Keep America Great

[Unregistered]

Shocking that Miss Lindsay is backtracking what he said/she said and NOW says a judge can be decided in an election year, even though under Obama it was the opposite. And yeah, it's on video.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...n-b498014.html

New to politics?

[Unregistered]

You’re quite naive thinking all that happens is the President picks a justice and that’s that. What occurred with the Merrick Garland nomination has occurred 11 times in American history. It’s called lapsed or postponed and the two previous occurrences in the last century happened with Republican nominations by Eisenhower and Harding. In addition dozens of Supreme Court nominees have also been rejected by the Senate. Learning civics is far more effective than crying like a baby “OMG the constitution” regarding things you have no clue about.

Ironic that one of the cases used to delay Garland was Joe Biden’s own argument in 1992. Not much ever works out for the geezer, but maybe his third campaign and third plagiarism will be his charm.

[Unregistered]

You’re quite naive thinking all that happens is the President picks a justice and that’s that. What occurred with the Merrick Garland nomination has occurred 11 times in American history. It’s called lapsed or postponed and the two previous occurrences in the last century happened with Republican nominations by Eisenhower and Harding. In addition dozens of Supreme Court nominees have also been rejected by the Senate. Learning civics is far more effective than crying like a baby “OMG the constitution” regarding things you have no clue about.

You mean Eisenhower and Harding selected a justice and the senate refused to even consider them. It's one thing to nominate someone who doesn't get past the judiciary committee. It's quite another for the nominee to not even be presented to the judiciary committee and say let the next president decide. Big difference.

[Unregistered]

You mean Eisenhower and Harding selected a justice and the senate refused to even consider them. It's one thing to nominate someone who doesn't get past the judiciary committee. It's quite another for the nominee to not even be presented to the judiciary committee and say let the next president decide. Big difference.

Not unlike the 400 bills the House passed last year that McConnell wouldn't let see the light of day. No one party should wield that much power. I think everyone can all agree on that. If a bill or nominee is going to die, let it die, but you can't deny it sunlight first

[Unregistered]

Not unlike the 400 bills the House passed last year that McConnell wouldn't let see the light of day. No one party should wield that much power. I think everyone can all agree on that. If a bill or nominee is going to die, let it die, but you can't deny it sunlight first

Just like the Congress controlled house pushing the impeachment through. See how it works
But that was ok. Lol. See how it works.

[Unregistered]

Just like the Congress controlled house pushing the impeachment through. See how it works
But that was ok. Lol. See how it works.

Biggest sham of all time.

[Unregistered]

Just like the Congress controlled house pushing the impeachment through. See how it works
But that was ok. Lol. See how it works.

But the Senate still had hearings on impeachment and took a vote. Mc Connell blocked hundreds of bills from even being considered, as well as Garland's nomination. It wasn't both chambers, impeachment was. See how THAT works?

[Unregistered]

You mean Eisenhower and Harding selected a justice and the senate refused to even consider them. It's one thing to nominate someone who doesn't get past the judiciary committee. It's quite another for the nominee to not even be presented to the judiciary committee and say let the next president decide. Big difference.

You need to 😭 more ❄️ 😢 👶, since reality will not bend to a ❄️’s mushy will.

There has not been a Chief Justice that was nominated by a D since 1954. The one Johnson nominated at the end of his term was fillibustered and Nixon would up appointing Burger. Additionally, 4/5 of the current conservative justices were appointed by presidents who lost the popular vote and if Trump gets his choice, before or after the election (where, if he “wins,” that won’t include the most popular votes) under most scenarios will make that 5/6.

Gonna be a tough call cons. Gotta make the case to the public that whatever you decide is for the best generationally, because lose the senate and WH due to overplaying the hand, the Dems will come in and redecorate fully.

Lot at stake and you need ALL the senators with you on the suicide mission. Even the youngish ones who seemed to be positioning themselves to lead the party post-Trump and then hope the democrats don’t turn it all around and the some of the gamble doesn’t work.

Collins already torpedoed a vote before the election. Said senate can consider Trump’s nominee before then but they winner of election should fill seat.

Sounds like a Senator. If Trump wins, cons can jam it through Nov - Dec and have 6-3 for cases to be heard then. Voters get to decide.

That’s probably for the best. If Dems win they have a real
Redecoration mandate.

See you at polls . Lines for first two days in VA cons. You think that’s GOP enthusiasm ? I got a bridge for ya then

T

[Unregistered]

You need to 😭 more ❄️ 😢 👶, since reality will not bend to a ❄️’s mushy will.

There has not been a Chief Justice that was nominated by a D since 1954. The one Johnson nominated at the end of his term was fillibustered and Nixon would up appointing Burger. Additionally, 4/5 of the current conservative justices were appointed by presidents who lost the popular vote and if Trump gets his choice, before or after the election (where, if he “wins,” that won’t include the most popular votes) under most scenarios will make that 5/6.

Gonna be a tough call cons. Gotta make the case to the public that whatever you decide is for the best generationally, because lose the senate and WH due to overplaying the hand, the Dems will come in and redecorate fully.

Lot at stake and you need ALL the senators with you on the suicide mission. Even the youngish ones who seemed to be positioning themselves to lead the party post-Trump and then hope the democrats don’t turn it all around and the some of the gamble doesn’t work.

Collins already torpedoed a vote before the election. Said senate can consider Trump’s nominee before then but they winner of election should fill seat.

Sounds like a Senator. If Trump wins, cons can jam it through Nov - Dec and have 6-3 for cases to be heard then. Voters get to decide.

That’s probably for the best. If Dems win they have a real
Redecoration mandate.

See you at polls . Lines for first two days in VA cons. You think that’s GOP enthusiasm ? I got a bridge for ya then

T

Did I mention that the average time between nomination and approval for the current 8 + Ginsburg was like 79 days? And that the more controversial took longer generally ? Yah .

So shortest was Ginsburg at 50 days and she was approved like 98-2 sooooo....

If Trump nominated Merrick Garland MONDAY morning I could possibly see this happening before Nov 3.

The more controversial took 80-100+.

Souter and Kennedy, the two previous, were moderates and still took 60+ days.

Rush it through and defend it at Ballot box

[Unregistered]

You need to 😭 more ❄️ 😢 👶, since reality will not bend to a ❄️’s mushy will.

There has not been a Chief Justice that was nominated by a D since 1954. The one Johnson nominated at the end of his term was fillibustered and Nixon would up appointing Burger. Additionally, 4/5 of the current conservative justices were appointed by presidents who lost the popular vote and if Trump gets his choice, before or after the election (where, if he “wins,” that won’t include the most popular votes) under most scenarios will make that 5/6.

Gonna be a tough call cons. Gotta make the case to the public that whatever you decide is for the best generationally, because lose the senate and WH due to overplaying the hand, the Dems will come in and redecorate fully.

Lot at stake and you need ALL the senators with you on the suicide mission. Even the youngish ones who seemed to be positioning themselves to lead the party post-Trump and then hope the democrats don’t turn it all around and the some of the gamble doesn’t work.

Collins already torpedoed a vote before the election. Said senate can consider Trump’s nominee before then but they winner of election should fill seat.

Sounds like a Senator. If Trump wins, cons can jam it through Nov - Dec and have 6-3 for cases to be heard then. Voters get to decide.

That’s probably for the best. If Dems win they have a real
Redecoration mandate.

See you at polls . Lines for first two days in VA cons. You think that’s GOP enthusiasm ? I got a bridge for ya then

T

You just insulted a poster who was on your side lol keep up with the thread.

[Unregistered]

You need to 😭 more ❄️ 😢 👶, since reality will not bend to a ❄️’s mushy will.

There has not been a Chief Justice that was nominated by a D since 1954. The one Johnson nominated at the end of his term was fillibustered and Nixon would up appointing Burger. Additionally, 4/5 of the current conservative justices were appointed by presidents who lost the popular vote and if Trump gets his choice, before or after the election (where, if he “wins,” that won’t include the most popular votes) under most scenarios will make that 5/6.

Gonna be a tough call cons. Gotta make the case to the public that whatever you decide is for the best generationally, because lose the senate and WH due to overplaying the hand, the Dems will come in and redecorate fully.

Lot at stake and you need ALL the senators with you on the suicide mission. Even the youngish ones who seemed to be positioning themselves to lead the party post-Trump and then hope the democrats don’t turn it all around and the some of the gamble doesn’t work.

Collins already torpedoed a vote before the election. Said senate can consider Trump’s nominee before then but they winner of election should fill seat.

Sounds like a Senator. If Trump wins, cons can jam it through Nov - Dec and have 6-3 for cases to be heard then. Voters get to decide.

That’s probably for the best. If Dems win they have a real
Redecoration mandate.

See you at polls . Lines for first two days in VA cons. You think that’s GOP enthusiasm ? I got a bridge for ya then

T

Collins waffles more than IHOP. She's saying that because she's tanking in in the polls. She knows McConnell will ram through a nominee, so she can say that then pretend it was out of her hands.

Murkowski has also said the vote shouldn't happen, but she's not up for reelection this year. There would need to be many more GOP defectors to make a difference, but McConnell has them in line.

- an independent who has stopped expecting any politician to do the right thing

[Unregistered]

Collins waffles more than IHOP. She's saying that because she's tanking in in the polls. She knows McConnell will ram through a nominee, so she can say that then pretend it was out of her hands.

Murkowski has also said the vote shouldn't happen, but she's not up for reelection this year. There would need to be many more GOP defectors to make a difference, but McConnell has them in line.

- an independent who has stopped expecting any politician to do the right thing

Independent’s are con losers in hiding.

[Unregistered]

Independent’s are con losers in hiding.

Not this one - socially liberal, fiscally conservative gun owner. However the GOP seems to have abandoned the platform of fiscal responsibility entirely, and there is much to improve on gun laws without impinging on my freedoms.

[Unregistered]

Cons getting nervous in VA, surrounding a polling station Saturday. At least they didn't bring their guns....this time.


"Supporters of President Donald Trump staged a rally during early voting at a polling station in Virginia on Saturday, in a stunt that an election official said had intimidated voters and disrupted voting...

"Citizens coming into and leaving the building did have to go by them," Gary Scott, the general registrar of Fairfax County, said in a statement to The New York Times. "Those voters who were in line outside of the building were moved inside and we continued operations. Some voters, and elections staff, did feel intimidated by the crowd and we did provide escorts past the group. One of the escorts was the county executive."

Fairfax County Democrats Chair Bryan Graham accused local Republicans of seeking to intimidate voters.

"The Republicans are straight-up attempting to intimidate voters at the Government Center. Circling the parking lots with their Trump flags and horns blaring," he tweeted.

[Unregistered]

Cons getting nervous in VA, surrounding a polling station Saturday. At least they didn't bring their guns....this time.


"Supporters of President Donald Trump staged a rally during early voting at a polling station in Virginia on Saturday, in a stunt that an election official said had intimidated voters and disrupted voting...

"Citizens coming into and leaving the building did have to go by them," Gary Scott, the general registrar of Fairfax County, said in a statement to The New York Times. "Those voters who were in line outside of the building were moved inside and we continued operations. Some voters, and elections staff, did feel intimidated by the crowd and we did provide escorts past the group. One of the escorts was the county executive."

Fairfax County Democrats Chair Bryan Graham accused local Republicans of seeking to intimidate voters.

"The Republicans are straight-up attempting to intimidate voters at the Government Center. Circling the parking lots with their Trump flags and horns blaring," he tweeted.

Typical of the Dems. Always want their way.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg chided the Senate in 2016 for failing to fill Antonin Scalia’s Supreme Court seat until after Election Day — in contrast to her own deathbed plea that it now wait until after the 2020 vote to replace her.

Ginsburg, 87, who died from pancreatic cancer on Friday, reportedly told her granddaughter Clara Spera that her “most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.”

Four years earlier, Fox News noted, she had a different take.

“There’s nothing in the Constitution that says the president stops being the president in his last year,” Ginsburg told the New York Times in 2016 when she urged the Senate to do “their job” and consider President Obama’s court nominee Merrick Garland.