Amy Barrett (post your smear campaign here)

#28
#28
volfanhill said:
Mitch warned Harry. Too late to cry now. The Dems started this nonsense. Now is you want to call out GOP hypocrisy you have to admit your own. Bc you felt the Merrick crap he did was nonsense. But now your making the same argument. Unless you want your argument to be “it’s not fair.” If that’s the case you are behaving like my 9 year old. Of course it isn’t fair. When has politics been fair? When have the Dems acted like it should be? Harry screwed with long term recognized procedures. Mitch warned him. Now he’s fing the Dems back. And probably enjoying every second. It was in that moment Mitch realized that Dems didn’t care about protocol or procedure.
Click to expand...
That's not the issue at all. That was Republicans holding up duly appointed judges. Just more GOP BS. There was nothing that would disqualify his judicial appointments. I can't believe you actually see it differently as in it's the Dem's fault. No, it was just more of the same Republican BS of Party over Country. I actually think that was part of the Republican platform, to holdup Obama's judicial nominees.

That November, Senate Democrats used the nuclear option on Obama nominations. In April 2017, McConnell and Senate Republicans then used it to eliminate an exception for Supreme Court nominees to help Trump nominee Neal Gorsuch get confirmed.
 
#29
#29
She will be hard to attack. The religious stuff is a bit extreme, but it's not clear that it has shown through in her opinions. For example, she's supposedly strongly opposed to the death penalty on religious grounds, but recently paved the way for a federal execution. She's got two black daughters. I think her personal life will be squeaky clean.
 
#30
#30
Mick said:
That's not the issue at all. That was Republicans holding up duly appointed judges. Just more GOP BS. There was nothing that would disqualify his judicial appointments. I can't believe you actually see it differently as in it's the Dem's fault. No, it was just more of the same Republican BS of Party over Country. I actually think that was part of the Republican platform, to holdup Obama judicial nominees.

That November, Senate Democrats used the nuclear option on Obama nominations. In April 2017, McConnell and Senate Republicans then used it to eliminate an exception for Supreme Court nominees to help Trump nominee Neal Gorsuch get confirmed.
Click to expand...
He told you he would. Harry changed procedure. What don’t you get about it? Harry invoked the nuke option. Mitch said don’t be stupid bc we will do it right back and if you don’t cate then we won’t. Blame Harry Reid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hjeagle1vol, TN-POSSUM, NorthDallas40 and 9 others
#31
#31
evillawyer said:
She will be hard to attack. The religious stuff is a bit extreme, but it's not clear that it has shown through in her opinions. For example, she's supposedly strongly opposed to the death penalty on religious grounds, but recently paved the way for a federal execution. She's got two black daughters. I think her personal life will be squeaky clean.
Click to expand...


In other words.....your side is toast.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Franklin Pierce, ajvol01, NorthDallas40 and 4 others
#32
#32
NEO said:
In other words.....your side is toast.
Click to expand...

If not for the 2016 theft and the faux rule out pit out to justify it, she'd be a perfectly fine replacement for a Thomas or Alito. The line of attack has to be (1) this is BS given what was done in 2016, and (2) she's a wolf in sheep's clothing when it comes to women's rights and church/state separation. But given that 40% of America seems to loves em some jesus and want their women barefoot and pregnant and taking orders from hubby (who's banging the office secretary on the side), they're probably fine with being a Christian caliphate.
 
#34
#34
volfanhill said:
He told you he would. Harry changed procedure. What don’t you get about it? Harry invoked the nuke option. Mitch said don’t be stupid bc we will do it right back and if you don’t cate then we won’t. Blame Harry Reid.
Click to expand...
No. Blame the Republicans for holding up qualified judicial nominees because they could. Same with holding up Obama's SC nominee. It had nothing to do with the nuclear option. Nothing.

Judge not: GOP blocks dozens of Obama court picks
 
#35
#35
Mick said:
No. Blame the Republicans for holding up qualified judicial nominees because they could. Same with holding up Obama's SC nominee. It had nothing to do with the nuclear option. Nothing.

Judge not: GOP blocks dozens of Obama court picks
Click to expand...
Was that in congruence with senate rules? Yes or no?

Side note nothing’s wrong with Trump and the GOP appointing another SCJ. Bad timing is all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hjeagle1vol, TN-POSSUM, NorthDallas40 and 4 others
#36
#36
volfanhill said:
Was that in congruence with senate rules? Yes or no?

Side note nothing’s wrong with Trump and the GOP appointing another SCJ. Bad timing is all.
Click to expand...
By not holding a hearing or a vote for Obama's nominee they definitely broke a norm.
 
#43
#43
volfanhill said:
Mitch flat out warned Harry and co what would happen. Here we are. Take all that displaced anger you have over this and point it where it belongs. Harry Reid.
Click to expand...
Mitch's warning had nothing to do with his actions to change the senate rules for Supreme Court nominees. That is stupid. Because Mitch was unjustly holding up Obama's picks. You do know Obama's appointments were qualified, right? You do know the Republicans weren't going to vote to approve any Obama nominee, right? but somehow all of that was Harry's fault, right? It seems your origin theory is completely wrong. Blame the Dems for the actions of Republicans is idiotic, but it is the Republican way. How about a little of that personal responsibility cherished by Republicans.
 
#44
#44
volfanhill said:
Mitch flat out warned Harry and co what would happen. Here we are. Take all that displaced anger you have over this and point it where it belongs. Harry Reid.
Click to expand...
Harry Reid didn't hold up Obama's pick. Harry Reid didn't change the Senate rules for SC nominees.
 
Last edited:
#47
#47
Mick said:
Harry Reid didn't hold up Obama's pick. Harry Reid didn't change the Senate rules for SC nominees.
Click to expand...
You know what rules he changed. And you know what Mitch said that would mean. Harry fundamentally changed how lower court nominations got through. You are a giant hypocrite if you had no problem with it being used on the lower courts but not the SC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol
#50
#50
volfanhill said:
You know what rules he changed. And you know what Mitch said that would mean. Harry fundamentally changed how lower court nominations got through. You are a giant hypocrite if you had no problem with it being used on the lower courts but not the SC.
Click to expand...
No, I'm not. Obviously the Republicans were trying to pack the courts by unjustly holding up nominees. That's the overwhelming theme here. It was a Republican power play plain and simple. Tell me I'm wrong.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top