Chuck Schumer's words are PERFECT (regarding waiting to replace RBG's SC Seat)...

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Listen to these Trumpists, pretending that this is about principle and principles are something they care about.

It's all about power for power's sake, all about saying "**** you" to non-Trumpists. And they deserve every last thing the democrats do in revenge, assuming they grow enough of a spine to take that revenge. Expand the court, admit D.C./Puerto Rico, **** the GOP.

Shut down the government and file Articles of Impeachment against William Barr.
Then expand the court, admit DC and PR and eliminate the filibuster.

 

[ludin]

Mitch McConnell and Lindsay Graham said they should in 2016. Now they are changing their tune. That is hypocrisy, and they are throwing out their own precedent, yes? Do you think that's a good idea?

i don't agree with it. i don't think they should stoop to leftists levels but schumer said obama should be able to appoint one in his last year so they are not the only hypocrites.

politics is dirty business.

 

[Mr Person]

Shut down the government and file Articles of Impeachment against William Barr.
Then expand the court, admit DC and PR and eliminate the filibuster.

Why shut down the government? None of this stuff happens unless the Dems take the senate/presidency, and keep the house.

 

[aociswundumho]

"The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president."

Perfect, no?

But when it came to Garland, he had the opposite opinion:



So which position is "perfect" and which one isn't?

 

[CaughtInThe]

But when it came to Garland, he had the opposite opinion:

View attachment 67296073

So which position is "perfect" and which one isn't?

actually, ole Chuck was just repeating ole Mitch's words from 2016. really, really good sarcasm.

 

[Moderate Right]

We wouldn't have to wait until the president that comes after Donald Trump. But we should wait until after the November election, if Republican-established precedent means anything. Whether Trump wins or loses, the Supreme Court vacancy should be filled after voters have had a chance to weigh in.

The precedent in 2016 was that we had a two term president who was obviously going to be replaced, 100% by a new president. This year Trump is in his first term and could serve four more years. The left have said that the next president should decide and it is ridiculous to wait four more years for the next president.

 

[aociswundumho]

actually, ole Chuck was just repeating ole Mitch's words from 2016. really, really good sarcasm.

No he wasn't, I just forgot to link to the original post:



Oh, and here are some other leftist hypocrites as well:

 

[CaughtInThe]

No he wasn't, I just forgot to link to the original post:



Oh, and here are some other leftist hypocrites as well:

it doesn't surprise me that you're trying to talk it away as ole Chuck posted ole Mitch's words.

i mean, what are your other options? integrity isn't one.

 

[Ikari]

It's kind of ridiculous to wait four years to fill this vacancy when we have a new president.

It'll just be a few more months. Far less than how long they stonewalled Obama's choice.

 

[Bullseye]

"The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president."


Perfect, no?

They already had a voice - in 2010 they took away the House, in 2014 they took the Senate, in 2016 they took away the White House. The people have been SHOUTING for ten years - the Dems aren't listening or don't care what the people are saying.

 

[aociswundumho]

it doesn't surprise me that you're trying to talk it away as ole Chuck posted ole Mitch's words.

i mean, what are your other options? integrity isn't one.

I don't even know what you're talking about. Provide some evidence, if I'm wrong I'll admit it.

Was Bernie and Warren being sarcastic as well?

 

[CaughtInThe]

They already had a voice - in 2010 they took away the House, in 2014 they took the Senate, in 2016 they took away the White House. The people have been SHOUTING for ten years - the Dems aren't listening or don't care what the people are saying.

oh. the perfect post to bookmark.

 

[CaughtInThe]

I don't even know what you're talking about. Provide some evidence, if I'm wrong I'll admit it.

Was Bernie and Warren being sarcastic as well?

i dig your tactic (since ole Mitch is actually in charge of the Senate). talk about anyone other than Mitch and his massive flip flop.

it's probably what Rush and Sean are doing daily.

 

[aociswundumho]

i dig your tactic (since ole Mitch is actually in charge of the Senate). talk about anyone other than Mitch and his massive flip flop.

it's probably what Rush and Sean are doing daily.

At this point I'm presuming you're a day drinker.

 

[CaughtInThe]

At this point I'm presuming you're a day drinker.

yeah, it's not like the leader of the Senate did a massive flip flop in just 4 years or anything.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

if tantrum means "laughing" because you guys couldn't pick out ole Mitch's words, then, yeah. tantrum.


but i get it. you guys can't be embarrassed anymore. Rush/Sean/Trump have trained you never to back down and always attack. there is no integrity but it works politically.

Putin's employees never get embarrassed.

 

[Excon]

yeah, they stonewalled. for NINE months.

this stuff isn't that hard. they're just hypocrites.

Wrong.
Again.

They didn't stonewall. They were straight forward with the position that they were not going to conduct a hearing for his consideration.​

Being straight forward about it is not stonewalling.

yeah, it's not like the leader of the Senate did a massive flip flop in just 4 years or anything.

There is no flip-flop here. The circumstance were different then and is why the Senate leader exercised his power the way he did.
And if the left is ever in such a position they are going to do the same thing.

Your crying reminds me of some of the lyrics from Tom MacDonald's new song.

"People so stupid, people so dumb, people so boo-hoo, wah-wah-wah
Get better issues, we're gonna run out of tissues, it's so dumb" ​

 

[CaughtInThe]

Wrong.
Again.

They didn't stonewall.​

yes. they did. for nine months.

don't worry though. young folks are watching the current Trump/Republican Party and will eventually swing the country way to the left (in response to this corrupt era).

 

[Excon]

yes. they did. for nine months.

Wrong as usual.

don't worry though. young folks are watching the current Trump/Republican Party and will eventually swing the country way to the left (in response to this corrupt era).

1. That's politics.
2. Maybe, maybe not. The riots seem to be having the opposite effect.

 

[CaughtInThe]

Wrong as usual.

no, they stonewalled for nine months.

it's not like it's a secret.

 

[beefheart]

Would you play poker with anyone who would lie and renege like that?

 

[lwf]

The precedent in 2016 was that we had a two term president who was obviously going to be replaced, 100% by a new president. This year Trump is in his first term and could serve four more years. The left have said that the next president should decide and it is ridiculous to wait four more years for the next president.

They don't mean, "the next president." They mean, "the president who wins the 2020 election."

 

[Helix]

nah, they just stonewalled for 9 months because they hated him. that's all it was.

and, now, their own words come back to haunt them (well, not really. they have no integrity).

yep. exactly.

 

[Excon]

no, they stonewalled for nine months.

it's not like it's a secret.

Wrong as usual you are.
They were straight forward about what was being done.
Being straight forward is not stonewalling.

Again.
Your crying reminds me of some of the lyrics from Tom MacDonald's new song.

"People so stupid, people so dumb, people so boo-hoo, wah-wah-wah
Get better issues, we're gonna run out of tissues, it's so dumb"

 

[OpportunityCost]

Shut down the government and file Articles of Impeachment against William Barr.
Then expand the court, admit DC and PR and eliminate the filibuster.

DC requires an amendment, PR voted down statehood on their ballot, file articles against Barr for what? Expanding the court has been tried and failed and the filibuster is already gone.

Absolutely doltish suggestions, you been talking to AOC or something?