|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 13,478
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 13,478 |
Are you genuinely surprised at this? Both sides have flip-flopped numerous times on this issue as it suited them. Expecting politicians (and McConnel, no less) to suddenly start acting with ethics/morals seems silly, given their track record.
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
-PrplPplEater
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823 |
Here's the hypocrisy and lie involved. When Obama wished to appoint a SCOTUS judge, Republican senators and their voters said that, even 270 days until the election, that the voters should have say in the election as to who should appoint the next judge to the SCOTUS. Now, with 44 days until the election they say Trump should appoint the new judge. The same Mitch McConnell who said.....
Feb. 22, 2016: McConnell reaffirms his stance: "Of course it’s within the president’s authority to nominate a successor even in this very rare circumstance — remember that the Senate has not filled a vacancy arising in an election year when there was divided government since 1888, almost 130 years ago — but we also know that Article II, Section II of the Constitution grants the Senate the right to withhold its consent, as it deems necessary."
Feb. 23, 2016: “The Senate will appropriately revisit the matter after the American people finish making in November the decision they’ve already started making today."
March 16, 2016, with Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland, McConnell stood his ground: It is important for the Senate to "give the people a voice in the filling of this vacancy" by waiting until the next president takes office. "The American people may well elect a president who decides to nominate Judge Garland for Senate consideration," McConnell said. "The next president may also nominate someone very different. Either way, our view is this: Give the people a voice."
And he tells "Meet the Press": "The American people are about to weigh in on who is going to be the president. And that's the person, whoever that may be, who ought to be making this appointment."
Now that Trump is president it seems he's shifted to a different stance....
Sept. 18, 2020: With the death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, McConnell said, "President Trump’s nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate.
"Americans reelected our majority in 2016 and expanded it in 2018 because we pledged to work with President Trump and support his agenda, particularly his outstanding appointments to the federal judiciary," he added. "Once again, we will keep our promise."
It's nothing more than a power grab. And as we can see on this very board, morals and ethics no longer mean anything to their supporters. They are being exposed for what they are. So they can stop acting like they hold any high ground. They gave that up almost four years ago and they support every scummy move they make to this very day. Uh, It is the Constitutional Duty of the President to nominate a Supreme Court Justice when there is a vacancy. Obama did it and Trump will too. Problem with your twisted story is Obama was at the end of his 8 year term while Trump is only in the middle of his. Senate said no to the outgoing President and will say yes to the midterm President.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,986
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,986 |
Here's the hypocrisy and lie involved. When Obama wished to appoint a SCOTUS judge, Republican senators and their voters said that, even 270 days until the election, that the voters should have say in the election as to who should appoint the next judge to the SCOTUS. Now, with 44 days until the election they say Trump should appoint the new judge. The same Mitch McConnell who said.....
Feb. 22, 2016: McConnell reaffirms his stance: "Of course it’s within the president’s authority to nominate a successor even in this very rare circumstance — remember that the Senate has not filled a vacancy arising in an election year when there was divided government since 1888, almost 130 years ago — but we also know that Article II, Section II of the Constitution grants the Senate the right to withhold its consent, as it deems necessary."
Feb. 23, 2016: “The Senate will appropriately revisit the matter after the American people finish making in November the decision they’ve already started making today."
March 16, 2016, with Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland, McConnell stood his ground: It is important for the Senate to "give the people a voice in the filling of this vacancy" by waiting until the next president takes office. "The American people may well elect a president who decides to nominate Judge Garland for Senate consideration," McConnell said. "The next president may also nominate someone very different. Either way, our view is this: Give the people a voice."
And he tells "Meet the Press": "The American people are about to weigh in on who is going to be the president. And that's the person, whoever that may be, who ought to be making this appointment."
Now that Trump is president it seems he's shifted to a different stance....
Sept. 18, 2020: With the death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, McConnell said, "President Trump’s nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate.
"Americans reelected our majority in 2016 and expanded it in 2018 because we pledged to work with President Trump and support his agenda, particularly his outstanding appointments to the federal judiciary," he added. "Once again, we will keep our promise."
It's nothing more than a power grab. And as we can see on this very board, morals and ethics no longer mean anything to their supporters. They are being exposed for what they are. So they can stop acting like they hold any high ground. They gave that up almost four years ago and they support every scummy move they make to this very day. Uh, It is the Constitutional Duty of the President to nominate a Supreme Court Justice when there is a vacancy. Obama did it and Trump will too. Problem with your twisted story is Obama was at the end of his 8 year term while Trump is only in the middle of his. Senate said no to the outgoing President and will say yes to the midterm President. He isn't a "Midterm" President until after he would be elected again. So as of today, he isn't. The Senate is a bunch of hypocrites is all that this is. Obama nominated a justice 8 MONTHS before the election and got denied. Trump will nominate, even if today, 6 WEEKS before the election and everything is hunky dory?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823 |
I know your side is trying to eliminate the Constitution but it hasn't happened yet. The Constitution Still Stands. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,765
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,765 |
So in 2016 the voters should have had a say. In 2020 the voters shouldn't have a say. Got it.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,765
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,765 |
I know your side is trying to eliminate the Constitution but it hasn't happened yet. The Constitution Still Stands. You wouldn't allow it to stand in 2016.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,986
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,986 |
I know your side is trying to eliminate the Constitution but it hasn't happened yet. The Constitution Still Stands. So glad you responded to my actual post. Name 1 way Democrats are trying to eliminate the Constitution by pointing out hypocrisy in the Senate? 1 example, please. And FYI, I didn't vote for a Democrat last election. Haven't decided on this one either. But it won't be Trump.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823 |
The Constitution does not say anything about the voters having a say in this.
The Constitution does say it is the sitting Presidents DUTY to nominate a new justice to fill a vacancy.
It is still the United States Constitution and not the Pit constitution, yet.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,986
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,986 |
The Constitution does not say anything about the voters having a say in this.
The Constitution does say it is the sitting Presidents DUTY to nominate a new justice to fill a vacancy.
It is still the United States Constitution and not the Pit constitution, yet. Right, but you didn't complain when Obama nominated someone and the Senate just ignored it for 8 months. It was still the Constitution then too. And this is the exact reason that they gave when they denied Obama.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,864
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,864 |
Posted this in the other thread. The left has dug itself a hole with Kavanaugh that they absolutely cannot climb out of. They gambled and they lost and that loss is about to get doubled down on.
If I were a Democrat I would be so pissed at how their party has handled this Presidency. If they push this Nom through you can directly correlate the expediency to the Kavanaugh charade. I just cannot see Republicans thinking they owe even one shred of consideration to the ask that this gets delayed.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,765
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,765 |
Yeah, that's it. It has nothing to do with them refusing to hold hearings on Obama's nominee in 2016 and wanting to push through Trump's in an election year. The fact that you pretend to be so deaf is a big part of the problem.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823 |
Uh, it wasn't me that decided anything, it was the Senate that decided Obama should not pick a Supreme at the end of an 8 year term.
Trump is only in his 4th year of an 8 year term and the Senate decided it will consider his nomination.
(The week after President Jimmy Carter lost his 1980 re-election bid, he announced the judicial nomination of a close ally of Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Ted Kennedy. The nomination sailed through the Senate, which confirmed the First U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals judge 80-10 less than a month later, six weeks before Inauguration Day. That nominee, Stephen Breyer, now sits on the Supreme Court.)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,765
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,765 |
2016, "Voters should have a say."
2020, "Voters should have no say."
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 15,933
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 15,933 |
 Look who’s trigged.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,532
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,532 |
Uh, It is the Constitutional Duty of the President to nominate a Supreme Court Justice when there is a vacancy. Obama did it and Trump will too.
Problem with your twisted story is Obama was at the end of his 8 year term while Trump is only in the middle of his.
Senate said no to the outgoing President and will say yes to the midterm President. Seeing this a lot right now, must be the New Fox talking point... BUT there is a huge flaw in this thinking because Presidential terms are 4 years not 8! 8 years assumes re election is automatic, ask Bush 1 and Jimmy Carter if that is true... Trump is in the last year of his term. McConnell is full of crap.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,864
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,864 |
Yeah, that's it. It has nothing to do with them refusing to hold hearings on Obama's nominee in 2016 and wanting to push through Trump's in an election year. The fact that you pretend to be so deaf is a big part of the problem. I hear you, the problem is like I said, when one side ignores their own hypocrisy for so long. The other side see's it as viable. I expect cries for impeachment on nearly everything Biden does if President.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,171
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,171 |
His term is still ongoing. Even if he loses, it is still his job until January. The job of the President, as it pertains to a Supreme Court vacancy, is to make an appointment. Period.
The Senate's job is to then hold confirmation hearings. Period.
Government needs to simply do their jobs and stop trying to work the system. Period.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,986
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,986 |
Uh, it wasn't me that decided anything, it was the Senate that decided Obama should not pick a Supreme at the end of an 8 year term.
Trump is only in his 4th year of an 8 year term and the Senate decided it will consider his nomination.
(The week after President Jimmy Carter lost his 1980 re-election bid, he announced the judicial nomination of a close ally of Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Ted Kennedy. The nomination sailed through the Senate, which confirmed the First U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals judge 80-10 less than a month later, six weeks before Inauguration Day. That nominee, Stephen Breyer, now sits on the Supreme Court.)
An 8 year term, huh? Someone needs to research a little better.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823 |
“They lost the election in 2016, they lost the White House," "So, listen, if they win back those things, they’ll be able to confirm and nominate their own justices in the future, but, to say because they lost elections that now that they will break all of our Constitutional norms and standards, they’ll pack courts, they’ll conduct impeachment hearings to stop a president from carrying forward his Constitutionally authorized privileges and responsibilities. That’s insane.”
-Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,532
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,532 |
His term is still ongoing. Even if he loses, it is still his job until January. The job of the President, as it pertains to a Supreme Court vacancy, is to make an appointment. Period.
The Senate's job is to then hold confirmation hearings. Period.
Government needs to simply do their jobs and stop trying to work the system. Period. If the Senate didn't have these pesky rules that they set for themselves this would all be true, but those rules and their fair application is what is up for debate and scrutiny.
Last edited by OldColdDawg; 09/21/20 01:15 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,171
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,171 |
And what rule is this, and is it unwritten or is it codified?
If it is the latter, then they need to follow it. If it is the former, it's not a rule. Period.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480 |
Trump is only in his 4th year of an 8 year term
I love this phrasing... the trolling level is off the charts...
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,765
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,765 |
His term is still ongoing. Even if he loses, it is still his job until January. The job of the President, as it pertains to a Supreme Court vacancy, is to make an appointment. Period.
The Senate's job is to then hold confirmation hearings. Period.
Government needs to simply do their jobs and stop trying to work the system. Period. Yet that wasn't what they were saying in 2016.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,765
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,765 |
And what rule is this, and is it unwritten or is it codified?
If it is the latter, then they need to follow it. If it is the former, it's not a rule. Period.
It's only the rule when they hold power.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480 |
And what rule is this, and is it unwritten or is it codified?
If it is the latter, then they need to follow it. If it is the former, it's not a rule. Period.
Look - if the Democrats had won the argument in 2016 and appointed Garland - I'd wouldn't have much to complain about now in 2020. But "the will of the senate" decided that Garland should not even be put through a nomination process (much less confirmed).... Democrats can very consistently say "we believe (in theory) that the president should be able to make appointments while their term is still ongoing -- however, this isn't what the senate decided in 2016 - and we shouldn't change our established norms based on the whims of who is in charge."
If it is the latter, then they need to follow it. If it is the former, it's not a rule. Period.
+ 9 supreme court justices is not a written rule. + The embargo against adding "Northwest Washington D.C." "South East Washington D.C", "Trinidad, Washington D.C." all as individual US states is an unwritten rule. + Impeaching a president or supreme court justices purely for political differences is banned by precedent. It is not a written rule. If we allow "unwritten rules" to be broken whenever a party with a presidency and the senate want it to be -- a lot of crazy **** is about to happen.
Last edited by Lyuokdea; 09/21/20 01:28 PM.
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823 |
What rule? The Biden rule?
But you said that was not a rule in 2016.
Even Biden said it yesterday that it is nonsense.
So now you cry because people are agreeing with you?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,171
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,171 |
His term is still ongoing. Even if he loses, it is still his job until January. The job of the President, as it pertains to a Supreme Court vacancy, is to make an appointment. Period.
The Senate's job is to then hold confirmation hearings. Period.
Government needs to simply do their jobs and stop trying to work the system. Period. Yet that wasn't what they were saying in 2016. I don't know who "They" are, nor do I care about what happened before. I am not playing Party Ping Pong. I'm stating what *I* believe in.... Do Your Damned Job(s).
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,532
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,532 |
And what rule is this, and is it unwritten or is it codified?
If it is the latter, then they need to follow it. If it is the former, it's not a rule. Period.
Not sure. All I know is this is what the debate is all about. And Trump should NOT pick this nominee IS my personal opinion. But here is a link that might help to start answering your question Purp: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrick_Garland_Supreme_Court_nomination
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,171
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,171 |
I don't have questions. I have statements.
Unless there are clear and specific written rules prohibiting the appointment being part of their job, then it is part of their job.
There is no middle ground there, at all. There is no gray area.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,532
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,532 |
Trump is only in his 4th year of an 8 year term
I love this phrasing... the trolling level is off the charts... I know. I guess we are voting for 8 years of Biden in November. I didn't know that. It will be good to just vote him in for 8 years and NOT have to worry about him being re elected in 4... 40 will like this.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,469
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 52,469 |
this would be the dopest night club name, ever.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
- Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,765
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,765 |
And I say do your job consistently. This isn't party ping pong. This is one party using two different standards based strictly on who the president is.
The same standard should be used by McConnell that he used in 2016. Now how is that party ping pong? The only one playing party ping pong here is the Republican senate.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,532
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,532 |
I don't have questions. I have statements.
Unless there are clear and specific written rules prohibiting the appointment being part of their job, then it is part of their job.
There is no middle ground there, at all. There is no gray area.
And did you say this with Merrick Garland?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,765
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,765 |
There is no middle ground there, at all. There is no gray area. Yet things were totally gray in 2016 and I didn't hear your voice then. Why promote the existence of such a double standard?
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,171
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,171 |
Ok, I'll bite and play into the two-party stupidity.... I'm pretty sure I had no stance one way or the other, vocally, but I'm very damned certain I would have been sick and annoyed at the parties playing their games like they are now. Feel free to search the board for all threads related to whomever the Hell is is Merrick Garland is.
I don't get into all of this tripe on the level you guys do, I simply don't care who the Supremes are because it's above my pay grade.... if it is a Dem President that gets to pick, then he gets to pick... and then it is up to the Senate to confirm or reject. Period. If it is the other way and it is an "R" doing the nominating, then guess what? Then he gets to nominate and the Senate is responsible for confirming or rejecting.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,765
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,765 |
I expect the senate to apply the same standards to the process.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 25,823 |
Come clean, you just read that post in the Constitution didn't you?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,171
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,171 |
I expect them to do what the Hell we pay them to do.
I expect them to Show Up and Do Their Jobs.
I don't give a rat's ass which way their vote or confirmation goes... but, I sure as Hell expect them to hold that confirmation with due diligence if a nomination goes in.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,532
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,532 |
Ok, I'll bite and play into the two-party stupidity.... I'm pretty sure I had no stance one way or the other, vocally, but I'm very damned certain I would have been sick and annoyed at the parties playing their games like they are now. Feel free to search the board for all threads related to whomever the Hell is is Merrick Garland is.
I don't get into all of this tripe on the level you guys do, I simply don't care who the Supremes are because it's above my pay grade.... if it is a Dem President that gets to pick, then he gets to pick... and then it is up to the Senate to confirm or reject. Period. If it is the other way and it is an "R" doing the nominating, then guess what? Then he gets to nominate and the Senate is responsible for confirming or rejecting.
And if Obama had not been denied his pick BECAUSE of an imminent election 9 months away I would probably feel the exact same way you do. But that did not happen and now the reasoning behind it not happening is the same reason this pick should not happen until the winner of the election is sworn in.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,765
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,765 |
I expect them to do what the Hell we pay them to do.
I expect them to Show Up and Do Their Jobs.
I don't give a rat's ass which way their vote or confirmation goes... but, I sure as Hell expect them to hold that confirmation with due diligence if a nomination goes in. I expected the same thing in 2016 too. When that guy what's his name wasn't given his hearing. 
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Supreme Court Vacancy
|
|
