It's all about October 1!!!!

[LoneLaugher]

Merrick Garland.

Is that going to be your new moniker?

Refusal to give Garland a hearing was a fucked up thing the Repubs did. This seems like Dem payback for it.

Not really. Ford wasn’t invited to make her story public by any democrat.

But it is now a bargaining chip working in the Dems favor to delay confirmation, yes?

No. They didn’t try any bargaining with Gorsuch. He slid right in. This guy is a liar who has been credibly accused of sexual assault. No comparison.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Merrick Garland.

Is that going to be your new moniker?

Refusal to give Garland a hearing was a fucked up thing the Repubs did. This seems like Dem payback for it.

Not really. Ford wasn’t invited to make her story public by any democrat.

But it is now a bargaining chip working in the Dems favor to delay confirmation, yes?

No. They didn’t try any bargaining with Gorsuch. He slid right in. This guy is a liar who has been credibly accused of sexual assault. No comparison.

Meh. Gorsuch was a gimme, IMO. This Kavanaugh guy apparently has skeletons. The Dems have bared down and sunk their teeth in this time.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Merrick Garland.

Is that going to be your new moniker?

Nope. Just a tissue for your crocodile tears.

To the brain-dead right...

A private citizen making a complaint of sexual assault with as much evidence to back her story as any of the similar claims levied against Bill Clinton — is an anti-American traitorous bullshit ploy to stall a perfectly acceptable candidate for the Supreme Court....

But denying a sitting U.S. president his constitutional authority to work with the Senate to seat a replacement was patriotic and heroic and prevented a Muslim non-citizen President from seating another Communist on the highest bench in the land.

He has the authority to appoint, but the Senate has the authority to provide advice and consent, and there is no time limit on that.

Boo fucking hoo.

Another "fuh fuh fuh, Garland" fuh fuh fuh" cockless wonder from the left.

The Senate did not advise and consent.

They have no obligation to. Article 2, Sec. 2.

 

[Votto]

Merrick Garland.

Was a rapist or is this just pay back?

You need to go to your dopey John Kerry thread and apologize if you want to have a chat with me, guy. You are failing the man test again.

Oh I did, and waiting on pins and needles for you retort.

 

[BULLDOG]

Merrick Garland.

Is that going to be your new moniker?

Refusal to give Garland a hearing was a fucked up thing the Repubs did. This seems like Dem payback for it.

payback for refusal to vote?
While i agree they should have voted (the repubs are hacks), this is wayyy beyond payback.
Yesterday was the most disgusting day in washington in my lifetime.

Republicans are the ones holding things up. They have enough senators to push it through, if they wanted to. Quit your whining.

 

[ABikerSailor]

You know, you gotta admit...................all this furor over did he or didn't he has far overshadowed the crap he did while working for Jr's admin.

 

[Faun]

Is that going to be your new moniker?

Nope. Just a tissue for your crocodile tears.

To the brain-dead right...

A private citizen making a complaint of sexual assault with as much evidence to back her story as any of the similar claims levied against Bill Clinton — is an anti-American traitorous bullshit ploy to stall a perfectly acceptable candidate for the Supreme Court....

But denying a sitting U.S. president his constitutional authority to work with the Senate to seat a replacement was patriotic and heroic and prevented a Muslim non-citizen President from seating another Communist on the highest bench in the land.

He has the authority to appoint, but the Senate has the authority to provide advice and consent, and there is no time limit on that.

Boo fucking hoo.

Another "fuh fuh fuh, Garland" fuh fuh fuh" cockless wonder from the left.

The Senate did not advise and consent.

They have no obligation to. Article 2, Sec. 2.

I didn’t say they had to.

The president has the power to appoint justices to fill vacancies. If the Senate refuses to advise and consent then they are essentially robbing the president of that power. Now while there may be reasonable circumstances to do that, such as in the waning months of an outgoing president’s term, there was no such reasonable excuse with Obama, who still had almost a year left to serve.

So if the anyone wants to defend robbing a president of their power to fill a Supreme Court vacancy; then let them cry over what’s being done to Kavanaugh.

 

[deanrd]

Something else that happens in October.

We find out how many millions of Americans are going to lose their healthcare.

Because Republicans needed the healthcare money to pay for tax cuts for billionaires. Needy billionaires are way more important than the children of the middle class. Everybody knows that.

 

[Timmy]

Merrick Garland.

Is that going to be your new moniker?

Refusal to give Garland a hearing was a fucked up thing the Repubs did. This seems like Dem payback for it.

Not really. Ford wasn’t invited to make her story public by any democrat.

But it is now a bargaining chip working in the Dems favor to delay confirmation, yes?

Delay what ? A new congress doesn’t come until Jan. Don is still prez .

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Nope. Just a tissue for your crocodile tears.

To the brain-dead right...

A private citizen making a complaint of sexual assault with as much evidence to back her story as any of the similar claims levied against Bill Clinton — is an anti-American traitorous bullshit ploy to stall a perfectly acceptable candidate for the Supreme Court....

But denying a sitting U.S. president his constitutional authority to work with the Senate to seat a replacement was patriotic and heroic and prevented a Muslim non-citizen President from seating another Communist on the highest bench in the land.

He has the authority to appoint, but the Senate has the authority to provide advice and consent, and there is no time limit on that.

Boo fucking hoo.

Another "fuh fuh fuh, Garland" fuh fuh fuh" cockless wonder from the left.

The Senate did not advise and consent.

They have no obligation to. Article 2, Sec. 2.

I didn’t say they had to.

The president has the power to appoint justices to fill vacancies. If the Senate refuses to advise and consent then they are essentially robbing the president of that power.

See Article 2, Sec. 2. They are robbing nothing, since the president can only exercise that power "by and with" the advice and consent of the Senate. There is no obligation for the Senate to act upon providing such advice and consent.

Now while there may be reasonable circumstances to do that, such as in the waning months of an outgoing president’s term, there was no such reasonable excuse with Obama, who still had almost a year left to serve.

Again, see the article. There is no notation of circumstances under which the Senate must consider the reasonableness of presenting advice and consent, or denying it. It's a decision made by the majority party.

So if the anyone wants to defend robbing a president of their power to fill a Supreme Court vacancy; then let them cry over what’s being done to Kavanaugh.

Apples and screwdrivers. In this case the Senate seeks to provide advice and consent. In the earlier matter, it did not, by rights.

In the current matter, enemies of the United States in the Senate are trying to prevent the seating of a justice who will lean the Court decisively in applying the Constitution by its mandates, and prevent it from being undermined via legislation.

Them's the breaks.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Is there anyone who doesn't understand that this circus is all about delaying a Senate confirmation vote on Judge Kavanaugh until after October 1, when the Supreme Court begins its new session? If he is not confirmed before then, he will have to sit out the entire session and not have a vote on any cases to be decided.

EVERYTHING the Democrats have done has been towards this end. It has NOTHING to do with an honest search for the truth, since they have already stated that a mere accusation is sufficient grounds to disqualify Judge Kavanaugh.

After Dr. Ford gets all the mileage and publicity she can out of her unsubstantiated allegation, she will "graciously" withdraw it "for the good of the country."

And many of you will swallow this crap.

It never ends well for the Fascist Progressive democrat Party

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Merrick Garland.

Is that going to be your new moniker?

Refusal to give Garland a hearing was a fucked up thing the Repubs did. This seems like Dem payback for it.

Not really. Ford wasn’t invited to make her story public by any democrat.

But it is now a bargaining chip working in the Dems favor to delay confirmation, yes?

Delay what ? A new congress doesn’t come until Jan. Don is still prez .

Great. Irrelevant.

 

[martybegan]

Merrick Garland.

Is that going to be your new moniker?

Nope. Just a tissue for your crocodile tears.

To the brain-dead right...

A private citizen making a complaint of sexual assault with as much evidence to back her story as any of the similar claims levied against Bill Clinton — is an anti-American traitorous bullshit ploy to stall a perfectly acceptable candidate for the Supreme Court....

But denying a sitting U.S. president his constitutional authority to work with the Senate to seat a replacement was patriotic and heroic and prevented a Muslim non-citizen President from seating another Communist on the highest bench in the land.

He has the authority to appoint, but the Senate has the authority to provide advice and consent, and there is no time limit on that.

Boo fucking hoo.

Another "fuh fuh fuh, Garland" fuh fuh fuh" cockless wonder from the left.

The Senate did not advise and consent.

Nothing in the Constitution places a time limit on them doing so.

The Japanese have a term for what the Senate did, Mokusatu.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Is that going to be your new moniker?

Nope. Just a tissue for your crocodile tears.

To the brain-dead right...

A private citizen making a complaint of sexual assault with as much evidence to back her story as any of the similar claims levied against Bill Clinton — is an anti-American traitorous bullshit ploy to stall a perfectly acceptable candidate for the Supreme Court....

But denying a sitting U.S. president his constitutional authority to work with the Senate to seat a replacement was patriotic and heroic and prevented a Muslim non-citizen President from seating another Communist on the highest bench in the land.

He has the authority to appoint, but the Senate has the authority to provide advice and consent, and there is no time limit on that.

Boo fucking hoo.

Another "fuh fuh fuh, Garland" fuh fuh fuh" cockless wonder from the left.

The Senate did not advise and consent.

Nothing in the Constitution places a time limit on them doing so.

The Japanese have a term for what the Senate did, Mokusatu.

mokusatsu

mo ku sa tsu

You’ve said nothing.

 

[martybegan]

Nope. Just a tissue for your crocodile tears.

To the brain-dead right...

A private citizen making a complaint of sexual assault with as much evidence to back her story as any of the similar claims levied against Bill Clinton — is an anti-American traitorous bullshit ploy to stall a perfectly acceptable candidate for the Supreme Court....

But denying a sitting U.S. president his constitutional authority to work with the Senate to seat a replacement was patriotic and heroic and prevented a Muslim non-citizen President from seating another Communist on the highest bench in the land.

He has the authority to appoint, but the Senate has the authority to provide advice and consent, and there is no time limit on that.

Boo fucking hoo.

Another "fuh fuh fuh, Garland" fuh fuh fuh" cockless wonder from the left.

The Senate did not advise and consent.

Nothing in the Constitution places a time limit on them doing so.

The Japanese have a term for what the Senate did, Mokusatu.

mokusatsu

mo ku sa tsu

You’ve said nothing.

Wow, killing me for misspelling an obscure Japanese term...

Wanker.

 

[Faun]

Is that going to be your new moniker?

Nope. Just a tissue for your crocodile tears.

To the brain-dead right...

A private citizen making a complaint of sexual assault with as much evidence to back her story as any of the similar claims levied against Bill Clinton — is an anti-American traitorous bullshit ploy to stall a perfectly acceptable candidate for the Supreme Court....

But denying a sitting U.S. president his constitutional authority to work with the Senate to seat a replacement was patriotic and heroic and prevented a Muslim non-citizen President from seating another Communist on the highest bench in the land.

He has the authority to appoint, but the Senate has the authority to provide advice and consent, and there is no time limit on that.

Boo fucking hoo.

Another "fuh fuh fuh, Garland" fuh fuh fuh" cockless wonder from the left.

The Senate did not advise and consent.

Nothing in the Constitution places a time limit on them doing so.

The Japanese have a term for what the Senate did, Mokusatu.

I never said there was a time constraint. But in McConnell’s case, it was to shut out the president from filling a seat the president is empowered to appoint.

And my experience with politics is maneuvers like this ultimately result in paybacks. I have no doubt the day will come when Democrats return the favor.

 

[LoneLaugher]

To the brain-dead right...

A private citizen making a complaint of sexual assault with as much evidence to back her story as any of the similar claims levied against Bill Clinton — is an anti-American traitorous bullshit ploy to stall a perfectly acceptable candidate for the Supreme Court....

But denying a sitting U.S. president his constitutional authority to work with the Senate to seat a replacement was patriotic and heroic and prevented a Muslim non-citizen President from seating another Communist on the highest bench in the land.

He has the authority to appoint, but the Senate has the authority to provide advice and consent, and there is no time limit on that.

Boo fucking hoo.

Another "fuh fuh fuh, Garland" fuh fuh fuh" cockless wonder from the left.

The Senate did not advise and consent.

Nothing in the Constitution places a time limit on them doing so.

The Japanese have a term for what the Senate did, Mokusatu.

mokusatsu

mo ku sa tsu

You’ve said nothing.

Wow, killing me for misspelling an obscure Japanese term...

Wanker.

Not a misspelling. A butchering. And if it is obscure, why did you introduce it like it proved something?

You made no point about what the term means and how it relates to what the Senate did.

Your comment was pretentious and made you seem like a fucking doooooosh.

 

[miketx]

Merrick Garland.

Is that going to be your new moniker?

Nope. Just a tissue for your crocodile tears.

Yet you are the one crying and lying.

 

[martybegan]

Nope. Just a tissue for your crocodile tears.

To the brain-dead right...

A private citizen making a complaint of sexual assault with as much evidence to back her story as any of the similar claims levied against Bill Clinton — is an anti-American traitorous bullshit ploy to stall a perfectly acceptable candidate for the Supreme Court....

But denying a sitting U.S. president his constitutional authority to work with the Senate to seat a replacement was patriotic and heroic and prevented a Muslim non-citizen President from seating another Communist on the highest bench in the land.

He has the authority to appoint, but the Senate has the authority to provide advice and consent, and there is no time limit on that.

Boo fucking hoo.

Another "fuh fuh fuh, Garland" fuh fuh fuh" cockless wonder from the left.

The Senate did not advise and consent.

Nothing in the Constitution places a time limit on them doing so.

The Japanese have a term for what the Senate did, Mokusatu.

I never said there was a time constraint. But in McConnell’s case, it was to shut out the president from filling a seat the president is empowered to appoint.

And my experience with politics is maneuvers like this ultimately result in paybacks. I have no doubt the day will come when Democrats return the favor.

I'm sure they will. but until then The Republicans in the Senate broke no rules in what they did.

 

[martybegan]

He has the authority to appoint, but the Senate has the authority to provide advice and consent, and there is no time limit on that.

Boo fucking hoo.

Another "fuh fuh fuh, Garland" fuh fuh fuh" cockless wonder from the left.

The Senate did not advise and consent.

Nothing in the Constitution places a time limit on them doing so.

The Japanese have a term for what the Senate did, Mokusatu.

mokusatsu

mo ku sa tsu

You’ve said nothing.

Wow, killing me for misspelling an obscure Japanese term...

Wanker.

Not a misspelling. A butchering. And if it is obscure, why did you introduce it like it proved something?

You made no point about what the term means and how it relates to what the Senate did.

Your comment was pretentious and made you seem like a fucking doooooosh.

Because I remembered the concept from a Movie about the Hiroshima bombing, and it seemed apt.

I actually misspelled it far worse when i google searched it, and had to type in the english translation to find it.

But if something like this makes your dick hard in your hand and allows you to on with your day, go for it.