McConnel discusses why we don't confirm Supreme Court justices in an election year.

[Dittohead not!]

He makes some good points, don't you think?

 

[jet57]

He makes some good points, don't you think?

Well, Mcconnell is cheating and showing everybody his true colors. I think he's going to retire after the election and he should.

 

[TypicalRussian]

this is war and the court will be ours and we are taking your right to end life(not even a right, constitution give us right to self govern and bad bad things)

if you care about the election year court ethics, why did you push a partisan impeachment against consituition ethics and flasyely accused kavaaugh of sex assault

 

[Bullseye]

Time to face a few facts. Had McConnell called hearings with a GOP major judiciary committee what are the odds Garland would have been referred to the full Senate and that the GOP led Senate would approve him? hint: zip, zilch, none.

 

[jet57]

Time to face a few facts. Had McConnell called hearings with a GOP major judiciary committee what are the odds Garland would have been referred to the full Senate and that the GOP led Senate would approve him? hint: zip, zilch, none.

Of course, but the nomination would have been made and today there'd be no argument against Mcconnell's game playing now.

 

[Metric Mouse]

He makes some good points, don't you think?

No, he doesn't. He is wrong and nominees should be considered when presented.

 

[iguanaman]

Time to face a few facts. Had McConnell called hearings with a GOP major judiciary committee what are the odds Garland would have been referred to the full Senate and that the GOP led Senate would approve him? hint: zip, zilch, none.

Not so fast. Mitch never even gave Garland a chance for a reason. He was a highly qualified moderate and could have been confirmed.

 

[iguanaman]

this is war and the court will be ours and we are taking your right to end life(not even a right, constitution give us right to self govern and bad bad things)

if you care about the election year court ethics, why did you push a partisan impeachment against consituition ethics and flasyely accused kavaaugh of sex assault

53 U.S. Senators found Trump guilty as charged in the impeachment.

https://www.justsecurity.org/68415/...es-53-senators-say-trump-guilty-on-the-facts/

 

[Bullseye]

Not so fast. Mitch never even gave Garland a chance for a reason. He was a highly qualified moderate and could have been confirmed.

Believe what you want. I'm not going to argue about what didn't happen.

 

[TypicalRussian]

53 U.S. Senators found Trump guilty as charged in the impeachment.

https://www.justsecurity.org/68415/...es-53-senators-say-trump-guilty-on-the-facts/

still partison

 

[Irwin Corey]

He makes some good points, don't you think?

I think the only "point" Moscow Mitch and make at this point is he's a chickenshit and always has been a chickenshit.

 

[iguanaman]

still partison

Romney is not a Democrat and several other Reps. said Trump was proven guilty so no impeachment was not partisan it was his aquittal that was. The evidence against Trump was overwhelming and damning

 

[TypicalRussian]

Romney is not a Democrat and several other Reps. said Trump was proven guilty so no it was not partisan.

53 to 47 is partisan

 

[iguanaman]

53 to 47 is partisan

His acquittal was partisan. The evidence against Trump was undeniable and several Reps agreed too.

 

[ClaraD]

He makes some good points, don't you think?

I wonder if McConnell will be able to be there or not on Monday? He fell and broke his collar bone....you know old age, fragility and all..

 

[ClaraD]

Romney is not a Democrat and several other Reps. said Trump was proven guilty so no impeachment was not partisan it was his aquittal that was. The evidence against Trump was overwhelming and damning

Romney is a Republican, even though they try to deny it....he is about the only one left with their common sense in tact.

 

[TypicalRussian]

His acquittal was partisan. The evidence against Trump was undeniable.

no it wasnt, not even close

and thats what I mean

this is war, the time for ethics is long gone

 

[Dittohead not!]

Well, Mcconnell is cheating and showing everybody his true colors. I think he's going to retire after the election and he should.

Let's hope.

 

[noonereal]

He makes some good points, don't you think?

No.

There should be a time limit from when a President nominates a judge and teh Senate must vote.

 

[Dittohead not!]

No.

There should be a time limit from when a President nominates a judge and teh Senate must vote.

Regardless of the letter after the president's name and the partisan makup of the Senate? I agree.

Sauce for the goose should be sauce for that gander as well.

 

[noonereal]

Regardless of the letter after the president's name and the partisan makup of the Senate? I agree.

Sauce for the goose should be sauce for that gander as well.

two wrongs don't make a right

The Dems blew this when Hill did not get off her ass and campaign... is Joe doing the same?????

 

[Dittohead not!]

two wrongs don't make a right

The Dems blew this when Hill did not get off her ass and campaign... is Joe doing the same?????

OK, if you say so, but this has nothing at all to do with confirming a SCOTUS nominee.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

this is war and the court will be ours and we are taking your right to end life(not even a right, constitution give us right to self govern and bad bad things)

if you care about the election year court ethics, why did you push a partisan impeachment against consituition ethics and flasyely accused kavaaugh of sex assault

The court won’t ever be “yours”. And don’t count your anti-woman’s choice eggs too early either.

 

[TypicalRussian]

The court won’t ever be “yours”. And don’t count your anti-woman’s choice eggs too early either.

it will be consertaive and were crushing roe vs wade!

 

[RaleBulgarian]

Time to face a few facts. Had McConnell called hearings with a GOP major judiciary committee what are the odds Garland would have been referred to the full Senate and that the GOP led Senate would approve him? hint: zip, zilch, none.

Disagree. Barring any disqualifying revelations, even a GOP lead Senate would not dare reject Garland. Judge Garland was a well known moderate who was respected and openly praised by many Republicans in D.C., where he was (still is) Chief Judge of the Appeals Court.

That is why McConnell had to torpedo Garland before he could even get a hearing.