Well first off..RIP...secondly this will be a mess
https://www.npr.org/2020/09/18/1003...n-of-gender-equality-dies-at-87?origin=NOTIFY
https://www.npr.org/2020/09/18/1003...n-of-gender-equality-dies-at-87?origin=NOTIFY
Get ready for an excrement show. The next candidate is going to be verbally flayed, flogged and crucified. The opposition is probably already lining up accusations and "victims".Well first off..RIP...secondly this will be a mess
https://www.npr.org/2020/09/18/1003...n-of-gender-equality-dies-at-87?origin=NOTIFY
2020 isnt messing around.Like we needed something else like this to happen.
Just glorious!Like we needed something else like this to happen.
Why wait til Monday?I dont disagree one bit. Will they wait until Feb or Monday? Precedent says Feb reality says Monday
Mitch McConnell in 2016: “The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president."
Both parties are hypocritical. If you want to list the examples, we'll be here all night.But even before Obama had named Garland, and in fact only hours after Scalia's death was announced, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell declared any appointment by the sitting president to be null and void. He said the next Supreme Court justice should be chosen by the next president — to be elected later that year.
"Of course," said McConnell, "the American people should have a say in the court's direction. It is a president's constitutional right to nominate a Supreme Court justice, and it is the Senate's constitutional right to act as a check on the president and withhold its consent." https://www.npr.org/2018/06/29/6244...errick-garland-in-2016-and-why-it-matters-now
That is a vile comment.there is a god
Yeah that's over the top. I don't agree with hardly a thing she's been in the majority on but she is a person of our history and I'll give her my respectThat is a vile comment.
It's pretty clear he meant that for a lame duck presidency.I dont disagree one bit. Will they wait until Feb or Monday? Precedent says Feb reality says Monday
Mitch McConnell in 2016: “The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president."
Nominate Ted Cruz!Well first off..RIP...secondly this will be a mess
https://www.npr.org/2020/09/18/1003...n-of-gender-equality-dies-at-87?origin=NOTIFY
Kind of ironic that the left will be quoting Mitchie.I dont disagree one bit. Will they wait until Feb or Monday? Precedent says Feb reality says Monday
Mitch McConnell in 2016: “The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president."
She SHOULD have retired during Obama's tenure IF she was really concerned about maintaining her far left spot on the court. I'm sure the thought that the HRC could lose never crossed her mind. She's been dead as far as any rational thought for a long long time. Her assistants have been writing everything for her for several years.First...May she rest in peace.
Second...She did the country no favors, she should of retired along time ago. Now they will be fighting over this.
Third....This is what she will be remembered for.
He's on the list. Atleast someone released their list. Sleepy almost forced to now. Although maybe not the real listNominate Ted Cruz!
Technically yes. Actually no. They had to muzzle her after her last faux pas. She hasn't written her own opinions for years. What transpires now will be very interesting. Trump has EVERY right and SHOULD nominate somebody quickly to fill the court.i thought she was already dead months ago
a 5-3 one will thoughWe will need a full Supreme Court before the election. There will be court challenges no matter who wins. A 4-4 Supreme Court wouldn’t decide anything
Agree, it's too bad that it's come to this.She SHOULD have retired during Obama's tenure IF she was really concerned about maintaining her far left spot on the court. I'm sure the thought that the HRC could lose never crossed her mind. She's been dead as far as any rational thought for a long long time. Her assistants have been writing everything for her for several years.
I have no faith in Robertsa 5-3 one will though
Wow, that's a good point. Trump should nominate someone on Monday. That will give them at least a little time to vet them.We will need a full Supreme Court before the election. There will be court challenges no matter who wins. A 4-4 Supreme Court wouldn’t decide anything
Is PERIOD conservative or liberal?I'm Trump supporter. He should NOT even think about nominating anyone until after the election. PERIOD.
It might work in his favor to wait.I'm Trump supporter. He should NOT even think about nominating anyone until after the election. PERIOD.
I don't have a problem of not having term limits. The Supreme Court was meant to be a slow moving entity unfazed by short term political swings in the other branches. RBG I think was hoping the Dems would re-take the senate on Hillary's coat tails so they could nominate an ultra-liberal such as herself as her replacement. I think she would have retired IF HRC had won and they had taken the Senate.12 year term limits lets a president nominate a judge every term
If he is going to nominate somebody, he’d be smart to nominate Amy Coney Barrett. He needs the white suburban female vote to win. Coney Barrett is a Catholic mother of a bunch of kids. The optics of her getting put through the ringer will be a bad look for the left and could possibly swing him votes. But that’s if he’s smart. I doubt he does it and we get another crap nominee more like Kavanaugh and less like Goursech.Wow, that's a good point. Trump should nominate someone on Monday. That will give them at least a little time to vet them.
It might work in his favor to nominate a black woman...... It seems like he had a few female black jurists in his sights the last time around.It might work in his favor to wait.