office and confirmed by a U.S. Senate that has just had its majority changed in that same election would be the most egregiously abusive horse-sh*t move by any part of the U.S. government in history.
If they do this, the retribution on Nov 3rd will be significant.
This is great news!
MAGA!
History Is on the Side of Republicans Filling a Supreme Court Vacancy in 2020 | National Review
Choosing not to fill a vacancy would be a historically unprecedented act of unilateral disarmament.www.nationalreview.com
Comparing legislation to a lifetime appointment they just set the precedent for? You're not brightYou mean like the ACA? It was pushed through a Dem controlled Congress. You know, the 4 months that Obama had total control. Don't sit here and say the Democrats don't do the same thing because it's a flat out lie you hypocrite.
Not sure now is the correct time for this statement, but I'm sure it's in response to Schumer.
"Pro-life" Republicans are never happier than when they're celebrating death.
You’ve been celebrating Ginsberg’s death.When did I celebrate death?
You’re just a typical left wing propagandist.
The great news is holding a vote.
You’ve been celebrating Ginsberg’s death.
Eat shit!
Elections have consequences.
They likely think Biden is going to win anyway, and I tend to agree with that prediction.
This would help ensure the victories are a lot broader than just Biden.
And, the legislative payback would begin after that.
Link?Grassley is supporting Trumps nominee
his spokesman made the confirmation on twitter
Lol
One hour after she is dead and he is ready to get in a replacement. Rs are complete dirtbags.
Schumer started talking about her replacement 3 minutes after she was deadIt is sad that we can’t honor her for just one day before political moves are made.