A Better Reason to Delay Kennedy’s Replacement

[HappyJoy]

Fake news alert.

It's an opinion. You guys are only capable of knee jerk reactions, aren't you?

Pointing out that something is an ignorant opinion is not a knee jerk. It's just an observation.

No, he called it 'fakenews' it's technically not news at all, it's opinion and well, Snooter didn't have much of a point beyond that.

Well, it really isn't news that leftists are squirming around like worms in hot ashes, trying to find some way out of their mess, you're right about that.

It's actually a mess that McConnell started and if Trump picks somebody on the far right it's not going to help the Republicans in November.

 

[DarkFury]

They KNEW it was going to cost them one going in. But 6 MORE years of Trump makes it THREE!
Ginsburg is 85 folks. That Clock IS ticking.

I think Sotomayor might be replaced before RBG.

Possible.

 

[DarkFury]

Fake news alert.

It's an opinion. You guys are only capable of knee jerk reactions, aren't you?

Pointing out that something is an ignorant opinion is not a knee jerk. It's just an observation.

No, he called it 'fakenews' it's technically not news at all, it's opinion and well, Snooter didn't have much of a point beyond that.

Well, it really isn't news that leftists are squirming around like worms in hot ashes, trying to find some way out of their mess, you're right about that.

It's actually a mess that McConnell started and if Trump picks somebody on the far right it's not going to help the Republicans in November.

Oh but it WILL. This WINNING is kind of growing on us. I expect a HIGHER republican turn out because of it.

 

[Cecilie1200]

There are legitimate reasons why Trump should not be allowed to pick a supreme court justice.

A Better Reason to Delay Kennedy’s Replacement

By Paul Schiff Berman

Mr. Berman is a professor at George Washington University Law School.

Almost immediately after Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement on Wednesday, Senate Democrats argued that his replacement should not be confirmed until after the midterm elections this fall — a version of the same argument that Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, used to stymie President Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court in 2016.

This is surely a valid argument, not least because Mr. McConnell’s blatantly anti-democratic ploy stole a judicial appointment from a popularly elected president and gave it to one who lost the popular vote by millions.

But there is another reason to withhold confirmation that both Republicans and Democrats should be able to agree on: People under the cloud of investigation do not get to pick the judges who may preside over their cases. By this logic, President Trump should not be permitted to appoint a new Supreme Court justice until after the special counsel investigation is over, and we know for sure whether there is evidence of wrongdoing.

True, that point is unlikely to stop Mr. McConnell or his colleagues. But it highlights the real risk involved in letting a deeply compromised president shape a court that may one day stand between him and impeachment.

www.nytimes.com/2018/06/29/opinion/a-better-reason-to-delay-kennedys-replacement.html

Fortunately the Democrats don'thave a choice, they have to do what they can until after the election. It's fair game at this point.

Why is that lying like a bazaar full of rugs is always "doing what they can" with Democrats?

Who is lying?

There should have been a floor vote for Garland, there wasn't and McConnell made up the "Biden rule" which wasn't a rule to justify him not doing his job. Now the Democrats are saying we are in another election year, while the President isn't up for re election, the body that is confirming the nominee is and the President is also under investigation. So, there is more than enough justification for the Democrats to do anything they legally can to delay the vote if we are to live by McConnel's standards.

McConnell didn't make up a damned thing. And he WAS doing his job; you just didn't like that it was him doing it, because that meant it involved keeping you from getting what you wanted. Had it been a leftist in that position, using the legitimate rules and power of the position to block a Republican President's nomination, you'd have been cheering, and we both know it.

Now the Democrats are saying, "All elections must be the same, because we're powerless otherwise", and it's horse shit. They're also saying - as they pretty much always do - "Our accusations should be treated as convictions!" Not only are we not going to allow them to paralyze the Presidency every time they're out of power, but we are also not interested in this hypocrisy, given that leftists certainly do not treat accusations of wrongdoing toward THEIR Presidents as prima facie evidence that he should not be allowed to exercise the powers of the office.

That is not "McConnell's standard", unless and until you can provide any evidence of him EVER suggesting that it should be applied to any election other than the Presidential. You don't get to invent shit on the fly and then make other people responsible for it.

 

[bripat9643]

There are legitimate reasons why Trump should not be allowed to pick a supreme court justice.

A Better Reason to Delay Kennedy’s Replacement

By Paul Schiff Berman

Mr. Berman is a professor at George Washington University Law School.

Almost immediately after Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement on Wednesday, Senate Democrats argued that his replacement should not be confirmed until after the midterm elections this fall — a version of the same argument that Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, used to stymie President Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court in 2016.

This is surely a valid argument, not least because Mr. McConnell’s blatantly anti-democratic ploy stole a judicial appointment from a popularly elected president and gave it to one who lost the popular vote by millions.

But there is another reason to withhold confirmation that both Republicans and Democrats should be able to agree on: People under the cloud of investigation do not get to pick the judges who may preside over their cases. By this logic, President Trump should not be permitted to appoint a new Supreme Court justice until after the special counsel investigation is over, and we know for sure whether there is evidence of wrongdoing.

True, that point is unlikely to stop Mr. McConnell or his colleagues. But it highlights the real risk involved in letting a deeply compromised president shape a court that may one day stand between him and impeachment.

www.nytimes.com/2018/06/29/opinion/a-better-reason-to-delay-kennedys-replacement.html

The "investigation" is a witch hunt. It's the reason Trump's nominee should be approved, not the opposite. We don't need any criminal Democrats deciding who is on the court.

 

[Cecilie1200]

There are legitimate reasons why Trump should not be allowed to pick a supreme court justice.

A Better Reason to Delay Kennedy’s Replacement

By Paul Schiff Berman

Mr. Berman is a professor at George Washington University Law School.

Almost immediately after Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement on Wednesday, Senate Democrats argued that his replacement should not be confirmed until after the midterm elections this fall — a version of the same argument that Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, used to stymie President Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court in 2016.

This is surely a valid argument, not least because Mr. McConnell’s blatantly anti-democratic ploy stole a judicial appointment from a popularly elected president and gave it to one who lost the popular vote by millions.

But there is another reason to withhold confirmation that both Republicans and Democrats should be able to agree on: People under the cloud of investigation do not get to pick the judges who may preside over their cases. By this logic, President Trump should not be permitted to appoint a new Supreme Court justice until after the special counsel investigation is over, and we know for sure whether there is evidence of wrongdoing.

True, that point is unlikely to stop Mr. McConnell or his colleagues. But it highlights the real risk involved in letting a deeply compromised president shape a court that may one day stand between him and impeachment.

www.nytimes.com/2018/06/29/opinion/a-better-reason-to-delay-kennedys-replacement.html

Did the Democrats wait until after the midterms for Kagan’s confirmation vote? Nope, was done in the summer of 2010.

Also, President Trump isn’t under any investigation.

Now shut up and sit down.

And not a single Republican at the time suggested, or even hinted, that Kagan's confirmation should be delayed by the election.

 

[OKTexas]

There are legitimate reasons why Trump should not be allowed to pick a supreme court justice.

A Better Reason to Delay Kennedy’s Replacement

By Paul Schiff Berman

Mr. Berman is a professor at George Washington University Law School.

Almost immediately after Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement on Wednesday, Senate Democrats argued that his replacement should not be confirmed until after the midterm elections this fall — a version of the same argument that Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, used to stymie President Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court in 2016.

This is surely a valid argument, not least because Mr. McConnell’s blatantly anti-democratic ploy stole a judicial appointment from a popularly elected president and gave it to one who lost the popular vote by millions.

But there is another reason to withhold confirmation that both Republicans and Democrats should be able to agree on: People under the cloud of investigation do not get to pick the judges who may preside over their cases. By this logic, President Trump should not be permitted to appoint a new Supreme Court justice until after the special counsel investigation is over, and we know for sure whether there is evidence of wrongdoing.

True, that point is unlikely to stop Mr. McConnell or his colleagues. But it highlights the real risk involved in letting a deeply compromised president shape a court that may one day stand between him and impeachment.

www.nytimes.com/2018/06/29/opinion/a-better-reason-to-delay-kennedys-replacement.html

Fortunately the Democrats don'thave a choice, they have to do what they can until after the election. It's fair game at this point.

Why is that lying like a bazaar full of rugs is always "doing what they can" with Democrats?

Who is lying?

There should have been a floor vote for Garland, there wasn't and McConnell made up the "Biden rule" which wasn't a rule to justify him not doing his job. Now the Democrats are saying we are in another election year, while the President isn't up for re election, the body that is confirming the nominee is and the President is also under investigation. So, there is more than enough justification for the Democrats to do anything they legally can to delay the vote if we are to live by McConnel's standards.

Yep, which is nothing they can do to delay the vote.


.

 

[HappyJoy]

It's an opinion. You guys are only capable of knee jerk reactions, aren't you?

Pointing out that something is an ignorant opinion is not a knee jerk. It's just an observation.

No, he called it 'fakenews' it's technically not news at all, it's opinion and well, Snooter didn't have much of a point beyond that.

Well, it really isn't news that leftists are squirming around like worms in hot ashes, trying to find some way out of their mess, you're right about that.

It's actually a mess that McConnell started and if Trump picks somebody on the far right it's not going to help the Republicans in November.

Oh but it WILL. This WINNING is kind of growing on us. I expect a HIGHER republican turn out because of it.

I hope you really think so.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Fake news alert.

It's an opinion. You guys are only capable of knee jerk reactions, aren't you?

Pointing out that something is an ignorant opinion is not a knee jerk. It's just an observation.

No, he called it 'fakenews' it's technically not news at all, it's opinion and well, Snooter didn't have much of a point beyond that.

Well, it really isn't news that leftists are squirming around like worms in hot ashes, trying to find some way out of their mess, you're right about that.

It's actually a mess that McConnell started and if Trump picks somebody on the far right it's not going to help the Republicans in November.

It's actually a mess that you jackholes just invented five minutes ago and are vainly and wildly trying to attribute to McConnell.

And does anyone here actually believe that you're concerned about it harming Republicans in November? Show of hands?

Anyone?

Bueller?

Didn't think so.

 

[HappyJoy]

There are legitimate reasons why Trump should not be allowed to pick a supreme court justice.

A Better Reason to Delay Kennedy’s Replacement

By Paul Schiff Berman

Mr. Berman is a professor at George Washington University Law School.

Almost immediately after Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement on Wednesday, Senate Democrats argued that his replacement should not be confirmed until after the midterm elections this fall — a version of the same argument that Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, used to stymie President Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court in 2016.

This is surely a valid argument, not least because Mr. McConnell’s blatantly anti-democratic ploy stole a judicial appointment from a popularly elected president and gave it to one who lost the popular vote by millions.

But there is another reason to withhold confirmation that both Republicans and Democrats should be able to agree on: People under the cloud of investigation do not get to pick the judges who may preside over their cases. By this logic, President Trump should not be permitted to appoint a new Supreme Court justice until after the special counsel investigation is over, and we know for sure whether there is evidence of wrongdoing.

True, that point is unlikely to stop Mr. McConnell or his colleagues. But it highlights the real risk involved in letting a deeply compromised president shape a court that may one day stand between him and impeachment.

www.nytimes.com/2018/06/29/opinion/a-better-reason-to-delay-kennedys-replacement.html

Fortunately the Democrats don'thave a choice, they have to do what they can until after the election. It's fair game at this point.

Why is that lying like a bazaar full of rugs is always "doing what they can" with Democrats?

Who is lying?

There should have been a floor vote for Garland, there wasn't and McConnell made up the "Biden rule" which wasn't a rule to justify him not doing his job. Now the Democrats are saying we are in another election year, while the President isn't up for re election, the body that is confirming the nominee is and the President is also under investigation. So, there is more than enough justification for the Democrats to do anything they legally can to delay the vote if we are to live by McConnel's standards.

Yep, which is nothing they can do to delay the vote.


.

I'm not sure Republicans will have the votes. We'll find out.

 

[OKTexas]

Nope.....protecting our liberties is what matters......and liberal activist judges won't do that.

Keep telling yourself that.

They practically have blasted it all over the news.
All you need to do is read some of Justice Ginsbergs writings and you'll know how she thinks.

Well then, why are y'all so adamant about getting conservative judges? How about a judge like Kennedy, who can go either way?

A judge that follows the Constitution and doesn't think they have the authority to rewrite legislation, isn't a conservative, they'd just be a good judge. That's all I want.


.

I am no more interested in having Justices who decide cases based on what their conservative political leanings tell them is "a good thing" than I am in having leftist Justices do it. Apply the law. Let the people and their elected representatives decide what is and isn't "a good thing".

Like Scalia said, if a judge is happy with every decision they must render, they're not doing their job.


.

 

[HappyJoy]

It's an opinion. You guys are only capable of knee jerk reactions, aren't you?

Pointing out that something is an ignorant opinion is not a knee jerk. It's just an observation.

No, he called it 'fakenews' it's technically not news at all, it's opinion and well, Snooter didn't have much of a point beyond that.

Well, it really isn't news that leftists are squirming around like worms in hot ashes, trying to find some way out of their mess, you're right about that.

It's actually a mess that McConnell started and if Trump picks somebody on the far right it's not going to help the Republicans in November.

It's actually a mess that you jackholes just invented five minutes ago and are vainly and wildly trying to attribute to McConnell.

And does anyone here actually believe that you're concerned about it harming Republicans in November? Show of hands?

Anyone?

Bueller?

Didn't think so.

It was invented in 2016. And no, I'm not concerned it will harm Republicans, I'm only hoping it will.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Pointing out that something is an ignorant opinion is not a knee jerk. It's just an observation.

No, he called it 'fakenews' it's technically not news at all, it's opinion and well, Snooter didn't have much of a point beyond that.

Well, it really isn't news that leftists are squirming around like worms in hot ashes, trying to find some way out of their mess, you're right about that.

It's actually a mess that McConnell started and if Trump picks somebody on the far right it's not going to help the Republicans in November.

Oh but it WILL. This WINNING is kind of growing on us. I expect a HIGHER republican turn out because of it.

I hope you really think so.

The more you warn us that we shouldn't do it because it'll hurt us, the more sure we become that it's exactly what we should do, because you're actually afraid it will hurt YOU.

 

[jon_berzerk]

A Better Reason to Delay Kennedy’s Replacement

--LOL

not a chance of it

"elections have consequences" -Barry Obama

--LOL

 

[Cecilie1200]

There are legitimate reasons why Trump should not be allowed to pick a supreme court justice.

A Better Reason to Delay Kennedy’s Replacement

By Paul Schiff Berman

Mr. Berman is a professor at George Washington University Law School.

Almost immediately after Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement on Wednesday, Senate Democrats argued that his replacement should not be confirmed until after the midterm elections this fall — a version of the same argument that Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, used to stymie President Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court in 2016.

This is surely a valid argument, not least because Mr. McConnell’s blatantly anti-democratic ploy stole a judicial appointment from a popularly elected president and gave it to one who lost the popular vote by millions.

But there is another reason to withhold confirmation that both Republicans and Democrats should be able to agree on: People under the cloud of investigation do not get to pick the judges who may preside over their cases. By this logic, President Trump should not be permitted to appoint a new Supreme Court justice until after the special counsel investigation is over, and we know for sure whether there is evidence of wrongdoing.

True, that point is unlikely to stop Mr. McConnell or his colleagues. But it highlights the real risk involved in letting a deeply compromised president shape a court that may one day stand between him and impeachment.

www.nytimes.com/2018/06/29/opinion/a-better-reason-to-delay-kennedys-replacement.html

Fortunately the Democrats don'thave a choice, they have to do what they can until after the election. It's fair game at this point.

Why is that lying like a bazaar full of rugs is always "doing what they can" with Democrats?

Who is lying?

There should have been a floor vote for Garland, there wasn't and McConnell made up the "Biden rule" which wasn't a rule to justify him not doing his job. Now the Democrats are saying we are in another election year, while the President isn't up for re election, the body that is confirming the nominee is and the President is also under investigation. So, there is more than enough justification for the Democrats to do anything they legally can to delay the vote if we are to live by McConnel's standards.

Yep, which is nothing they can do to delay the vote.


.

I'm not sure Republicans will have the votes. We'll find out.

Oh, yeah, you just have our best interests at heart. Suuuuuure you do.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Pointing out that something is an ignorant opinion is not a knee jerk. It's just an observation.

No, he called it 'fakenews' it's technically not news at all, it's opinion and well, Snooter didn't have much of a point beyond that.

Well, it really isn't news that leftists are squirming around like worms in hot ashes, trying to find some way out of their mess, you're right about that.

It's actually a mess that McConnell started and if Trump picks somebody on the far right it's not going to help the Republicans in November.

It's actually a mess that you jackholes just invented five minutes ago and are vainly and wildly trying to attribute to McConnell.

And does anyone here actually believe that you're concerned about it harming Republicans in November? Show of hands?

Anyone?

Bueller?

Didn't think so.

It was invented in 2016. And no, I'm not concerned it will harm Republicans, I'm only hoping it will.

Now if only we could get you to hold your breath until it does.

 

[theHawk]

There are legitimate reasons why Trump should not be allowed to pick a supreme court justice.

A Better Reason to Delay Kennedy’s Replacement

By Paul Schiff Berman

Mr. Berman is a professor at George Washington University Law School.

Almost immediately after Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement on Wednesday, Senate Democrats argued that his replacement should not be confirmed until after the midterm elections this fall — a version of the same argument that Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, used to stymie President Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court in 2016.

This is surely a valid argument, not least because Mr. McConnell’s blatantly anti-democratic ploy stole a judicial appointment from a popularly elected president and gave it to one who lost the popular vote by millions.

But there is another reason to withhold confirmation that both Republicans and Democrats should be able to agree on: People under the cloud of investigation do not get to pick the judges who may preside over their cases. By this logic, President Trump should not be permitted to appoint a new Supreme Court justice until after the special counsel investigation is over, and we know for sure whether there is evidence of wrongdoing.

True, that point is unlikely to stop Mr. McConnell or his colleagues. But it highlights the real risk involved in letting a deeply compromised president shape a court that may one day stand between him and impeachment.

www.nytimes.com/2018/06/29/opinion/a-better-reason-to-delay-kennedys-replacement.html

Did the Democrats wait until after the midterms for Kagan’s confirmation vote? Nope, was done in the summer of 2010.

Also, President Trump isn’t under any investigation.

Now shut up and sit down.

And not a single Republican at the time suggested, or even hinted, that Kagan's confirmation should be delayed by the election.

And not a single one is suggesting it now.

 

[HappyJoy]

No, he called it 'fakenews' it's technically not news at all, it's opinion and well, Snooter didn't have much of a point beyond that.

Well, it really isn't news that leftists are squirming around like worms in hot ashes, trying to find some way out of their mess, you're right about that.

It's actually a mess that McConnell started and if Trump picks somebody on the far right it's not going to help the Republicans in November.

Oh but it WILL. This WINNING is kind of growing on us. I expect a HIGHER republican turn out because of it.

I hope you really think so.

The more you warn us that we shouldn't do it because it'll hurt us, the more sure we become that it's exactly what we should do, because you're actually afraid it will hurt YOU.

It'll hurt the country sure, no doubt about it.

 

[HappyJoy]

Fortunately the Democrats don'thave a choice, they have to do what they can until after the election. It's fair game at this point.

Why is that lying like a bazaar full of rugs is always "doing what they can" with Democrats?

Who is lying?

There should have been a floor vote for Garland, there wasn't and McConnell made up the "Biden rule" which wasn't a rule to justify him not doing his job. Now the Democrats are saying we are in another election year, while the President isn't up for re election, the body that is confirming the nominee is and the President is also under investigation. So, there is more than enough justification for the Democrats to do anything they legally can to delay the vote if we are to live by McConnel's standards.

Yep, which is nothing they can do to delay the vote.


.

I'm not sure Republicans will have the votes. We'll find out.

Oh, yeah, you just have our best interests at heart. Suuuuuure you do.

I don't think you're reading my posts, when did I till you I had your interests at heart? I'm simply saying here I don't know if the Republicans will have enough votes to pass a supreme court nominee.

 

[HappyJoy]

No, he called it 'fakenews' it's technically not news at all, it's opinion and well, Snooter didn't have much of a point beyond that.

Well, it really isn't news that leftists are squirming around like worms in hot ashes, trying to find some way out of their mess, you're right about that.

It's actually a mess that McConnell started and if Trump picks somebody on the far right it's not going to help the Republicans in November.

It's actually a mess that you jackholes just invented five minutes ago and are vainly and wildly trying to attribute to McConnell.

And does anyone here actually believe that you're concerned about it harming Republicans in November? Show of hands?

Anyone?

Bueller?

Didn't think so.

It was invented in 2016. And no, I'm not concerned it will harm Republicans, I'm only hoping it will.

Now if only we could get you to hold your breath until it does.

Hold my breathe for what? Who are you having a conversation with?