Dem Sen. Joe Manchin: “Senate Dems Would Be Wrong To Filibuster Gorsuch”

[Weatherman2020]

Manchin has figured out the craziness of the left is how you get more Trump. And Manchin does not want more Trump.

 

[Rustic]

Most likely Trump will be picking 3 Supreme Court justices, if the dunes had any brains they would just approve this first guy...
because if they force the Republicans to go nuclear that means the next nominees only need 51 votes...

 

[basquebromance]

Michael Moore Threatens Dems: Block Gorsuch or Face Primaries

 

[Rustic]

Michael Moore Threatens Dems: Block Gorsuch or Face Primaries

Jabba the hut needs to eat more…

 

[Weatherman2020]

Michael Moore Threatens Dems: Block Gorsuch or Face Primaries

Yeah, Moore hasn't figured out why Trump is turning into a demigod.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Michael Moore Threatens Dems: Block Gorsuch or Face Primaries

Jabba the hut needs to eat more…

Moore just got on a plane for Quebec.

 

[Missourian]

More Democratic senators: Let’s give this Gorsuch guy a hearing and a vote (but that doesn’t mean I’m for cloture) - Hot Air

 

[tolumba21]

This is a constitutional epidemic because Trump's SCOTUS nominee was trying to replace a nominee of Obama's SCOTUS pick. That is hardly fair, and unconstitutional. I rest my case.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Missourian]

Yet, while we all watch in amazement how Democrats, some of whom voted for Gorsuch’s confirmation to the appellate court, make the argument that he’s dangerous and a consumer of human flesh, there are six Senate Democrats (so far) who are committed to giving Gorsuch a hearing and a vote: Sens. Jon Tester (D-MT), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Joe Manchin (D-WV), Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND), and Chris Coons (D-DE)

More Democratic senators: Let’s give this Gorsuch guy a hearing and a vote (but that doesn’t mean I’m for cloture) - Hot Air
​

How does that match up to my map?

Montana, North Dakota, Missouri, and West Virginia.

Add Florida, Ohio, Indiana and Wisconsin... there's your 60 votes.​

 

[Missourian]

This is a constitutional epidemic because Trump's SCOTUS nominee was trying to replace a nominee of Obama's SCOTUS pick. That is hardly fair, and unconstitutional. I rest my case.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Everyone knew the stakes of the 2016 elections...your side lost. And with that loss came the loss of a supreme court pick. "Elections have consequences" remember? Had Hillary won, you'd be demanding an up or down vote on her appointment.

P.S. - Not everything you don't like is unconstitutional. Everything was above board, completely legal and constitutional.

 

[my2¢]

I like his "2 wrongs don't make a right" statement. It has been a while since I heard somebody in Washington speak as an adult.

 

[tolumba21]

This is a constitutional epidemic because Trump's SCOTUS nominee was trying to replace a nominee of Obama's SCOTUS pick. That is hardly fair, and unconstitutional. I rest my case.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Everyone knew the stakes of the 2016 elections...your side lost. And with that loss came the loss of a supreme court pick. "Elections have consequences" remember? Had Hillary won, you'd be demanding an up or down vote on her appointment.

P.S. - Not everything you don't like is unconstitutional. Everything was above board, completely legal and constitutional.

Yeah, I don't like Gorsuch very much. In my opinion, I disagree with why President Trump picked Gorsuch, and not why Former Pres. Obama picked Merrick Garland. It is about the one that will replace the late justice Antonin Scalia. And in the US Constitution, the judicial branch (Article III) give power and create all cases and trials whatsoever.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[AnCap'n_Murica]

Manchin has figured out the craziness of the left is how you get more Trump. And Manchin does not want more Trump.

The only thing that he has figured out is that he wants to be re-elected.

 

[Missourian]

Yeah, I don't like Gorsuch very much. In my opinion, I disagree with why President Trump picked Gorsuch, and not why Former Pres. Obama picked Merrick Garland. It is about the one that will replace the late justice Antonin Scalia. And in the US Constitution, the judicial branch (Article III) give power and create all cases and trials whatsoever.

Uh huh...um...thanks for clarifying that...

 

[tolumba21]

News media is making a major focus on this defocused line on why did it 'go nuclear' after the court's selection.

Less than 24 hours later, President Trump sent a direct message to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) about using a political maneuver called the "nuclear option" to streamline the approval of his nominee without needing 60 votes.

Citing an expansion of filibustering by Republicans to block President Barack Obama's nominees for U.S. Court of Appeals seats, then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) used the nuclear option to create more relaxed Senate precedents for those confirmations.

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, D-New York, isn't giving Republicans much of a choice on whether or not they will have to use the nuclear option, saying Democrats will ensure Gorsuch gets an "exhaustive" hearing and need the full amount of votes.

The Nuclear Option Republicans Can Use to Confirm Supreme Court Nominee Gorsuch

Trump tells Senate Republicans to 'go nuclear' in defense of Gorsuch

Trump encourages McConnell to 'go nuclear' if needed in upcoming battle over Supreme Court nominee

Donald Trump has advised Republicans to use the so-called “nuclear option” to force through his supreme court nominee against Democratic opposition.

The nominee requires 60 votes in the Senate, meaning that at least eight Democrats must offer support to avoid a filibuster, unless Republican Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell changes Senate rules to lower the threshold to 50 votes – a scenario known as the “nuclear option”.

Anthony Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, said: “After unnecessarily holding open a vacancy on the supreme court for nearly a year under President Obama, any effort now by Senate Republicans to rush this process should be resisted.” Gorsuch was welcomed by Senate Republicans to Capitol Hill on Wednesday.

Trump tells Republicans to use 'nuclear option' to confirm supreme court pick

Sent from my LG-D415 using Tapatalk

 

[tyroneweaver]

Manchin has figured out the craziness of the left is how you get more Trump. And Manchin does not want more Trump.

Democrats Complain About Gorsuch. But All Of Them, Including Obama and Schumer, Voted For Him in 2006.

 

[ptbw forever]

Michael Moore Threatens Dems: Block Gorsuch or Face Primaries

Primaries will just mean that Republicans win even more seats than expected and Trump can just replace the entire Supreme Court.

 

[oreo]

Manchin has figured out the craziness of the left is how you get more Trump. And Manchin does not want more Trump.

Well if the Democrats like this Supreme court nominee, you can bet the Reich wingers on this board won't--LOL

"Many other notable former Senate Democrats voted to confirm Gorsuch back in 2006. Former Massachusetts Sen. and Secretary of State John Kerry was listed as voting in favor of Gorsuch, as was Hillary Clinton and former Vice President and Sen. Joe Biden.

Gorsuch's Harvard Law School classmate and eventual president, Barrack Obama, also voted to support Gorsuch's nomination to the 10th Circuit Court."
Here Are the Democrats Who Voted for Neil Gorsuch as a Circuit Court Judge in 2006

ssssh--they think they're getting another Judge Scalia, but who they're really getting is another John Edwards.

So every one of these Democrats voted FOR Gorsuch for the 10th circuit.



View image on Twitter

 

[Little-Acorn]

Dem Sen. Joe Manchin: “Senate Dems Would Be Wrong To Filibuster Gorsuch”


Dems have been wrong on nearly everything they've done for many years.

Don't expect that to stop them now.

Expect the usual screams, hysterical protests etc. And the Republicans to finally change the Senate rules to eliminate filibusters for Supreme Court justices, and confirm the guy.

The Democrats have checked out of any coherent contributions to a peaceful transition of power. "The right thing" is the last thing they will consider doing.

 

[Little-Acorn]

This is a constitutional epidemic because Trump's SCOTUS nominee was trying to replace a nominee of Obama's SCOTUS pick. That is hardly fair, and unconstitutional.

It's always a hoot to hear Democrats demanding "fairness". And pretending they have any idea of what is constitutional.