straightUp Loc: California

In February of 2016, Supreme Court Justice, Antonin Scalia died. The president at the time was Barack Obama so according to traditional protocol, he was supposed to pick a replacement. But the Republicans refused to confirm, saying it's too close to the election and that the winner of the upcoming election should pick it. And so they changed the rules. When asked what would happen if in the future a Supreme Court justice dies during the last year of a Republican presidents term. The responses were all the same. The new rule would be upheld.

Well, in September of 2020, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader-Ginsburg died... in the last year of a Republican president's term. So where is that rule now? Why are Republicans breaking their necks to make sure Trump selects the replacement BEFORE the election?

I'm hearing a lot of really lame excuses but nothing that wasn't also the case in 2016. In the end there is no way to cover up the blatant hypocrisy of the Republican party.

Wolf counselor Loc: Heart of Texas

Radiance3

==================
Hypocrisy? Nonsense! You are talking different events. It is clear and evident within the framework of the constitution, the duties and responsibilities of the president to expeditiously fill up the seat at the SC for the needs of the nation.

The president is within his legal rights and responsibilities to fulfill this duty. No amount of intimidations could stop him, He is bravely going to do it on Saturday. I emailed him who the best nominee should be. The Senate is ready to confirm happen what may. I repeat: It is a duty bound to be done by the orders of the framework of the constitution.

Good luck Mr. President and God bless!

So, go pound sand, along with Piglosi, and Schumer, and then call for violence of the BLACK BLM's and ANTIFAS. These people are against the civilized world.These people are violent and crazy,

Liberty Tree

The only rule is the Constitution and Republicans have followed it in both cases. Democrats would do the same thing under the circumstances and you know it .

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

Gatsby

Blame "Crazy Nancy": Her "Not One Dollar" stance was the opening of Hostilities.

President Trump doesn't start wars, he just wins them!

Radiance3

=================
This appointment has been historically proven 29 times within the framework of the constitution. So, LIBS, what are left for you to complain about? Resort to violence? Call your BLM'S? Pelosi and Schumer are so desperate right now. Pelosi's last recourse is IMPEACHMENT of the president, Lol..!

Smedley_buzkill

Let's see, the Constitution says that the president shall nominate, not maybe should nominate. Election year or not. Obama was a lame duck president and no matter who he nominated a Republican Senate would not have confirmed. So what? The "rules" you refer to mean nothing if they contradict the clear mandate of the Constitution.

straightUp Loc: California

Then why is Neil Gorsuch on the bench?

See, what I mean? You can toss 2016 aside as a "different event" and then get all holy with what you think the Constitution says, but once you acknowledge the fact that the rules of the constitution were just as valid in 2016 as they are now, the hypocrisy becomes undeniable. As clear as a naked body in the morning sunshine.


I'm not saying he isn't. Do you even know what I am saying?
???
I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of the Republican Party. The hypocrisy everyone can see, but you refuse to look at.

FACT #1: In 2016 the Republicans, led by Mitch McConnell, refused to confirm ANY judge appointed by the sitting president. They said it was because they were "too close" to the 2016 elections.

FACT #2: In 2020 the Republicans led by Mitch McConnell is rushing to have the judge confirmed BEFORE the election.

Hypocrisy - 101.


What intimidations? Bravely?

Yeah, Mr. Bone Spurs, who hides in the basement when protesters get too close. LOL


I'm sure he's very grateful for your recommendation.


Oh, I know. I was listening when McConnell, the King of Hypocrisy, said they would immediately confirm WHOEVER Trump picks.


Then why is Neil Gorsuch on the bench?

hmmmm?


Yes, he needs both... lot's of both!


Aw, look at you. All, angry... telling people to pound sand, intentionally misspelling names and tossing out all kinds of unrelated accusations that aren't even true.

Look, I know you can't really argue my point. It's not really a debate. It's a simple fact. This is why I don't expect it to last more than a page. Your best option is to just forget it.

straightUp Loc: California

Well, the Constitution isn't actually a rule, it's a body of many rules. So do you know *which* of those rules you are talking about? I'm just curious because I don't think you do.

Not that it really matters because the point is that in 2016 Republicans said... they can't confirm any judge appointed by the president this close to an election. No matter what the Constitution says... THAT is what the Republicans in 2016 said and it's in direct conflict with what they are saying now.

Just so it's clear the title of this post is "Hypocrisy 101", not "Constitution 101".

straightUp Loc: California

Once again, I am not disputing the legal right for Trump to pick a replacement. Not once have I said that. It's interesting how all of you gravitate to that argument. I'm guessing that's all right-wing media is saying right now, so your minds are probably flooded with it. But again... I am not disputing the legal basis. I am merely pointing out the hypocrisy of the Republican Party's double standard so well-demonstrated by Mitch McConnell's statements.

So far, no one has been able to answer to that. All I see is a lot of shoe shuffling.

straightUp Loc: California

Oh, it started long before that. You don't remember the Children of the Corn aka... House Republicans circa 2012 when they said they refuse to cooperate with the president? They even let the government shut down to prove their point. "Not One Dollar" is a whisper compared to that.


LOL - Such as what?

What war has he won? The hairspray war in his bathroom? Ha, ha, ha!

Did you see him standing before RBG's coffin this morning? It's one of the few moments where you can actually see him AND hear the people, No helicopter noises, bands playing or speakers. Just him and Melania at the top of the steps and the sound of boos and hisses from the people.

I've never seen anything like that before. No president in my life time ever got that kind of response from a crowd like that. It was erie.

straightUp Loc: California

Except for one thing my friend. Those contrary "rules" prove the hypocrisy that I am talking about. Those "rules" that I refer to are the "rules" McConnell established in 2016, whether they are constitutional or not doesn't change what McConnell said. Now he is doing the exact opposite to what he insisted in 2016.

That's called hypocrisy.

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

In 2013, under the leadership of then-Sen. Hairy Reid, democrats voted to deploy a parliamentary procedure dubbed the “nuclear option” to change Senate rules to pass most executive and judicial nominees by a simple majority vote, instead of the long-standing 60-vote threshold needed to overcome a filibuster.

Nobody can match Joe Biden's slanderous excoriation of judge Robert Bork. The democrats treatment of Brett Kavanaugh may be a close second.

The vacant seat on the SCOTUS bench is not about McConnell's leadership or lack thereof.

The Supreme Court of the United States does not belong to the democrat party, it is We the People's court. And, the vacant seat in that court did not belong to Justice Ginsburg, it is our seat to fill.

These are 'hardcore radicals' dressed up as Senators and Reps

Rose42

Duh its hypocritical. The interesting thing is the outrage from democrats is only because they may not be able to make the next pick. They’re simply the other side of the same rotting coin.