SCOTUS 10: Pack the Court!

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Re: SCOTUS 10: Pack the Court!

I nearly spit out my food laughing last night. Some group has an ad attacking Tina Smith and they accuse her of coming out against the Supreme Court nominee without him having his due process.

First off, **** off about process- we aren’t even gonna be allowed to get his documents like all the other nominees.
Second, merick garland so again, **** right off.

These people are insane

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: SCOTUS 10: Pack the Court!

I nearly spit out my food laughing last night. Some group has an ad attacking Tina Smith and they accuse her of coming out against the Supreme Court nominee without him having his due process.

First off, **** off about process- we aren’t even gonna be allowed to get his documents like all the other nominees.
Second, merick garland so again, **** right off.

These people are insane

There are plenty of reasons not to vote for her and none of them involve the Court.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: SCOTUS 10: Pack the Court!

Well yeah, they never play by the rules so not sure why they would now. The 49 dems should just vote not to confirm even if it's solely because you should be able to review someone's records before they get a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court. It can provide cover as well.

Nope. North Dakota, Indiana, and West Virginia Dems will all vote for the clown. I don't like it anymore than you do. The only solace is hopefully it will work and save one of those seats. Doubtful.

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

There are plenty of reasons not to vote for her and none of them involve the Court.

I don’t love her, I’d prefer Al. But I’m sure as hell not voting for Painter or god forbid Housley.

Edit- in the primary I will support her. Will vote for the D candidate in November

[Handyman]

Re: SCOTUS 10: Pack the Court!

I would rather burn the Senate to the ground than vote for Housely.

[joecct]

I would rather burn the Senate to the ground than vote for Housely.

Call Her Majesty. She may have a battalion ready. However, Bladensburg will be a wee bit tougher this time around.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: SCOTUS 10: Pack the Court!

I don’t love her, I’d prefer Al. But I’m sure as hell not voting for Painter or god forbid Housley.

Edit- in the primary I will support her. Will vote for the D candidate in November

I don't see why we need to mine the Boundary Waters. Leave it alone.

[Rover]

Re: SCOTUS 10: Pack the Court!

Well yeah, they never play by the rules so not sure why they would now. The 49 dems should just vote not to confirm even if it's solely because you should be able to review someone's records before they get a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court. It can provide cover as well.

I happen to agree. Not being able to fully vet a nominee is a good reason for the Manchin's of the world to vote no and it does give them some cover to do so.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: SCOTUS 10: Pack the Court!

I happen to agree. Not being able to fully vet a nominee is a good reason for the Manchin's of the world to vote no and it does give them some cover to do so.

You really think that will matter? I don't.

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

I don't see why we need to mine the Boundary Waters. Leave it alone.

Neither do I but I also don’t want a whack job like housley in there. That’s worse

[Rover]

Re: SCOTUS 10: Pack the Court!

You really think that will matter? I don't.

Despite my differences with trix, he is right about this one. Whether it "matters" is subject to interpretation, but there are plenty of reasons a red state Dem should in fact vote against Kavanaugh depending on what comes up in a full vetting. If the GOP isn't going to allow a full vetting, then they should vote against him and take that to the voters. When their opponents b itch, they should turn that around on them and ask if they're on board with approving people for lifetime appointments on the SCOTUS with zero scrutiny.

Lamar Alexander said it best when he voted for maybe Kagan. His take was that it wasn't his job to only vote in favor of a nominee that he himself would have put forth. His job was to make sure the person had the requisite qualifications. I don't like John Roberts, but will admit there was nothing on his past that would disqualify him from the court, unlike say Nixon toadie Robert Bork - a central figure in Nixon's quest to obstruct justice (the Saturday night massacre). Same with Alito, while on the other hand Thomas was vastly underqualified. However, if Dems aren't going to get a chance to question the guy fully and review his record, vote no. Aside from the most committed Trump Humpers, who would be against that?

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Re: SCOTUS 10: Pack the Court!

SO where are all the non trump humper republicans? I haven’t heard a peep about slowing it down and doing this the proper way

[unofan]

SO where are all the non trump humper republicans? I haven’t heard a peep about slowing it down and doing this the proper way

They're out there with Hatch claiming this is the biggest obstructionism ever without ever mentioning the name Merrick Garland, of course.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: SCOTUS 10: Pack the Court!

SO where are all the non trump humper republicans? I haven’t heard a peep about slowing it down and doing this the proper way

The ends justify the means. They have been working on the taking over of the Court for decades now and it's in their grasp and they will not let it go. Flake, Corker, Collins, Murkowski, Paul will ALL Vote for this guy. All of them. Even McCain would vote for him if he were able. This is the Republicans Wet Dreams coming to life.

They will all be joined by three Democrats. It's done.

[Handyman]

Re: SCOTUS 10: Pack the Court!

Rover,

I dont think Scooby is saying that logically you arent right, he is saying that it wont matter because they are too spineless to actually stand up that way.