Discussion: A Smirking McConnell Says He'd 'Fill' SCOTUS Vacancy If One Opens In 2020

TPM Article Topics
21

Of course he will, that “rule” he made-up last time was only for Democrats…

3 Likes
22

He only swallowed a turtle. He’s been a snake all along.

2 Likes
23

Fell for it? They LOVE it.

5 Likes
24

As usual nowhere to be found… Chuckie is such a lip dick and coward where else does anyone expect him to be. Unless, that is, he has another corporate check to receive then he’s all in.

1 Like
25

Assuming we can take the presidency and still not take the Senate…

Can we pack the courts? Can we add more justices?

1 Like
26

The Biden Rule seems to be another Biden gaffe. I’ll bet he wishes he would have kept his mouth shut in 92. At some point the BR will become a campaign ad for Trump to discredit Biden.

2 Likes
27

So either someone is resigning or McConnell is betting someone is going to die.

Is there some conservative SC justice that has kompromat and can be persuaded to retire?

Or does one have to hope fervently that McConnell is envisioning to replace a non-conservative SC justice through natural causes only and not induced by “accident”, novichok, or other unnatural causes?

1 Like
28

I think that’ll open the pandora’s box.

1 Like
29

My point was there never was a rule.

10 Likes
30

The end justifies the means. It seems to me the only path of action is to show the good people of Kentucky that McConnell is not working in their best interests. It’s very obvious, but getting through to the voters there is a challenge. Given the right resources, I’m sure there are people in Kentucky who could convince their brethren.

3 Likes
31

Agreed, I am asking how to take away his job security, thus my use of “voting” public

2 Likes
32

Biden even claimed the Republicans were stupid for invoking his “rule”. It was an idea he was pushing back in 92. I’m sure Biden didn’t think Mitch would actually use it to the Repubs advantage.

33

“The original constitution does not specify the number of justices for the Supreme Court. By 1801, Congress set the number of justices at five. That was changed in 1807 to increase the number to seven and again, in 1837 the number changed to nine. By 1863, the number rose as high as ten members.”

6 Likes
34

So weird that rethugs always find loopholes from Dems’ “mistakes”. Is it just bad luck or is it because Dems haven’t spent time digging out rethugs’ dirt?

1 Like
35

If bad things happen to him - I’m good with that. The worse the better.

4 Likes
36

So sick of this shit. When are we going to start “owning” the cons?

2 Likes
37

Repugs are just better dirty pool players.

38

That’s because they are the ones that crap in the pool.

6 Likes
39

Won’t happen, unless and until he’s caught doing something so vile (in the “minds” of his base) that they turn on him. Things like trying to improve the lot of black and brown people in America, or insulting the Traitor-in-Chief, or passing something that Speaker Pelosi wants passed, but the rank-and-file Rethugs don’t.

1 Like
40

I was thinking more along this kind of pool.

2 Likes