Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Gorsuch will get the seat because the (D)'s right now are nothing more than, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia,Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia,Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia,Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia,Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia,Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia,Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia,Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia,Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia,Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia,Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia,Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia,Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia,Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia,
All day, all the time. There are so many valid things to counter but all they can come up with is, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia,Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia,Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia,Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia,Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia,Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia,Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia,Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia,Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia,Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia,
It's amazing to listen to the Hatch,McConnell and Grassley posturing on their new found ideals. These were the same people that wouldn't even allow a hearing on the Garland who was perfectly qualified and now these people feel that Gorsuch should be approved because of his qualifications.
Trump other GOP senators constantly stated that Clinton shouldn't be elected because she would be the first president because might be under investigation by the FBI, but here we have Trump actually being investigated. The republicans were satisfied with their lame excuse that at supreme court justice shouldn't have a hearing in an election year so it's tough for them to discover some newly found integrity.
Good thing Gorsuch didn't learn Russian in college or he might be delayed. Just like ALL the cabinet positions nominated by TRUMP, Gorsuch will sail through. Even NPR says that Gorsuch is innocent and using the "Ginsburg" replies of deflection will not affect any votes.
Good thing Gorsuch didn't learn Russian in college or he might be delayed. Just like ALL the cabinet positions nominated by TRUMP, Gorsuch will sail through. Even NPR says that Gorsuch is innocent and using the "Ginsburg" replies of deflection will not affect any votes.
Welcome to the Supreme court Gorsuch!!
These hearings have nothing to do with Gorsuch or Garland, both are quite qualified, this is about our politicians injecting politics into the supreme court.
Have the Democrats thrown in the towel in opposition to Gorsuch? Democrats may know that opposition to Gorsuch is a lost cause.
Especially since he had been previously confirmed unanimously. This seems to be an exercise in hypocrisy of the most obvious kind.
Also, considering that they have openly backed the blocking of Trump's "travel ban" by liberal judges who's opinions are clearly based on politics and not law, their objecting to Gorsuch based on a claim that he may not be impartial, but make rulings based on his political biases, is just plain laughable.
Last edited by nononsenseguy; 03-22-2017 at 05:26 AM..
It's the congressional beating the right of passage. He will be ok. One thing about this, yes some folks are so set you can spot them a mild away, but many change their views, it happens. No guarantees
What I see is the usual hypocrisy with the dems.
Just a year ago they are all having a hissy fit saying that the Supreme Court CANNOT function without a full court.
The United States MUST have a full court in order to survive. Time is of the essence!
NOW, a full court means NOTHING.
Who cares how long it takes.
Which only goes to show people should look real hard at what they dems said several years ago and what they say today.
This is a pattern going as far back, probably further, as the H. Bush admin.
It's amazing to listen to the Hatch,McConnell and Grassley posturing on their new found ideals. These were the same people that wouldn't even allow a hearing on the Garland who was perfectly qualified and now these people feel that Gorsuch should be approved because of his qualifications.
You conveniently ignore the fact that there is precedent for not considering a nominee in an election year. This has been well established as a tradition for many years, and it was with good reason. Do some research, or is it that you simply like to spread the misinformation/propaganda of your Party, who also know full well that this is established tradition, which they would use in a heartbeat if the shoe were on the other foot?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
Trump other GOP senators constantly stated that Clinton shouldn't be elected because she would be the first president because might be under investigation by the FBI, but here we have Trump actually being investigated. The republicans were satisfied with their lame excuse that at supreme court justice shouldn't have a hearing in an election year so it's tough for them to discover some newly found integrity.
This "investigation" is phony, and based on nothing other than manufactured and baseless charges of a "Russian connection," for which, to date, there has been zero evidence. In Hillary's case, she clearly broke the law, mishandled classified information, resulting in compromise, by the use of her unsecure private server. She further lied to the FBI, and to Congress. She is a bona fide criminal. Trump is not.
I have long thought, dating back to the confirmation hearing of Robert Bork, that the Senate should confirm, by a simple majority vote, any nominee of the President. My opinion has not changed in this regard.
Likewise, I am against the 'filibuster' nonsense. If a Senator wishes to filibuster, let him, or her, take the floor and begin talking until they can't talk no more. This nonsense of a Senator being able to say "I filibuster", and then going out to eat pie, should stop.
Now, I was utterly opposed to the Senate Republicans refusing to 'advise and consent' to Obama's nomination of Garland. I became particularly irritated with our Canadian Junior Senator, Rafael Edward Cruz, of saying, when it appeared Ms. Clinton would win the presidency, that there was no reason to ever hold a confirmation hearing; that the Court would do quite well with 8 Justices, or even 6.
The Republicans have set a dangerous precedent. Someday there will be a Republican president, and a Democratic senate. I would hope that said Democratic senate would resist the temptation to categorically refuse to consider any Supreme Court nomination, but I am filled with dread and doubt.
As for Judge Gorsuch: the theft of Obama's seat has been successfully carried out. It is done, and nothing can be done about it. As such, the Senate should confirm Judge Gorsuch. Trump is President, and the President should have his nominee confirmed.
The only recourse the Democrats have is to remind the voters of the theft in 2018. However, since many voters didn't seem to mind when the theft was being carried out in broad daylight, I doubt they will care a year hence.
I have long thought, dating back to the confirmation hearing of Robert Bork, that the Senate should confirm, by a simple majority vote, any nominee of the President. My opinion has not changed in this regard.
Likewise, I am against the 'filibuster' nonsense. If a Senator wishes to filibuster, let him, or her, take the floor and begin talking until they can't talk no more. This nonsense of a Senator being able to say "I filibuster", and then going out to eat pie, should stop.
Now, I was utterly opposed to the Senate Republicans refusing to 'advise and consent' to Obama's nomination of Garland. I became particularly irritated with our Canadian Junior Senator, Rafael Edward Cruz, of saying, when it appeared Ms. Clinton would win the presidency, that there was no reason to ever hold a confirmation hearing; that the Court would do quite well with 8 Justices, or even 6.
The Republicans have set a dangerous precedent. Someday there will be a Republican president, and a Democratic senate. I would hope that said Democratic senate would resist the temptation to categorically refuse to consider any Supreme Court nomination, but I am filled with dread and doubt.
As for Judge Gorsuch: the theft of Obama's seat has been successfully carried out. It is done, and nothing can be done about it. As such, the Senate should confirm Judge Gorsuch. Trump is President, and the President should have his nominee confirmed.
The only recourse the Democrats have is to remind the voters of the theft in 2018. However, since many voters didn't seem to mind when the theft was being carried out in broad daylight, I doubt they will care a year hence.
This is a fantastic post. I agree 100% with this synopsis.
I have long thought, dating back to the confirmation hearing of Robert Bork, that the Senate should confirm, by a simple majority vote, any nominee of the President. My opinion has not changed in this regard.
Likewise, I am against the 'filibuster' nonsense. If a Senator wishes to filibuster, let him, or her, take the floor and begin talking until they can't talk no more. This nonsense of a Senator being able to say "I filibuster", and then going out to eat pie, should stop.
I agree on both counts.
Quote:
Now, I was utterly opposed to the Senate Republicans refusing to 'advise and consent' to Obama's nomination of Garland. I became particularly irritated with our Canadian Junior Senator, Rafael Edward Cruz, of saying, when it appeared Ms. Clinton would win the presidency, that there was no reason to ever hold a confirmation hearing; that the Court would do quite well with 8 Justices, or even 6.
The Republicans have set a dangerous precedent. Someday there will be a Republican president, and a Democratic senate. I would hope that said Democratic senate would resist the temptation to categorically refuse to consider any Supreme Court nomination, but I am filled with dread and doubt.
As for Judge Gorsuch: the theft of Obama's seat has been successfully carried out. It is done, and nothing can be done about it. As such, the Senate should confirm Judge Gorsuch. Trump is President, and the President should have his nominee confirmed.
The only recourse the Democrats have is to remind the voters of the theft in 2018. However, since many voters didn't seem to mind when the theft was being carried out in broad daylight, I doubt they will care a year hence.
Part of the reason Obama didn't get his nominee is because he refused to fight for it. Doing the hard work was below him.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Gorsuch is easy win... Who's next?
