Should the Judiciary Hearing Be Scrapped & Just A Confirmation Vote Be Held?

[Billiejeens]

Usually I don't pay attention to anything Rush Limbaugh says because he is more often than not a pompous arrogant windbag....but I just read the headline talking about how Limbaugh made this suggestion.

He makes a great point - we know how this is going to go. In the coming confirmation hearings Democrats are going to do their very best to top their immoral, unethical, despicable assault they perpetrated against Kavanaugh.

The Kavanaugh hearings were a complete, disgusting, heinous waste of time...so why bother?!

Why put any candidate through such a despicable process when we already know in the end, even if the candidate displayed the wisdom of Solomon and walked on water, the Democrats would still NOT vote for them?

Complete the necessary legal background checks and just vote.

Everything from the moment the nominee is named to the moment the vote is held will be nothing but an immoral, unethical character / job / family / life assassination attempt by the Democrats who only want to prevent the vacancy from being filled by President Trump.

Why allow the Democrats do that to anyone?!

Limbaugh calls on Senate GOP to scrap Judiciary Committee hearing for Trump SCOTUS nominee

Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee should proceed directly to a vote on President Trump's forthcoming Supreme Court nominee without bothering to hold a confirmation hearing, syndicated radio host Rush Limbaugh said Tuesday.

www.foxnews.com

easy, are you still to fucking lazy to read the Constitution? Your dumb ass needs to get a 4th grader to "advise" you about Article 2, Sec 2, Cls 2 to enlighten your ignorant ass about the "advise and consent " requirements in the Constitution; especially as it pertains to judges. Oh, and pass that on to that idiot Rush and your idiotic brethren who responded to the OP with such vacuous un-Constitutional suggestions!

What does Article 2 Section 2, Clause 2 specifically say that has caused to to write this?
Yes I am familiar with what it says -

 

[easyt65]

easy, are you still to fucking lazy to read the Constitution? Your dumb ass needs to get a 4th grader to "advise" you about Article 2, Sec 2, Cls 2 to enlighten your ignorant ass about the "advise and consent " requirements in the Constitution; especially as it pertains to judges. Oh, and pass that on to that idiot Rush and your idiotic brethren who responded to the OP with such vacuous un-Constitutional suggestions!

I read the Constitution. I know what it says.

Show me in Article 2, Sec 2, Cls 2 / in the "advise and consent " requirements where it states the politics of personal destruction - immorally, unethically, despicable attempting to destroy a nominee personally is either part of the 'advise' or 'consent' phase.

What they did to Kavanaugh was NEITHER!

 

[my2¢]

I don't see the harm in scrapping the judiciary hearing. Ideally there is good reason for these hearings but in reality they've become pretty much of a joke.

 

[easyt65]

After thinking about it I can answer one of my own questions:

Why should we allow Democrats to put another nominee through another 'Kavanaugh assassination attempt / inquisition'?

Because the majority of Americans turned on the Democrats last time, disapproving of the disgusting display.

Let the Democrats attack a woman and her Catholic religion...it will not go well for them.

 

[Slade3200]

Usually I don't pay attention to anything Rush Limbaugh says because he is more often than not a pompous arrogant windbag....but I just read the headline talking about how Limbaugh made this suggestion.

He makes a great point - we know how this is going to go. In the coming confirmation hearings Democrats are going to do their very best to top their immoral, unethical, despicable assault they perpetrated against Kavanaugh.

The Kavanaugh hearings were a complete, disgusting, heinous waste of time...so why bother?!

Why put any candidate through such a despicable process when we already know in the end, even if the candidate displayed the wisdom of Solomon and walked on water, the Democrats would still NOT vote for them?

Complete the necessary legal background checks and just vote.

Everything from the moment the nominee is named to the moment the vote is held will be nothing but an immoral, unethical character / job / family / life assassination attempt by the Democrats who only want to prevent the vacancy from being filled by President Trump.

Why allow the Democrats do that to anyone?!

Limbaugh calls on Senate GOP to scrap Judiciary Committee hearing for Trump SCOTUS nominee

Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee should proceed directly to a vote on President Trump's forthcoming Supreme Court nominee without bothering to hold a confirmation hearing, syndicated radio host Rush Limbaugh said Tuesday.

www.foxnews.com

So you’re advocating breaking from the legal process that has been established over decades so you can push your parties candidate through before an election? Is that what I’m hearing? Do you plan on continuing to call yourself a supporter of law and order or do you just move to partisan hack?

I posted what the process is. Hearings must be held, hearings that could be a simple question and answer period, and those hearings can end based on a vote to send the decision to the floor for a vote.

I am not against the Constitution. I am against putting a nominee in front of Democrats who will ask questions only to cut them off before they can answer and rabidly, viciously, immorally attack them personally - AS THE DEMOCRATS DID RECENTLY TO US AG BARR...AS THEY DID AGAINST KAVANAUGH.

The disgusting attack on Barr recently shows the Democrats have not changed, that they don't want answers or to learn. They still engage in 'seek and destroy' missions, as they did with Kavanaught.

Nothing has changed. Barrett has not even named yet but the Democrats have already been immorally....and potentially ILLEGALLY (discrimination against religious faith) attacking her for being Catholic.

As I have already said, Democrats seek to destroy whatever nominee is named - at the end of their onslaught against the nominee not one Democrat will vote for them...just as was the case BEFORE they began attacking the nominee.

Allowing the Democrats to perpetrate another despicable personal attack - to execute their politics of personal destruction - against another nominee simply for being another party's nominee, should NOT be tolerated.

As I said before there is been a constitutional process of selecting and consenting new SCOTUS judges. Do you know on average how long this process has taken in the past?

 

[Slade3200]

After thinking about it I can answer one of my own questions:

Why should we allow Democrats to put another nominee through another 'Kavanaugh assassination attempt / inquisition'?

Because the majority of Americans turned on the Democrats last time, disapproving of the disgusting display.

Let the Democrats attack a woman and her Catholic religion...it will not go well for them.

That’s why we have elections and if the Dems actions cause the people to turn on them then they don’t win re-election. That’s how the system works. If their actions cause such a backlash then there’s no reason to be opposed to them doing it again. Kav is wearing the robe after all

 

[konradv]

If the Republicans attempt to short circuit the confirmation process, the Democrats should walk out and deny them a quorum. If Scalia dying in Feb. of an election year was too close to the election, then RBG's death in Sept. should be even more so, unless you're a total hypocrite.

RBG herself declared in 2016 that it is a PRESIDENT'S right and duty to fill vacancies, that a President does not stop being a President in his last year.

Barry declared if he had the opportunity to fill a vacancy his last year he would, and Democrats su]ported him.

Hypocrite? STFU! The Democrats are the living embodiment of the word. Stop you crying and temper tantrum.

As usual, ignoring the time restraints and attempting to shove his selection down our throats. Why wasn't there enough time in '16, but there is enough time now? What's the SPIN on that one? I say, Dems walk out. Deny them a quorum. Don't participate in this farce at all.

 

[Slade3200]

If the Republicans attempt to short circuit the confirmation process, the Democrats should walk out and deny them a quorum. If Scalia dying in Feb. of an election year was too close to the election, then RBG's death in Sept. should be even more so, unless you're a total hypocrite.

RBG herself declared in 2016 that it is a PRESIDENT'S right and duty to fill vacancies, that a President does not stop being a President in his last year.

Barry declared if he had the opportunity to fill a vacancy his last year he would, and Democrats su]ported him.

Hypocrite? STFU! The Democrats are the living embodiment of the word. Stop you crying and temper tantrum.

As usual, ignoring the time restraints and attempting to shove his selection down our throats. Why wasn't there enough time in '16, but there is enough time now? What's the SPIN on that one? I say, Dems walk out. Deny them a quorum. Don't participate in this farce at all.

The senate GOP is saying they had a mandate to block Obama’s pick and this time they have a mandate to select Trumps. It has to do with the Party in power. Each one of those senators and Trump have recordings of them directly contradicting themselves between then and now. This new spin of theirs is not adequate. None of them including Trump should ever be believed, they are all political hacks. But most of us already knew that.

 

[Billiejeens]

If the Republicans attempt to short circuit the confirmation process, the Democrats should walk out and deny them a quorum. If Scalia dying in Feb. of an election year was too close to the election, then RBG's death in Sept. should be even more so, unless you're a total hypocrite.

RBG herself declared in 2016 that it is a PRESIDENT'S right and duty to fill vacancies, that a President does not stop being a President in his last year.

Barry declared if he had the opportunity to fill a vacancy his last year he would, and Democrats su]ported him.

Hypocrite? STFU! The Democrats are the living embodiment of the word. Stop you crying and temper tantrum.

As usual, ignoring the time restraints and attempting to shove his selection down our throats. Why wasn't there enough time in '16, but there is enough time now? What's the SPIN on that one? I say, Dems walk out. Deny them a quorum. Don't participate in this farce at all.

The senate GOP is saying they had a mandate to block Obama’s pick and this time they have a mandate to select Trumps. It has to do with the Party in power. Each one of those senators and Trump have recordings of them directly contradicting themselves between then and now. This new spin of theirs is not adequate. None of them including Trump should ever be believed, they are all political hacks. But most of us already knew that.

You mean each of the Democrat Senators, of course.

The situation is not the same - you won't admit that, and that's okay.

 

[Slade3200]

If the Republicans attempt to short circuit the confirmation process, the Democrats should walk out and deny them a quorum. If Scalia dying in Feb. of an election year was too close to the election, then RBG's death in Sept. should be even more so, unless you're a total hypocrite.

RBG herself declared in 2016 that it is a PRESIDENT'S right and duty to fill vacancies, that a President does not stop being a President in his last year.

Barry declared if he had the opportunity to fill a vacancy his last year he would, and Democrats su]ported him.

Hypocrite? STFU! The Democrats are the living embodiment of the word. Stop you crying and temper tantrum.

As usual, ignoring the time restraints and attempting to shove his selection down our throats. Why wasn't there enough time in '16, but there is enough time now? What's the SPIN on that one? I say, Dems walk out. Deny them a quorum. Don't participate in this farce at all.

The senate GOP is saying they had a mandate to block Obama’s pick and this time they have a mandate to select Trumps. It has to do with the Party in power. Each one of those senators and Trump have recordings of them directly contradicting themselves between then and now. This new spin of theirs is not adequate. None of them including Trump should ever be believed, they are all political hacks. But most of us already knew that.

You mean each of the Democrat Senators, of course.

The situation is not the same - you won't admit that, and that's okay.

No two situations are the same but these two are similar enough to show the blatant hypocrisy of both parties. More so from the GOP as the Dems can claim the move to successfully block Garland set a precedent

 

[Billiejeens]

If the Republicans attempt to short circuit the confirmation process, the Democrats should walk out and deny them a quorum. If Scalia dying in Feb. of an election year was too close to the election, then RBG's death in Sept. should be even more so, unless you're a total hypocrite.

RBG herself declared in 2016 that it is a PRESIDENT'S right and duty to fill vacancies, that a President does not stop being a President in his last year.

Barry declared if he had the opportunity to fill a vacancy his last year he would, and Democrats su]ported him.

Hypocrite? STFU! The Democrats are the living embodiment of the word. Stop you crying and temper tantrum.

As usual, ignoring the time restraints and attempting to shove his selection down our throats. Why wasn't there enough time in '16, but there is enough time now? What's the SPIN on that one? I say, Dems walk out. Deny them a quorum. Don't participate in this farce at all.

The senate GOP is saying they had a mandate to block Obama’s pick and this time they have a mandate to select Trumps. It has to do with the Party in power. Each one of those senators and Trump have recordings of them directly contradicting themselves between then and now. This new spin of theirs is not adequate. None of them including Trump should ever be believed, they are all political hacks. But most of us already knew that.

You mean each of the Democrat Senators, of course.

The situation is not the same - you won't admit that, and that's okay.

No two situations are the same but these two are similar enough to show the blatant hypocrisy of both parties. More so from the GOP as the Dems can claim the move to successfully block Garland set a precedent

Each involves filling an empty seat
Other than that nothing similar.

 

[easyt65]

If the Republicans attempt to short circuit the confirmation process, the Democrats should walk out and deny them a quorum. If Scalia dying in Feb. of an election year was too close to the election, then RBG's death in Sept. should be even more so, unless you're a total hypocrite.

RBG herself declared in 2016 that it is a PRESIDENT'S right and duty to fill vacancies, that a President does not stop being a President in his last year.

Barry declared if he had the opportunity to fill a vacancy his last year he would, and Democrats su]ported him.

Hypocrite? STFU! The Democrats are the living embodiment of the word. Stop you crying and temper tantrum.

As usual, ignoring the time restraints and attempting to shove his selection down our throats. Why wasn't there enough time in '16, but there is enough time now? What's the SPIN on that one? I say, Dems walk out. Deny them a quorum. Don't participate in this farce at all.

"shove his selection down our throats"?

Bwuhahahaha.....way to ignore the factual steps of how a nominee is confirmed and 'emotionalize' the shit out of it.

Ramming' something down the throats of the majority of Americans who do not want it best describes what Barry and the Democrats did with Obamacare or DACA, not what is going on now. Unlike Obamacare & DACA, what is going on now is CONSTITUTIONAL.

You make it sound like every single American citizen gets a say in who becomes the next USSC Justice - YOU get NO say in any nomination / confirmation...EVER. You never did! As long as the Constitution is followed through the process all you have to bitch about is the fact that the most successful President in US history - or at least modern history, the guy who triggers you because he beat Hillary and has defeated every Democrat coup attempt, will get a 2nd USSC Justice.

Need a f*ing tissue, oh butt-hurt sore-loser?

 

[Slade3200]

If the Republicans attempt to short circuit the confirmation process, the Democrats should walk out and deny them a quorum. If Scalia dying in Feb. of an election year was too close to the election, then RBG's death in Sept. should be even more so, unless you're a total hypocrite.

RBG herself declared in 2016 that it is a PRESIDENT'S right and duty to fill vacancies, that a President does not stop being a President in his last year.

Barry declared if he had the opportunity to fill a vacancy his last year he would, and Democrats su]ported him.

Hypocrite? STFU! The Democrats are the living embodiment of the word. Stop you crying and temper tantrum.

As usual, ignoring the time restraints and attempting to shove his selection down our throats. Why wasn't there enough time in '16, but there is enough time now? What's the SPIN on that one? I say, Dems walk out. Deny them a quorum. Don't participate in this farce at all.

The senate GOP is saying they had a mandate to block Obama’s pick and this time they have a mandate to select Trumps. It has to do with the Party in power. Each one of those senators and Trump have recordings of them directly contradicting themselves between then and now. This new spin of theirs is not adequate. None of them including Trump should ever be believed, they are all political hacks. But most of us already knew that.

You mean each of the Democrat Senators, of course.

The situation is not the same - you won't admit that, and that's okay.

No two situations are the same but these two are similar enough to show the blatant hypocrisy of both parties. More so from the GOP as the Dems can claim the move to successfully block Garland set a precedent

Each involves filling an empty seat
Other than that nothing similar.

Really? How is this situation different that what Graham’s comments say? There are dozens of other examples

I want you to use my words against me. If there's a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said let's let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination," Graham said

 

[JimBowie1958]

All those women have had a Senate confirmation hearing for their current positions. I think Graham should limit the next hearing for the nominee to less than 8 hours if not a shorter period of time.

The Constitution does not require the Senate to have hearings. Since we know the Democrats oppose ANY nominee as their starting position, why bother with hearings? It will be nothing more than another slanderfest of leftwing crazies and whores.

Poor Democrat whores, all lined up to testify against the nominee but never knowing who it was that raped them again.

 

[Billiejeens]

If the Republicans attempt to short circuit the confirmation process, the Democrats should walk out and deny them a quorum. If Scalia dying in Feb. of an election year was too close to the election, then RBG's death in Sept. should be even more so, unless you're a total hypocrite.

RBG herself declared in 2016 that it is a PRESIDENT'S right and duty to fill vacancies, that a President does not stop being a President in his last year.

Barry declared if he had the opportunity to fill a vacancy his last year he would, and Democrats su]ported him.

Hypocrite? STFU! The Democrats are the living embodiment of the word. Stop you crying and temper tantrum.

As usual, ignoring the time restraints and attempting to shove his selection down our throats. Why wasn't there enough time in '16, but there is enough time now? What's the SPIN on that one? I say, Dems walk out. Deny them a quorum. Don't participate in this farce at all.

The senate GOP is saying they had a mandate to block Obama’s pick and this time they have a mandate to select Trumps. It has to do with the Party in power. Each one of those senators and Trump have recordings of them directly contradicting themselves between then and now. This new spin of theirs is not adequate. None of them including Trump should ever be believed, they are all political hacks. But most of us already knew that.

You mean each of the Democrat Senators, of course.

The situation is not the same - you won't admit that, and that's okay.

No two situations are the same but these two are similar enough to show the blatant hypocrisy of both parties. More so from the GOP as the Dems can claim the move to successfully block Garland set a precedent

Each involves filling an empty seat
Other than that nothing similar.

Really? How is this situation different that what Graham’s comments say? There are dozens of other examples

I want you to use my words against me. If there's a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said let's let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination," Graham said

You realize that in 2016 the sitting President was term limited out of office and now he is not, yes?
You do understand that in 2016 the WH and The Senate were controlled by different parties
and today they are controlled by the same party, yes?

If either party controlled each of those - the nomination would be expected to and would go forward.
Plenty of precedent for that.

 

[easyt65]

Really? How is this situation different that what Graham’s comments say? There are dozens of other examples

I want you to use my words against me. If there's a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said let's let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination," Graham said

"A President has the right and obligation to fill a USSC vacancy as quickly as possible. A President does not stop being a President his last year in office."
- Ruth Bader Ginsburg

(*** And not one single condemnation of the Democrats who pissed on RBG's legacy and beliefs by LYING THEIR ASSES OFF about 'RBG's 'last dying wish' bullshit in an attempt to pull off an 'EMOTIONAL SCAM' for their own political benefit!)


'If I get a chance to fill a USSC vacancy I will.'
- President Barak Obama, 2016 - his final year in office
* Democrats had no problem with it when he declared he would do so

Democrats have always been comfortable knowing the GOP were too much of a 'Boy Scout' to do to Democrats what Democrats always boldly did to the GOP....until this wake-up call from a Republican President who does not cower from a fight but instead says, "Bring it the f* on - I will fight fire with fire!"

You know damn-well that if Obama was in office right now he and Democrats would have the 'gas pedal' pushed to the floor to fill this vacancy. Stop being a lying hypocritical POS, acting as if you believe for a second that is not the case / FACT!

Stop blubbering and showing your ass like a child throwing a temper tantrum. Life is a bitch and you don't always get your way. If you want to be pissed at someone be pissed at the short-sighted Democrat Leaders who killed the Filibuster and instituted the 'Nuclear option'.... THAT Democrat f*-up sure stings like a bitch right now, don't it?!

 

[Cecilie1200]

Yes. I'm sick of all this bullshit. It's Trump's right as president to make this call, and fuck the rest that don't like it. They have all, at some point, professed to favor that which they now claim unfair?

These demotwats don't play by the rules, and are demanding now that Trump should NOT either now? because of some alleged dying wish??? GtFo with that noise. It is WAR TIME BITCHES.

2016.

What about it?

 

[Cecilie1200]

If the Republicans attempt to short circuit the confirmation process, the Democrats should walk out and deny them a quorum. If Scalia dying in Feb. of an election year was too close to the election, then RBG's death in Sept. should be even more so, unless you're a total hypocrite.

RBG herself declared in 2016 that it is a PRESIDENT'S right and duty to fill vacancies, that a President does not stop being a President in his last year.

Barry declared if he had the opportunity to fill a vacancy his last year he would, and Democrats su]ported him.

Hypocrite? STFU! The Democrats are the living embodiment of the word. Stop you crying and temper tantrum.

As usual, ignoring the time restraints and attempting to shove his selection down our throats. Why wasn't there enough time in '16, but there is enough time now? What's the SPIN on that one? I say, Dems walk out. Deny them a quorum. Don't participate in this farce at all.

"shove his selection down our throats"?

Bwuhahahaha.....way to ignore the factual steps of how a nominee is confirmed and 'emotionalize' the shit out of it.

Ramming' something down the throats of the majority of Americans who do not want it best describes what Barry and the Democrats did with Obamacare or DACA, not what is going on now. Unlike Obamacare & DACA, what is going on now is CONSTITUTIONAL.

You make it sound like every single American citizen gets a say in who becomes the next USSC Justice - YOU get NO say in any nomination / confirmation...EVER. You never did! As long as the Constitution is followed through the process all you have to bitch about is the fact that the most successful President in US history - or at least modern history, the guy who triggers you because he beat Hillary and has defeated every Democrat coup attempt, will get a 2nd USSC Justice.

Need a f*ing tissue, oh butt-hurt sore-loser?

The American people actually DID get a say in this judicial confirmation . . . when we voted for a Republican President and a Republican-majority Senate, knowing that they would most likely be filling judicial vacancies.

So the Democrats need to get the fuck out of the way and let the choice that the American people made go forward.

 

[Blues Lifer]

Democrats need to get the fuck out of the way and let the choice that the American people made go forward.

I agree, but I kind of enjoy that they are embarrassing themselves with this petulant hissy fit.

"it was her dying wish!"

 

[Diver Diva]

Just do it. They have the votes to confirm Judge Barrett, skip the hearings and don't allow the Dems to turn it into another circus like they did with Justice Cavanaugh.

As much as I would enjoy watching the Dems self-destruct, it's not worth putting the woman's seven children through the pain of watching their mother being trashed by a bunch of leftist thugs.