A 2018 article on the left's criticism of Amy Barrett. Because she’s a Christian who lives a Christian life. They have been targeting her because of her faith alone, nothing else. Amy Coney Barrett: Progressives Use Religious Ignorance, Bigotry to Slime SCOTUS Candidate | National Review Also, plenty of Catholics in states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Arizona who will probably flinch at the coming attacks on Barrett at the hearings, if it is her.
The name of the nominee is supposed to be out by the end of the week In other news, Cocaine Mitch has morphed into "Apex Predator Mitch"
After the impeachment fiasco, constant investigations, and ******** handling of the Kavanaugh hearings, I don't care that the Republicans may be hypocritical on this. Obama himself said something along the lines of elections having consequences. The consequence 4 years ago was he lost the Senate and the Dems lost the election. Frankly, I don't want dirty politics, but it's time the Rs start sticking it back to the Dems.
Screw that. A big part of his 2016 win was to replace this woman when she finally kicked the bucket. Should have happened long ago. Oh well, not his fault she lasted as long as she did.
Lamar Alexander did say he would vote (never know what he might do) Jeff Flake (retired) opined that he would not (in case anyone was worried about the Flake)
Heard on the radio that Pelosi is threatening impeachment as a way of jamming up the Senate to delay the confirmation process. She just hasn't decided whether she'll impeach Trump again or AG Barr. She says she has "arrows in her quiver" and I'll bet she'll fire them all.
So, she is saying she has things she can impeach on but she has been allowing those 2 crooks to continue in office until it is politically expedient for her to deem otherwise. And, the media will not challenge her as I just did.
As mentioned above, we could say the Kavanaugh hearings negate any sense of fair play by the Republicans on this. Of course, the Democrats would say the Republicans had it coming after the Garland cancellation. It's a fight for the culture of America and as far as I'm concerned, the main thing is a Conservative SCOTUS. I'm just about of the mind to say I don't care about fair play because the white privilege, metoo, racism, cancel culture gambits are not about fairness; they are about the ruthless pursuit of power. I'm down for whatever at this point.
There is one huge difference between 2016 and 2020 And that difference points out McConnell is not being hypocritical. Read his words. Does the phrase Lame Duck President appear? That is like people ignoring the word illegal before the word immigrant
Some people say Scalia’s last wishes were that Supreme Court Justices don’t get a say in their replacements as the constitution is law, not a feel-good charity.
Obama was a lame duck, but that wasn't the standard. Remember, he invoked the Biden Rule. The Biden Rule was first invoked in anticipation of a possible vacancy before the 1992 election - when Bush wasn't a lame duck. To be clear, I don't have a problem with Trump nominating someone. Supreme Court nominations and vacancy are a political bloodsport primarily because of the Left making the Court a super-legislature and for turning nominations into political ****-shows starting with Bork. I don't mind playing dirty. However, I'm not gonna BS and pretend anyone is following some kind of consistent principle when they clearly are not.
Keep in mind that Trump could make the recess appointment, and if the GOP loses the election, Cocaine Mitch could call a lame duck session of the Senate and confirm Barrett.
No joke. My old boss taught me a lot of things. Some were ironic or sarcasm about business such as this one: "It's ok to lie." His deal was this, "Just tell me the rules and I'll play by them." I didn't come out of that experience as a lying, cheating sack of sh*t, but I got where he was coming from because we ran into far too many situations where contracts apparently had no meaning. This is a knife-fight and the sanctimony from both sides is just more evidence that they think we're idiots. I'd tell Trump to nominate whomever and let the Senate take the hit for the hypocrisy. Shift it to McConnell. I want to be honest. I could sit here and post the most idealistic, Christ-laden view of our government and in the end, I'd do what Christ did: "Render unto Caesar etc..." It's as if he knew it was hopeless. He said, "That's your problem man. My kingdom is not of this earth and I'm not asking Caesar to make things right. I'm asking YOU to make things right with me."
Perhaps I'm wrong, I just feel that would piss off the base basically giving in to the Dems and their hysteria and threats. Probably not enough they would vote for Biden or simply not vote, so, who knows, maybe it would be a good strategy. But, I am seeing that an announcement is imminent.
I remember Nick Faldo a few years ago lamenting some rule of golf as being absurd. However, he also said as absurd as it was, if it benefited him during his playing years, he would certainly invoke the rule. Don't like the rules...change them. Not so easy to do when the rules are The Constitution.
I haven't read all the case law. But advise and consent is kind of vague to me. And when the Senate must act is also vague to me. I don't know where the Constitutional line is drawn in the sand. Seems they can do what they want. If you don't like it, then call your Congressman and vote accordingly.
What are the quorum requirements for a Senate vote (if any)? I wonder if all the Senate Dems could take a trip to New Mexico or something to prevent a vote--if there is a quorum requirement they could play...?
Like x 1
