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.
"The GOP wouldn't even hold hearings for Merrick Garland."
Show us in the Constitution where it is REQUIRED.
Funny hoe so many on the left want to take the "highroad' yet IGNORE the Constitution.
ADVISE and consent
The repubs GAVE their ADVISE, DO NOT SUBMIT in the last year of a president term.
Something PROMISED by the dems.
I love it when the dems do something out of the ordinary and are WARNED NOT TO DO IT and when the tide turns, whine and complain about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seacove
Mitch McConnell and the Republican GOP showed their contempt for the constitution when they refused to hold hearings for Merrick Garland.
There is no place in the constitution whatsoever for what they did, they refused to do their jobs.
Republicans really have no idea how angry Democrats are about this particular issue. And if the GOP Senate has hearings and votes for a Trump nominated SCJ in his fourth year, I shudder to think what will happen.
These protests are nothing, absolutely nothing, compared to the white hot rage that will occur if the GOP appoints a SCJ in Trump's fourth year after they not only did what they did, but Kavanaugh had the slimy, oily, disgusting gall to put salt in the wound by reminding the country of Merrick Garland in his introductory speech. After that sleazy move by Kavanaugh, which was done for an audience of one, he showed how putrid he is.
" Republican GOP showed their contempt for the constitution when they refused to hold hearings for Merrick Garland."
In my post 543, I addressed your false claim.
So, I will REPEAT IT, Show us in the Constitution where it is REQUIRED. Thee GAVE their ADVISE as is stated in the Constitution.
UNDER the Constitution both the Senate and the House are ALLOWED to make up their OWN RULES on HOW TO OPERATE.
Reid CHANGED the rules, was WARNED NOT TO and went AHEAD ANYWAY.
As my Mother used to say. YYOU made your bed, now LIE IN IT"!
Because its a "hearing" and not a court, or committee meeting, no such rules apply. They should just throw everyone out NOT invited by the nominee. There is no obligation to allow the public to be in the same room.
"They should just throw everyone out"
I am NOT a fan of this type of thinking, and we see it way to often.
Why should the decent HONEST respectful people have to be thrown out because of a few loonies?
We hear it a lot on a multitude of issue, like guns, a very FEW use them for bad and ALL gun owners should have to pay the price.
That's nice. Make no mistake, what comes around goes around and after the moves Trump and his supporters have made, I'm looking forward to a lot of crying on the other side and it too will be delicious.
Considering how much the GOP has kept hidden from the public, it would be no surprise. Turn the government into a big black box with no visibility whatsoever.
McConnell has already shown politics matters more than the constitution, to hold the hearings in secret is EXACTLY what we would expect from this administration.
" Make no mistake, what comes around goes around"
EXACTLY reid CHANGED THE RULES and now dems have to live with it!
That's nice. Make no mistake, what comes around goes around and after the moves Trump and his supporters have made, I'm looking forward to a lot of crying on the other side and it too will be delicious.
Considering how much the GOP has kept hidden from the public, it would be no surprise. Turn the government into a big black box with no visibility whatsoever.
McConnell has already shown politics matters more than the constitution, to hold the hearings in secret is EXACTLY what we would expect from this administration.
"Considering how much the GOP has kept hidden from the public,"
Where are ALL the document for Obama and Holder's gun fiasco? OH, I forgot Obama claimed "Executive privilege".
They actually hate democracy which is how they can possibly find it within themselves to support a POS such as Trump and his admiration for and kowtowing to dictators.
"to support a POS"
With a "trash mouth" like this, it is NO WONDER New Yorker's from the city have such TERRIBLE reputation!
NO AND NEITHER DID ANYONE IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.
It has never been done before, it was not done by Democrats, it is not in the Constitution, which Republicans CLAIM to support when in fact REPUBLICANS LIE ABOUT SUPPORTING.
If Trump supporters think they rage they are seeing now is bad, they have seen NOTHING like the rage they will see if the GOP Senate approves a SCJ nominee in Trump's fourth year.
The GOP needs to stop lying about their support of the Constitution.
" it is not in the Constitution"
You keep whining about this, so show us what IS in the Constitution to back up your, IMO, ignorant claim.
I heard that the Harvard lawsuit will go to the Supreme Court and present a chance to overturn Affirmative Action with a 5-4 decision. Imagine how much Trump's support will grow among the right and imagine the outrage on the left. I hope we see it.
"to overturn Affirmative Action"
If you read the Equal Rights act, you will see that Affirmative Action is in DIRECT VIOLATION of the Equal Rights Act.
So, killing babies is caring about the children? Isn't that sort of like if you care about the illegal children you will not want to stop the traffickers from bringing them over here?
From what I understood this nominee would not do anything about abortion, which is what the 1st nominee also said. Unfortunately millions of evangelicals voted for Trump ONLY because he would nominate people to SC who would overturn Roe vs Wade.
Kirsten Gillibrad: Women will die if Kavanaugh is confirmed
Quote:
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) is not on the Senate Judiciary Committee tasked with the confirmation hearings for Brett Kavanaugh as the next Supreme Court justice, but for a second day on Wednesday, she joined protesters in the Hart Senate Office Building to say the nominee is “dangerous for women” and that “women will die” if he is seated on the high court.
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand thanked the protesters, including those who were sharing stories about having an abortion and who wore t-shirts that read: “I Had An Abortion.”
“It couldn’t be clearer than it was in the hearing today,” Gillibrand said. “Just listen to his answers.”
“He would not protect a woman’s right to choose,” Gillibrand said. “He would not protect the constitutional right to make decisions about your own reproductive freedom, your own future, your own lives.”
US Senate candidate, NY
Sen. Sasse said protesters have been screaming for decades that “women are going to die.” When you criminalize abortion and limit our reproductive health care, women die. It’s not “hysteria”: We’re in a fight for our lives. Sexist attacks won’t stop us.
I thought libs were claiming Republicans were the ones that run on "fear"?
US Senate candidate, NY
Sen. Sasse said protesters have been screaming for decades that “women are going to die.” When you criminalize abortion and limit our reproductive health care, women die. It’s not “hysteria”: We’re in a fight for our lives. Sexist attacks won’t stop us.
I thought libs were claiming Republicans were the ones that run on "fear"?
old gringo, are you listening?
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.
Kirsten Gillibrad: Women will die if Kavanaugh is confirmed
