Amy Coney Barrett at WH Today, Mitch has 50 votes locked up (parties, retire)
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.
Lets take the example of Garland. Yeah Democrats were pretty upset that Republicans shirked their duty to the constitution and just refused to give a judge a up or down vote.
Where does the Constitution command a duty to give a judge an up or down vote? All it does is say that the President nominates someone, with advice and consent of the Senate. That means that the Senate has to indicate its approval or disapproval. How they do that is up to the Senate, not the Constitution. And the Senate followed its rule on confirming nominees (Democrats hate it when lawmakers follow the rules), by not giving him a vote. That IS part of the Senate rules, you know.
The amount of squalling and tantrum-throwing the Democrats have done over a simple obeying of the Senate rules, as the Constitution requires, has been as monumental as it was immature.
Where does the Constitution command a duty to give a judge an up or down vote? All it does is say that the President nominates someone, with advice and consent of the Senate. That means that the Senate has to indicate its approval or disapproval. How they do that is up to the Senate, not the Constitution. And the Senate followed its rule on confirming nominees (Democrats hate it when lawmakers follow the rules), by not giving him a vote. That IS part of the Senate rules, you know.
The amount of squalling and tantrum-throwing the Democrats have done over a simple obeying of the Senate rules, as the Constitution requires, has been as monumental as it was immature.
Following the rules is the new impeachable offence.
Where does the Constitution command a duty to give a judge an up or down vote? All it does is say that the President nominates someone, with advice and consent of the Senate. That means that the Senate has to indicate its approval or disapproval. How they do that is up to the Senate, not the Constitution. And the Senate followed its rule on confirming nominees (Democrats hate it when lawmakers follow the rules), by not giving him a vote. That IS part of the Senate rules, you know.
The amount of squalling and tantrum-throwing the Democrats have done over a simple obeying of the Senate rules, as the Constitution requires, has been as monumental as it was immature.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aussiehoff
Following the rules is the new impeachable offence.
Nothing particularly new about it. Democrats have always regarded the Constitution, not as a framework to build on, but as an obstacle to get around.
Their ideal of a massive government that controls everyone and everything, is very different from the smaller limited government the Constitution specifies. So they spend most of their time and effort figuring how to get away with giving Government extra authority, without getting caught.
A Senate appointed by each state, with Senators loyal to their state, was the chief bulwark against big-govt pushers trying to transfer power from the states to the Fed govt. Progressive liberals got rid of that by passing the 17th amendment. It got rid of state govt appointments of Senators and changed it to direct elections of Senators by the people, turning the Senate into just another House, subject to all the fears, passions, and greed of that body.
Once that coup was in place, the Courts were the only part of the Fed govt, left to safeguard the power of diverse State govts as the Constitution requires. And liberals have been doing a full-court press ever since, to get liberal fanatics dedicated to expanding govt, installed on Federal courts.
That's why the incredible amount of far-left screeching, lying, and caterwauling has been going on every time a conservative judge or Justice is appointed to the Federal court system. A conservative court system that obeys and upholds the Constitution's restrictions and bans on big government, threatens the leftists' entire reason for being: Expansion of central government limited only by what the far left arbitrarily decide isn't needed (yet).
Observe what they did to everyone from Robert Bork to Clarence Thomas to Brett Kavanaugh and now the latest nominee from a list of similar solid conservatives. Each battery of attacks, slime, and personal insults just keeps getting worse as the liberals thrash around, trying to fool normal people into thinking the conservatives are monsters, each and every one.
I genuinely feel sorry for whomever President Trump nominates next. They all know what happened to Brett Kavanaugh. And that will be a picnic compared to what the liberals do to the next nominee.
I just heard a Sen. Graham voice clip on a radio newscast.
He said that:
Kavanaugh changed everything
That the nominee will have the support of every member of the Judiciary Committee.
That neither he nor Mitch can be intimidated.
And that they have the votes for. confirmation
He also said if you have it, please send ten dollars because he’s getting outspent by so much (in his Senate race).
Now that Cory Gardner has committed to voting for the nominee, it's a done deal. Thank God Trump beat Hillary.
Gardner will be the last Republican senator from Colarado, if trends do not change, Colorado will only send Democrats to the Senate in the future, such as New York and California. Thanks be to God this garbage will be humiliated in my home state.
He is no longer in tune with the current values ​​of Colorado voters, he is an anti-marijuana in a pro-marijuana state, anti-gay in a state ruled by a homosexual, anti-abortion in a pro-abortion state, his defeat is so clear that he’s not even campaigning.
Killing the far left agenda for a decade is more important than any seat or election.
A decade?
She's 48.
She could easily serve for the next 30 years and beyond.
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.
