If RBG is gone, how about a deal: Merrick Garland for the wall and immigration reform?

[AntonToo]

Looking for a very big comprehensive deal.
How about this, if RBG is done trump has two options:
1. Amy Coney Barrett, Notre Dame professor
2. Merrick Garland, AND immigration reform, including:
1. No catch & release
2. No diversity lottery
3. No asylum claims unless pre-approved
4. No chain migration
5. Only merit based immigration for who the US needs
6. No birthright citizenship, i.e. no cottage industry for anchor babies
7. DACA kids get green cards but NOT citizenship
8. $25b for the wall and border security,

What do you think Nancy and Chuck would do? Barrett or Garland and border security?

Oh Oh - looks like someone is getting a little nervous about what a strong conservative majority court is going to wreck.

 

[martybegan]

SC picks are not like holding onto pickdiddle or punch buggy hits.

Republican actions with Garland created a rift between the parties

It will not go away with Republicans putting out a hand and saying.....Let’s be friends

LOL, that is the event you peg on a "rift" between parties?

Nice try. It started with Bork, and continued with every Republican nominee having to fight for votes, and every Dem nominee being given a pass by my gutless party.

Bork was given a hearing and was rejected. That is the way the system was designed to work.

Garland creates a whole new ballgame. It will not go away with the President saying ...let’s play nice

Garland wasn't the first nominee to get no hearing, to get no vote. He won't be the last.

First in a hundred years

But you are correct. He won’t be the last
Republicans have created a new norm for filling court vacancies
Vacancies will now remain unfilled until a President of your party takes office

A sudden death at the end of the term when your party doesn't control the Senate is the new "precedent"

Expansion of that would be on the party that expands it.

 

[martybegan]

SC picks are not like holding onto pickdiddle or punch buggy hits.

Republican actions with Garland created a rift between the parties

It will not go away with Republicans putting out a hand and saying.....Let’s be friends

LOL, that is the event you peg on a "rift" between parties?

Nice try. It started with Bork, and continued with every Republican nominee having to fight for votes, and every Dem nominee being given a pass by my gutless party.

Bork was given a hearing and was rejected. That is the way the system was designed to work.

Garland creates a whole new ballgame. It will not go away with the President saying ...let’s play nice

Bork was smeared with bullshit and the Dems played partisan hack-ball over a qualified individual.

Bork did not even get all Republicans to vote for him. Reagan still got to fill the seat
Something Obama was denied

Bork got taken in by a hatchet job, something progressives are known for, and something partisan twat-waddles like you applaud.

 

[rightwinger]

Republican actions with Garland created a rift between the parties

It will not go away with Republicans putting out a hand and saying.....Let’s be friends

LOL, that is the event you peg on a "rift" between parties?

Nice try. It started with Bork, and continued with every Republican nominee having to fight for votes, and every Dem nominee being given a pass by my gutless party.

Bork was given a hearing and was rejected. That is the way the system was designed to work.

Garland creates a whole new ballgame. It will not go away with the President saying ...let’s play nice

Garland wasn't the first nominee to get no hearing, to get no vote. He won't be the last.

First in a hundred years

But you are correct. He won’t be the last
Republicans have created a new norm for filling court vacancies
Vacancies will now remain unfilled until a President of your party takes office

A sudden death at the end of the term when your party doesn't control the Senate is the new "precedent"

Expansion of that would be on the party that expands it.

A Supreme Court seat was left vacant for over a year

Setting a new precedent that an opposition party Senate is under no obligation to fill a seat

 

[rightwinger]

Republican actions with Garland created a rift between the parties

It will not go away with Republicans putting out a hand and saying.....Let’s be friends

LOL, that is the event you peg on a "rift" between parties?

Nice try. It started with Bork, and continued with every Republican nominee having to fight for votes, and every Dem nominee being given a pass by my gutless party.

Bork was given a hearing and was rejected. That is the way the system was designed to work.

Garland creates a whole new ballgame. It will not go away with the President saying ...let’s play nice

Bork was smeared with bullshit and the Dems played partisan hack-ball over a qualified individual.

Bork did not even get all Republicans to vote for him. Reagan still got to fill the seat
Something Obama was denied

Bork got taken in by a hatchet job, something progressives are known for, and something partisan twat-waddles like you applaud.

Bork was held accountable for his own record. Even Republicans voted against him.

Poor choice by Reagan

 

[22lcidw]

LOL, that is the event you peg on a "rift" between parties?

Nice try. It started with Bork, and continued with every Republican nominee having to fight for votes, and every Dem nominee being given a pass by my gutless party.

Bork was given a hearing and was rejected. That is the way the system was designed to work.

Garland creates a whole new ballgame. It will not go away with the President saying ...let’s play nice

Bork was smeared with bullshit and the Dems played partisan hack-ball over a qualified individual.

Bork did not even get all Republicans to vote for him. Reagan still got to fill the seat
Something Obama was denied

Bork got taken in by a hatchet job, something progressives are known for, and something partisan twat-waddles like you applaud.

Bork was held accountable for his own record. Even Republicans voted against him.

Poor choice by Reagan

Saul Alinsky lives!

 

[rightwinger]

Bork was given a hearing and was rejected. That is the way the system was designed to work.

Garland creates a whole new ballgame. It will not go away with the President saying ...let’s play nice

Bork was smeared with bullshit and the Dems played partisan hack-ball over a qualified individual.

Bork did not even get all Republicans to vote for him. Reagan still got to fill the seat
Something Obama was denied

Bork got taken in by a hatchet job, something progressives are known for, and something partisan twat-waddles like you applaud.

Bork was held accountable for his own record. Even Republicans voted against him.

Poor choice by Reagan

Saul Alinsky lives!

Who?

 

[martybegan]

LOL, that is the event you peg on a "rift" between parties?

Nice try. It started with Bork, and continued with every Republican nominee having to fight for votes, and every Dem nominee being given a pass by my gutless party.

Bork was given a hearing and was rejected. That is the way the system was designed to work.

Garland creates a whole new ballgame. It will not go away with the President saying ...let’s play nice

Garland wasn't the first nominee to get no hearing, to get no vote. He won't be the last.

First in a hundred years

But you are correct. He won’t be the last
Republicans have created a new norm for filling court vacancies
Vacancies will now remain unfilled until a President of your party takes office

A sudden death at the end of the term when your party doesn't control the Senate is the new "precedent"

Expansion of that would be on the party that expands it.

A Supreme Court seat was left vacant for over a year

Setting a new precedent that an opposition party Senate is under no obligation to fill a seat

When a judge dies in an election year when the Senate is controlled by the other party.

If Dems want to extend on that, then it's on them to do so.

 

[martybegan]

LOL, that is the event you peg on a "rift" between parties?

Nice try. It started with Bork, and continued with every Republican nominee having to fight for votes, and every Dem nominee being given a pass by my gutless party.

Bork was given a hearing and was rejected. That is the way the system was designed to work.

Garland creates a whole new ballgame. It will not go away with the President saying ...let’s play nice

Bork was smeared with bullshit and the Dems played partisan hack-ball over a qualified individual.

Bork did not even get all Republicans to vote for him. Reagan still got to fill the seat
Something Obama was denied

Bork got taken in by a hatchet job, something progressives are known for, and something partisan twat-waddles like you applaud.

Bork was held accountable for his own record. Even Republicans voted against him.

Poor choice by Reagan

Bork as attacked and slandered by Teddy derp Kennedy, and the Dems piled on because of worry over Roe.

It's always about dead fetuses with democrats.

 

[rightwinger]

Bork was given a hearing and was rejected. That is the way the system was designed to work.

Garland creates a whole new ballgame. It will not go away with the President saying ...let’s play nice

Garland wasn't the first nominee to get no hearing, to get no vote. He won't be the last.

First in a hundred years

But you are correct. He won’t be the last
Republicans have created a new norm for filling court vacancies
Vacancies will now remain unfilled until a President of your party takes office

A sudden death at the end of the term when your party doesn't control the Senate is the new "precedent"

Expansion of that would be on the party that expands it.

A Supreme Court seat was left vacant for over a year

Setting a new precedent that an opposition party Senate is under no obligation to fill a seat

When a judge dies in an election year when the Senate is controlled by the other party.

If Dems want to extend on that, then it's on them to do so.

All bets are off
There is no longer an urgency to fill an empty seat

If it can sit empty for a year....it can sit for two years or three years

The Garland rule

 

[rightwinger]

Bork was given a hearing and was rejected. That is the way the system was designed to work.

Garland creates a whole new ballgame. It will not go away with the President saying ...let’s play nice

Bork was smeared with bullshit and the Dems played partisan hack-ball over a qualified individual.

Bork did not even get all Republicans to vote for him. Reagan still got to fill the seat
Something Obama was denied

Bork got taken in by a hatchet job, something progressives are known for, and something partisan twat-waddles like you applaud.

Bork was held accountable for his own record. Even Republicans voted against him.

Poor choice by Reagan

Bork as attacked and slandered by Teddy derp Kennedy, and the Dems piled on because of worry over Roe.

It's always about dead fetuses with democrats.

Bork was held accountable for his record
Garland never had a chance to defend his position

 

[martybegan]

Garland wasn't the first nominee to get no hearing, to get no vote. He won't be the last.

First in a hundred years

But you are correct. He won’t be the last
Republicans have created a new norm for filling court vacancies
Vacancies will now remain unfilled until a President of your party takes office

A sudden death at the end of the term when your party doesn't control the Senate is the new "precedent"

Expansion of that would be on the party that expands it.

A Supreme Court seat was left vacant for over a year

Setting a new precedent that an opposition party Senate is under no obligation to fill a seat

When a judge dies in an election year when the Senate is controlled by the other party.

If Dems want to extend on that, then it's on them to do so.

All bets are off
There is no longer an urgency to fill an empty seat

If it can sit empty for a year....it can sit for two years or three years

The Garland rule

No, again, the Republicans own this only in an election year when the opposite party is in charge. If it gets extended its on dems.

 

[martybegan]

Bork was smeared with bullshit and the Dems played partisan hack-ball over a qualified individual.

Bork did not even get all Republicans to vote for him. Reagan still got to fill the seat
Something Obama was denied

Bork got taken in by a hatchet job, something progressives are known for, and something partisan twat-waddles like you applaud.

Bork was held accountable for his own record. Even Republicans voted against him.

Poor choice by Reagan

Bork as attacked and slandered by Teddy derp Kennedy, and the Dems piled on because of worry over Roe.

It's always about dead fetuses with democrats.

Bork was held accountable for his record
Garland never had a chance to defend his position

Bork was Character Assassinated.

 

[rightwinger]

First in a hundred years

But you are correct. He won’t be the last
Republicans have created a new norm for filling court vacancies
Vacancies will now remain unfilled until a President of your party takes office

A sudden death at the end of the term when your party doesn't control the Senate is the new "precedent"

Expansion of that would be on the party that expands it.

A Supreme Court seat was left vacant for over a year

Setting a new precedent that an opposition party Senate is under no obligation to fill a seat

When a judge dies in an election year when the Senate is controlled by the other party.

If Dems want to extend on that, then it's on them to do so.

All bets are off
There is no longer an urgency to fill an empty seat

If it can sit empty for a year....it can sit for two years or three years

The Garland rule

No, again, the Republicans own this only in an election year when the opposite party is in charge. If it gets extended its on dems.

Sorry Republicans

Nobody put you on a clock and you don’t get to set rules for when Dems are calling the shots

Garland rule is you don’t have to fill a seat for the opposition party

 

[rightwinger]

Bork did not even get all Republicans to vote for him. Reagan still got to fill the seat
Something Obama was denied

Bork got taken in by a hatchet job, something progressives are known for, and something partisan twat-waddles like you applaud.

Bork was held accountable for his own record. Even Republicans voted against him.

Poor choice by Reagan

Bork as attacked and slandered by Teddy derp Kennedy, and the Dems piled on because of worry over Roe.

It's always about dead fetuses with democrats.

Bork was held accountable for his record
Garland never had a chance to defend his position

Bork was Character Assassinated.

It was his character

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

SC picks are not like holding onto pickdiddle or punch buggy hits.

Republican actions with Garland created a rift between the parties

It will not go away with Republicans putting out a hand and saying.....Let’s be friends

LOL, that is the event you peg on a "rift" between parties?

Nice try. It started with Bork, and continued with every Republican nominee having to fight for votes, and every Dem nominee being given a pass by my gutless party.

Bork was given a hearing and was rejected. That is the way the system was designed to work.

Garland creates a whole new ballgame. It will not go away with the President saying ...let’s play nice

Garland wasn't the first nominee to get no hearing, to get no vote. He won't be the last.

First in a hundred years

But you are correct. He won’t be the last
Republicans have created a new norm for filling court vacancies
Vacancies will now remain unfilled until a President of your party takes office

Republicans have created a new norm for filling court vacancies

Yup, Borking finally caught up to the Dems.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Bork was smeared with bullshit and the Dems played partisan hack-ball over a qualified individual.

Bork did not even get all Republicans to vote for him. Reagan still got to fill the seat
Something Obama was denied

Bork got taken in by a hatchet job, something progressives are known for, and something partisan twat-waddles like you applaud.

Bork was held accountable for his own record. Even Republicans voted against him.

Poor choice by Reagan

Bork as attacked and slandered by Teddy derp Kennedy, and the Dems piled on because of worry over Roe.

It's always about dead fetuses with democrats.

Bork was held accountable for his record
Garland never had a chance to defend his position

Meh, get in the back seat.
Elections have consequences.

 

[rightwinger]

Republican actions with Garland created a rift between the parties

It will not go away with Republicans putting out a hand and saying.....Let’s be friends

LOL, that is the event you peg on a "rift" between parties?

Nice try. It started with Bork, and continued with every Republican nominee having to fight for votes, and every Dem nominee being given a pass by my gutless party.

Bork was given a hearing and was rejected. That is the way the system was designed to work.

Garland creates a whole new ballgame. It will not go away with the President saying ...let’s play nice

Garland wasn't the first nominee to get no hearing, to get no vote. He won't be the last.

First in a hundred years

But you are correct. He won’t be the last
Republicans have created a new norm for filling court vacancies
Vacancies will now remain unfilled until a President of your party takes office

Republicans have created a new norm for filling court vacancies

Yup, Borking finally caught up to the Dems.

Bork had a Senate hearing and a vote by all Senators
He was rejected as unsuitable

Garland was rejected before he was even selected

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

LOL, that is the event you peg on a "rift" between parties?

Nice try. It started with Bork, and continued with every Republican nominee having to fight for votes, and every Dem nominee being given a pass by my gutless party.

Bork was given a hearing and was rejected. That is the way the system was designed to work.

Garland creates a whole new ballgame. It will not go away with the President saying ...let’s play nice

Garland wasn't the first nominee to get no hearing, to get no vote. He won't be the last.

First in a hundred years

But you are correct. He won’t be the last
Republicans have created a new norm for filling court vacancies
Vacancies will now remain unfilled until a President of your party takes office

Republicans have created a new norm for filling court vacancies

Yup, Borking finally caught up to the Dems.

Bork had a Senate hearing and a vote by all Senators
He was rejected as unsuitable

Garland was rejected before he was even selected

Bork had a Senate hearing and a vote by all Senators
He was rejected as unsuitable

Yup, Borking finally caught up to the Dems.

 

[rightwinger]

Bork was given a hearing and was rejected. That is the way the system was designed to work.

Garland creates a whole new ballgame. It will not go away with the President saying ...let’s play nice

Garland wasn't the first nominee to get no hearing, to get no vote. He won't be the last.

First in a hundred years

But you are correct. He won’t be the last
Republicans have created a new norm for filling court vacancies
Vacancies will now remain unfilled until a President of your party takes office

Republicans have created a new norm for filling court vacancies

Yup, Borking finally caught up to the Dems.

Bork had a Senate hearing and a vote by all Senators
He was rejected as unsuitable

Garland was rejected before he was even selected

Bork had a Senate hearing and a vote by all Senators
He was rejected as unsuitable

Yup, Borking finally caught up to the Dems.

Even Republicans voted against him

He was that bad