DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Supreme Court Vacancy

I love this phrasing... the trolling level is off the charts...

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.

OK I kept my word and it's Monday. I hope and pray that Trump nominates and gets a conservative judge approved who is against abortion. That is the reason I voted for Trump. Come on Donny get off your fat ass and get it done. It's time to set things up to overturn Roe V wade

GM bro, you know I love you man. BUT SCREW THAT! If they try I hope women drag them into the streets and beat them with sticks.

I LMAO off when you act like all woman are for abortion. I know a hell of a lot of woman who are 110 percent against abortion. I hope those woman drag men who blow off abortion as if it were nothing into the streets and beat the hell out of them.

Tit for tat bro.

I LMAO off when you act like all woman are for abortion. I know a hell of a lot of woman who are 110 percent against abortion. I hope those woman drag men who blow off abortion as if it were nothing into the streets and beat the hell out of them.

Tit for tat bro.

I LMAO off when you act like all woman are for abortion. I know a hell of a lot of woman who are 110 percent against abortion. I hope those woman drag men who blow off abortion as if it were nothing into the streets and beat the hell out of them.

Tit for tat bro.

2016, "Voters should have a say."

2020, "Voters should have no say."

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.

Nancy Pelosi refuses to rule out second impeachment of Trump to delay Supreme Court battle

‘We have arrows in our quiver,’ House Speaker says in warning to president and Mitch McConnell
John T. Bennett
Washington Bureau Chief
@BennettJohnT
1 day ago
27 comments

Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Sunday did not dismiss the idea that House Democrats might impeach Donald Trump again in order to force the Senate to hold a trial in removing him from office in order to delay a battle over the president’s coming nomination to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court.

“We have our options. We have arrows in our quiver that I’m not about to discuss,” the California Democrat said on ABC’s “This Week” program when asked about impeaching the president or Attorney General William Barr.

“But the fact is, we have a big challenge in our country,” Ms Pelosi said. "This president has threatened to not even accept the results of the election with statements that he and his henchmen have made. So right now, our main goal … would be to protect the integrity of the election as we protect the American people from the coronavirus.”

The move would be an unprecedented one for Ms Pelosi and Democrats, but in the extreme year that is 2020 and with America’s politics so divided, just about no one in Washington is ruling out anything as Republicans try to install a 6-3 conservative lean on the highest court in the land and Democrats scramble to try delaying a vote until after Election Day – or even into next year.


When ABC anchor George Stephanopoulos asked if she is ruling out any step the House could take to interrupt the Senate’s agenda, the speaker left all options on the table.

“We have a responsibility, we take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States,” she said. “We have a responsibility to meet the needs of the American people. When we weigh the equities of protecting our democracy, [it] requires us to use every arrow in our quiver,.”

There has been some scuttlebutt about impeaching the president for a second time, with the charges related to what Democrats say has been his ineffective and cruel response to the coronavirus pandemic. Some Democrats have suggested impeaching the attorney general for a list of actions, including appearing to do Mr Trump’s bidding on cases involving his friends or campaign associates, as well as his use of federal law enforcement against US citizens who have been protesting racial inequality and police violence against black people.

Under the Constitution, the Senate would be required to hold a trial if the House votes to impeach a president or Cabinet official.

Because a trial would tie up the chamber’s agenda for weeks or longer, it would not have time to take up something as complicated as a Supreme Court nomination at the same time.


All senators are required to be inside the Senate chamber during the trial, meaning Judiciary Committee members would not be able to hold confirmation hearings with any Trump nominee.

Democrats are pressing Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to follow the path he set in 2016, when he blocked then-President Barack Obama’s final high court nominee, Merrick Garland, arguing voters should speak first about who they wanted as president. Four years later, he and his allies are vowing a vote before Mr Trump’s term expires in late January. And they are not ruling out trying to hold confirmation hearings and have a simple-majority floor vote before 3 November’s election.

“Voters should pick the president," Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden said on Friday night, "and the president should pick the nominee.”


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world...le-b507574.html

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."



I would be very careful with this argument:

+ 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.

i wish Trump would just announce the decision today, instead of waiting until friday.

the earlier, the better. lets get this party started already!

We could beat it into GMs head that overturning Roe v Wade won’t stop abortion. It’ll just stop safe abortions. He doesn’t care about women or their safety though. Or babies after their born unwanted. Just cell clumps and zygotes.

You might hear your doctor talk about different phases of pregnancy with specific medical terms like embryo and zygote. These describe your baby’s stages of development.

https://www.healthline.com/health/pregnancy/embryo-fetus-development

Your developing baby has already gone through a few name changes in the first few weeks of pregnancy. Generally, your baby will be called an embryo from conception until the eighth week of development. After the eighth week, the baby will be called a fetus until it’s born.

Notice how the Clinic calls the baby a "BABY" not a clump of cells.

Some people think that the cells of a very early embryo are too unspecialized or insufficiently unified for the embryo to count as an individual human being. The embryo, they say, is more akin to a mass or ball of cells.



From the zygote stage forward, however, the unborn human clearly exhibits the molecular composition and behavior characteristic of a self-integrated and self-directed organism rather than a mere collection of cells. That's why she can go on to develop the specialized tissues and organs that she does.



"From the moment of sperm-egg fusion," concludes embryologist Maureen L. Condic, a professor at the University of Utah School of Medicine, in a detailed scientific analysis, "a human zygote acts as a complete whole, with all the parts of the zygote interacting in an orchestrated fashion to generate the structures and relationships required for the zygote to continue developing towards its mature state."

https://www.mccl.org/post/2017/12/20/the...unborn-children

And there we go!

You like extra butter on your popcorn? I got plenty.

I'm not sure if the downfall of American Democracy is a fun thing to watch...

Well it’s happening anyway, so might as well make it an event.

What you prefer I do? Move back to Germany?

All I can do is show up and vote, bro. But at the end of the day, I’m clearly not capable of changing anyone’s minds, at least not nearly enough to matter.

I’m gonna vote for Biden, but honestly I don’t think it will matter, cause I think trump might squeak out a win again.

So, might as well make it an event.

Blah blah blah. Take it out of the womb and start it in kindergarten then.

You never addressed the rest of my post. You care not about women that’ll be turned to back alley abortions. You care nothing about the children born into horrible situations where they are unwanted. You adopt none of these unwanted. You just want them born.

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.

X'fils are like abortions, you don't want, or want ta need one, but when you do, you want a professional."
(And for all my life I've been pro-life, I'm still pro life, even anti- coat hanger, death)
(So, I'm talking about Legality, Not, endorsement,
Sad conclusion, there will be abortions in the usa, legal or illegal,
the conclusion then is,
who does it, and I think, in America, we need it to be a professional)
That is, the most pro life, I can reconcile,

GC. Senator Grassley and somebody else, Gardner, came out in support of the appointment process going forward before the election sometime 2 nights ago or last night.

Romney was going to wait until a senator lunch on Tuesday to weigh in.

It's Tuesday, it's after lunch, and Mitt Romney has come out in support of going ahead with the appointment process before the election.

Blah blah blah Just let women murder their kids up to five years of age then

I didn't answer because an answer wasn't warranted for those lies. Everybody knows I care about women, and children, I care about all people. While you support killing off human life.