Should McConnell invoke the "nuke option" on behalf of Gorsuch?

[Iceweasel]

Regarding this issue, basically, what McConnell did was to "cut" Obama's term to seven years........and following Trump's own mantra about Hillary Clinton when he stated that no candidate can viable while under an FBI investigation, then the Trump's administration's nominee for a seat in the SCOTUS cannot ALSO be viable while this current administration is under the same FBI cloud.

Obama did quite a lot in his last year. It's been discussed frequently and you are not entitled to create facts for reality, it just distances you further from it. I don't recall Trump saying Hillary wasn't viable, whatever that means.

How many more years is Trump going to be "investigated"? If there was anything it would have been leaked to the democrat news outlets long ago. I heard one democrat this morning that voted against Reid's nuclear option say he is still opposed to it so he will likely vote for Gorsuch since there is no good reason not to. I imagine he is not alone.

 

[nat4900]

I don't recall Trump saying Hillary wasn't viable, whatever that means.

Just to refresh (or educate) your faulty memory....

Serving at the time as the chairman of the Republican National Committee, Priebus put it pretty clearly: He thought the FBI probe alone was enough to prove Clinton shouldn’t be President. “Clinton's conduct was a severe error in judgment that grossly endangered our national security and put highly classified information at risk,” the man now serving as Trump’s chief of staff said in a February 2016 statement.
What Trump, GOP said about FBI probes to attack Clinton

Now that we have found out that Trump has ALSO been under FBI investigation, you morons simply "forget" the above.

 

[Iceweasel]

I don't recall Trump saying Hillary wasn't viable, whatever that means.

Just to refresh (or educate) your faulty memory....

Serving at the time as the chairman of the Republican National Committee, Priebus put it pretty clearly: He thought the FBI probe alone was enough to prove Clinton shouldn’t be President. “Clinton's conduct was a severe error in judgment that grossly endangered our national security and put highly classified information at risk,” the man now serving as Trump’s chief of staff said in a February 2016 statement.
What Trump, GOP said about FBI probes to attack Clinton

Now that we have found out that Trump has ALSO been under FBI investigation, you morons simply "forget" the above.

Trump is Priebus on your planet?

 

[nat4900]

I'll bet you $5 that the leftists on this board actually think the Constitution requires sixty votes to confirm.

Since you nitwits are so much in love of a simple majority, you forget WHO won the popular vote and were bailed out by the outdated EC......

Look, I don't mind if Gorsuch gets in........and that you right wingers want to "forget" how Garland was treated by the turtle-faced, McConnell.......after all, the makeup of the SCOTUS would not be much different than when the ultra-partisan Scalia (may the devil torture his soul) was alive................HOWEVER, if another opening were to come up under Trump, filibuster is not only an option, IT IS A MUST !!!

 

[nat4900]

Trump is Priebus on your planet?

Oh, is Podesta Hillary Clinton?

Do you want for me to list how many times Trump called Hillary Clinton "crooked Hillary" because of the FBI probe?

 

[Iceweasel]

Trump is Priebus on your planet?

Oh, is Podesta Hillary Clinton?

Do you want for me to list how many times Trump called Hillary Clinton "crooked Hillary" because of the FBI probe?

You misunderstood the question.

"Trump is Priebus on your planet?"

 

[Fang]

In "fairness" to Reid (whom I very much disliked) applied the nuke option ONLY to appoint the dozens upon dozens of federal judge-ships that were being filibustered by the GOP........EXCLUDING the option from any seats in the SCOTUS.

That is such a disingenuous statement. When Sotamayor and Kagan were nominated democrats had the votes. There was no need for the nuclear option. However, Reid used the option to appoint many federal judges. He tipped his hand on his intentions. I have no doubt he would have done it with Garland if given the opportunity. The end justified the means with Reid. The GOP must use the nuclear option if Dems try to block Gorsuch as this is the new tactic brought on by Reid.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Regarding this issue, basically, what McConnell did was to "cut" Obama's term to seven years........and following Trump's own mantra about Hillary Clinton when he stated that no candidate can viable while under an FBI investigation, then the Trump's administration's nominee for a seat in the SCOTUS cannot ALSO be viable while this current administration is under the same FBI cloud.

Obama did quite a lot in his last year. It's been discussed frequently and you are not entitled to create facts for reality, it just distances you further from it. I don't recall Trump saying Hillary wasn't viable, whatever that means.

How many more years is Trump going to be "investigated"? If there was anything it would have been leaked to the democrat news outlets long ago. I heard one democrat this morning that voted against Reid's nuclear option say he is still opposed to it so he will likely vote for Gorsuch since there is no good reason not to. I imagine he is not alone.

You heard an ethical, principled Democrat? I thought that was like sighting a unicorn. Who was it?

 

[Iceweasel]

Regarding this issue, basically, what McConnell did was to "cut" Obama's term to seven years........and following Trump's own mantra about Hillary Clinton when he stated that no candidate can viable while under an FBI investigation, then the Trump's administration's nominee for a seat in the SCOTUS cannot ALSO be viable while this current administration is under the same FBI cloud.

Obama did quite a lot in his last year. It's been discussed frequently and you are not entitled to create facts for reality, it just distances you further from it. I don't recall Trump saying Hillary wasn't viable, whatever that means.

How many more years is Trump going to be "investigated"? If there was anything it would have been leaked to the democrat news outlets long ago. I heard one democrat this morning that voted against Reid's nuclear option say he is still opposed to it so he will likely vote for Gorsuch since there is no good reason not to. I imagine he is not alone.

You heard an ethical, principled Democrat? I thought that was like sighting a unicorn. Who was it?

Ethical Democrat, that's an oxymoron. Heavy on the moron.

 

[postman]

That is such a disingenuous statement. When Sotamayor and Kagan were nominated democrats had the votes. There was no need for the nuclear option. However, Reid used the option to appoint many federal judges. He tipped his hand on his intentions. I have no doubt he would have done it with Garland if given the opportunity. The end justified the means with Reid. The GOP must use the nuclear option if Dems try to block Gorsuch as this is the new tactic brought on by Reid.

I believe the gang of (somewhere around 12 or14) were there to keep the nuclear option from being used

 

[Cecilie1200]

I don't recall Trump saying Hillary wasn't viable, whatever that means.

Just to refresh (or educate) your faulty memory....

Serving at the time as the chairman of the Republican National Committee, Priebus put it pretty clearly: He thought the FBI probe alone was enough to prove Clinton shouldn’t be President. “Clinton's conduct was a severe error in judgment that grossly endangered our national security and put highly classified information at risk,” the man now serving as Trump’s chief of staff said in a February 2016 statement.
What Trump, GOP said about FBI probes to attack Clinton

Now that we have found out that Trump has ALSO been under FBI investigation, you morons simply "forget" the above.

So your "evidence" that Trump said Hillary wasn't viable is a quote from Reince Preibus saying she made an error in judgement?

 

[nat4900]

So your "evidence" that Trump said Hillary wasn't viable is a quote from Reince Preibus saying she made an error in judgement?

Ahhhhh, you're among the right wing morons who never figured out what Trump was repeatedly saying when he called Clinton "crooked Hillary"????

You folks are seriously dense.....LOL

BTW......Currently, ONLY Trump is under FBI investigation, but you're too dense to realize it......yet.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I'll bet you $5 that the leftists on this board actually think the Constitution requires sixty votes to confirm.

Since you nitwits are so much in love of a simple majority, you forget WHO won the popular vote and were bailed out by the outdated EC......

Look, I don't mind if Gorsuch gets in........and that you right wingers want to "forget" how Garland was treated by the turtle-faced, McConnell.......after all, the makeup of the SCOTUS would not be much different than when the ultra-partisan Scalia (may the devil torture his soul) was alive................HOWEVER, if another opening were to come up under Trump, filibuster is not only an option, IT IS A MUST !!!

Since you nitwits are so much in love with blanket "always or never" applications of concept, you forget that different situations have different circumstances and different rules, and they do so for a reason.

I do not "love" simple majorities OR hate them, and even if I did one or the other, that would not automatically mean that they always apply, you frigging halfwit bandwidth-wasting moron. For the record, I also did not express a personal "feelz" about either way. I just made reference to the fact that the Constitution does not require 60 votes to confirm a Supreme Court Justice. The Constitution - which you should really read at some point - also contains the OTHER factual point you seem to have so much trouble wrapping both brain cells around: that the election of a President has diddly squat to do with your apocryphal (read: bullshit invention) "popular vote".

And while I realize this likely is not actually written down anywhere (not that you ever bother to frigging READ what's written down, anyway), there is no provision for laws to stop taking effect merely because they're "outdated" (translation: this law has prevented me from doing whatever I want for a really long time!).

Furthermore, pinhead, I have no desire whatsoever to forget the proceedings surrounding Garland because, despite your clearly-stated opinion to the contrary, I have no actual problem, morally or procedurally, with them. You never seem to get it through your damned head that your worldview doesn't constitute a moral standard I aspire to, YOU do not constitute a moral authority I answer to, and I would consider it a high insult if the likes of you actually approved of me.

While it is true that Garland would have created a different makeup on the Court than Justice Scalia did, it is utterly irrelevant to anything being discussed here, as is your incredibly classy wishing ill on the dead. Tell me, have you always been gutter trash, or does the DNC offer classes on it when you submit your voter registration?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Regarding this issue, basically, what McConnell did was to "cut" Obama's term to seven years........and following Trump's own mantra about Hillary Clinton when he stated that no candidate can viable while under an FBI investigation, then the Trump's administration's nominee for a seat in the SCOTUS cannot ALSO be viable while this current administration is under the same FBI cloud.

Obama did quite a lot in his last year. It's been discussed frequently and you are not entitled to create facts for reality, it just distances you further from it. I don't recall Trump saying Hillary wasn't viable, whatever that means.

How many more years is Trump going to be "investigated"? If there was anything it would have been leaked to the democrat news outlets long ago. I heard one democrat this morning that voted against Reid's nuclear option say he is still opposed to it so he will likely vote for Gorsuch since there is no good reason not to. I imagine he is not alone.

You heard an ethical, principled Democrat? I thought that was like sighting a unicorn. Who was it?

Ethical Democrat, that's an oxymoron. Heavy on the moron.

True, but it sounds like one of them stumbled accidentally into it.

 

[Cecilie1200]

So your "evidence" that Trump said Hillary wasn't viable is a quote from Reince Preibus saying she made an error in judgement?

Ahhhhh, you're among the right wing morons who never figured out what Trump was repeatedly saying when he called Clinton "crooked Hillary"????

You folks are seriously dense.....LOL

BTW......Currently, ONLY Trump is under FBI investigation, but you're too dense to realize it......yet.

Well, admittedly, it was a hard code to crack (for illiterate mouthbreathers like you, anyway), but I think what Trump was saying when he called her "Crooked Hillary" was that she was crooked. In the legal and ethical sense, not in the posture sense, in case you were confused.

Since my "Dictionaries for Democrats" program still hasn't gotten off the ground, let me just clarify for you that "crooked" and "non-viable" are not synonyms. With lackwits like you in the electorate, they aren't even cause-and-effect, as they should be.

 

[bripat9643]

Democrats are seriously considering a filibuster on the vote for Gorsuch to the SCOTUS....The memory of how judge Garland was treated by McConnell, coupled with the very real fact that the Trump administration is currently under FBI (and other intelligence agencies') investigation...possibly even subsequent criminal investigations.

So, should McConnell invoke the nuclear option to seat Gorsuch and risk a precedent that could backfire for the GOP.......or allow the Gorsuch confirmation to wither away?

It won't backfire because Republicans never filibuster court nominees.

Sent from my SM-G930U using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

"They that sow the wind, shall reap the whirlwind",

What are they going to reap?

Sent from my SM-G930U using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

 

[edward37]

Democrats are seriously considering a filibuster on the vote for Gorsuch to the SCOTUS....The memory of how judge Garland was treated by McConnell, coupled with the very real fact that the Trump administration is currently under FBI (and other intelligence agencies') investigation...possibly even subsequent criminal investigations.

So, should McConnell invoke the nuclear option to seat Gorsuch and risk a precedent that could backfire for the GOP.......or allow the Gorsuch confirmation to wither away?

It won't backfire because Republicans never filibuster court nominees.

Sent from my SM-G930U using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

"They that sow the wind, shall reap the whirlwind",

What are they going to reap?

Sent from my SM-G930U using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

The British spy will be telling who pissed on who,,,,,,