Well of COURSE, you are Jeff. You won’t get ANYBODY this conservative if you screw around. But we always KNEW this. NOW you guys are just ‘showing’ everybody how hypocritical you ARE. ‘No nominee for OBAMA or the country is going to hell!!! OH SHT, SHE WON. We’d better confirm!’
Garland was a peace offering from a polite and generous President.
Killery can nominate her own and I hope you all choke on him/her.
Wow, what a ballsy statement. /s
That on-coming tidal wave got ya nervous, Jeffy Boy?
Whatta Flake…
Wow – good of you to show us your hand, there, Mr. Flake. Asshat to the core, I see. Why not confirm the man because he’s a good fit and he deserves respect as a SCOTUS nominee? Why not because it’s the right thing to do? Why not because it’s right for the nation as a whole as opposed the best option for Republicans? Seriously, dude, this is prime-time reason so many are turned off by today’s “Republicanism.”
Garland who?
Flake: “If Hillary Clinton is president-elect then we should move forward with hearings in the lame duck.”
Or, you could do you damn job now.
Just a thought…
If the Republicans think SCOTUS is so important that they’re willing to support a dangerous incompetent like Trump, then the unprecedented obstruction of Judge Garland seems entirely predictable, and in a perverted sense, understandable (from their viewpoint).
And since he’s the “most conservative” judge they’re liable to get over the next four years, I think they’ll confirm him during the lame duck.
That’s Mitch McConnel’s M.O. He’s not a profile in courage. Just the consummate player of arcane rules to benefit his side, decency be damned.
They can’t do it now because they are all out on the campaign trail until November. This lame duck session is going to be fun to watch, especially if Repugs get their a**es handed to them on the 8th.
When Garland is confirmed, who is most likely to be Chief Justice?
I’ll be very surprised if Garland joins the court. He was a compromise candidate that the Rs rejected. After the election there is no need for Ds to compromise quite so much. Someone more liberal and younger should be added.
One of the Obamas?
If we get the Senate back with a large enough margin, I’d love to see President Clinton nominate somebody who’s coincidentally got a wide-open schedule.
Barack Hussein Obama.
you think one of them would want the job? if so, sure.
Even though I’m okay with Garland being confirmed, I’d find it ‘Just Desserts’ if he were to decide to remove his name from consideration now. He’s too classy a guy, from what I understand, but wouldn’t that be like an extra cherry on top the banana split? Oh, and I so want Thomas to resign before New Year’s Eve 2016. Make Hillary (happily) work for that Presidential salary. Make McConnell lose another pair of undies to stains. LOL.
I’d give them zero credit if they approved him now. It would just confirm what we already know…Trump is toast.
Seriously, now that Scalia’s not around to tell him how to vote, Thomas has no reason to sit there like the ignorant oaf he is.
Garland should withdraw on November 9.
“I have decided that the new President should make this appointment,”
Heads will explode.
They had their chance and should not be allowed to have it both ways.
The Anita Hill idea is just too amazing to ever happen. Whoever is a female Thurgood Marshall type should get the nomination.
edit: she could always just re-nominate him.
Garland should withdraw his nomination and Obama should “let the people decide” and dump it on Clinton. That would be the first scrimmage in this new game.
If it were just about Garland, I’d say ok. But the GOP was playing a game of poker. In the middle of a hand BHO offered to split the pot. The GOP said no lets see if we can win this pot, but then they lose the hand and say sure, lets split the pot. I really think it would be hard for the dems to accept that.