timschochet
Footballguy
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/news/2020/01/08/ruth-bader-ginsburg-health-096302
Great news. May you live to be 100, Madam Ginsburg!
Great news. May you live to be 100, Madam Ginsburg!
Good thing the president cured cancer.https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/news/2020/01/08/ruth-bader-ginsburg-health-096302
Great news. May you live to be 100, Madam Ginsburg!
Wrong thread.Good thing the president cured cancer.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/news/2020/01/08/ruth-bader-ginsburg-health-096302
Great news. May you live to be 100, Madam Ginsburg!
Exactly like Democrats. The Democrats bare at least as much responsibility for how overly politicized the judicial appointment process has become. Trying to claim a hide road is laughable.Wrong thread.
I wish RBG the best, but given her age and recent health, I worry about her ability to hang on into January 2021. Their stance on the Garland nomination notwithstanding, I have no doubt that our current President and the Senate would have no issue fast-tracking another conservative justice onto the bench up until inauguration day, if a Democrat is elected and even if the Senate flips. Our current Republican leadership's hypocrisy has no bounds.
I can accept the idea that Democrats have contributed in some fashion to where we are currently on judicial appointments. But the idea that they bare "at least as much responsibility" as Republicans seems absurd. I would think even a staunch Republican defender like yourself would admit that the Merrick Garland debacle was a giant leap forward. No?Exactly like Democrats. The Democrats bare at least as much responsibility for how overly politicized the judicial appointment process has become. Trying to claim a hide road is laughable.
That's a great question. I wonder what the real date is, where we are actually safe. By law the new Congress convenes on January 3rd each year, so I guess it would depend on the makeup of the Senate as of that date. If Republicans retain control, perhaps January 17th or 18th? I could see them rushing someone through the process last minute, and it seems like norms would suggest it would take a few weeks to get someone through, but as we learned with Merrick Garland, norms mean nothing if not written into law. Could Senate confirmation literally mean a vote called day of, like mid day 1/19, where Republicans confirm someone completely unvetted?Wrong thread.
I wish RBG the best, but given her age and recent health, I worry about her ability to hang on into January 2021. Their stance on the Garland nomination notwithstanding, I have no doubt that our current President and the Senate would have no issue fast-tracking another conservative justice onto the bench up until inauguration day, if a Democrat is elected and even if the Senate flips. Our current Republican leadership's hypocrisy has no bounds.
There is nothing even remotely equivalent that the GOP has done to the political circus that was seen during the Bork, Thomas, and Kavanaugh hearings. You can claim the game that was played with Garland was worse, but dropping 11th hour politically motivated rape allegations has to be near the top of dirty tricks ever played in a nomination process. Of course the Supreme Court thread is a more appropriate place to dive into this.I can accept the idea that Democrats have contributed in some fashion to where we are currently on judicial appointments. But the idea that they bare "at least as much responsibility" as Republicans seems absurd. I would think even a staunch Republican defender like yourself would admit that the Merrick Garland debacle was a giant leap forward. No?
Democrats didn't drop any rape allegations - American citizens did. Where were the Gorsuch rape allegations?There is nothing even remotely equivalent that the GOP has done to the political circus that was seen during the Bork, Thomas, and Kavanaugh hearings. You can claim the game that was played with Garland was worse, but dropping 11th hour politically motivated rape allegations has to be near the top of dirty tricks ever played in a nomination process. Of course the Supreme Court thread is a more appropriate place to dive into this.
Yes they did. They advised and colluded with the supposed victim and leaked the info at the last-minute to try to blow up the nomination.Democrats didn't drop any rape allegations - American citizens did. Where were the Gorsuch rape allegations?
Especially when neither side can spell “bear” correctly.Let's not have the same conversation in this thread that we have in every Supreme Court thread about which political party is worse.
The Scalia one was so bad, but I think the main offenders were banned.I feel like I need a shower after reading these posts. Using this news to score political potshots is a disgrace.
I mean, maybe if folks added some humor to their comments it would at least be palatable.Let's not have the same conversation in this thread that we have in every Supreme Court thread about which political party is worse.
Let's not have the same conversation in this thread that we have in everySupreme Courtthread about which political party is worse.
Whigs or Bull Moose?Let's not have the same conversation in this thread that we have in every Supreme Court thread about which political party is worse.
I would fully expect that. I have no doubt the republicans have a running short list of candidates that they could fast track given this exact scenario.Could Senate confirmation literally mean a vote called day of, like mid day 1/19, where Republicans confirm someone completely unvetted?