Discussion: Heritage Action Calls On GOP To Block Clinton's SCOTUS Noms For Years

1 Like

I’m actually starting to hope for a Martian Invasion…

Insect overlords would be a welcome change from the childish GOP teabaggers…

6 Likes

We have to be grateful for ever smaller things now.

I’m grateful that TPM didn’t call Heritage Action a think tank. Win.

13 Likes

It seems to me that the Republican Senators blocking consideration of lawful appointments by the sitting President is a kind of “treason” against the American people. In any case, it is most certainly a dereliction of duty and would warrant removal from the Senate.

5 Likes

“Heritage Action is calling on Republican senators to block Hillary Clinton’s Supreme Court nominees for the entirety of her administration.”

Can we call it treason now?

(Pause)

OK, how about now?

(Pause)

Now?

19 Likes

Heritage Action. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.
What we are now seeing with the FBI actions and the calls by the Reich-Wingers to disrupt and DISABLE the entire Government is nothing less than a COUP that is being carried out right under the noses of the MSM and all they can talk about is fucking e-mails!
The 4th estate has completely FAILED and we now have nothing but TMZ and Pravda in it’s place with Bagdhad Bob at the Nightly News desk and paid-sycophants in the Pundit chairs.
Weep for America. She died in 2016 after a too-short run of Democratic Representative Government, her place will be taken by the Corporate Figurehead who bows to the highest bidder.
This reminds me of how Rome fell, when the Emperors took over and eventually just bid outright in cash against each other for the job.

11 Likes

No, it isn’t treason. I would certainly reserve the right of Democrats to block any Trump nomination for the simple reason that Obama was wrongfully and arbitrarily deprived of his right to nominate a justice, and until such time as that the nominative power is restored to a Democratic president, the Republicans don’t get their ball back. Very simple. Exceptional obstruction calls for an exceptional response.

The more the GOPERS talk like this, the more convinced I am that their internals show HRC blowing them away next Tues.

14 Likes

Who cares what they think? Politicians have to answer to the public. They only have to please their corporate sponsors. If Hillary wins and the Democrats control the Senate none of this will be an issue.

4 Likes

Hey Heritage Action, what do the republicans do after they’re done wiping their asses with the constitution?

5 Likes

I’m just waiting for some Republican lunkhead to recommend, in all seriousness, that we simply burn Washington, D.C. to the ground.

It’s the next logical step.

1 Like

Would those be the same internals that showed Mitt Romney winning in a landslide in 2012? They’re not real good at cipherin’.

2 Likes

So what happens when there is only a few justices on the Supreme Court? This is why it is imperative to elect the Democrats who are on the ballot in 5 days.

6 Likes

Dereliction of duty against a democratic president is a huge positive for their supporters. In fact, that is a prerequisite as long as it is against the Dems. If they dont do it, they will be primaried and lose.

1 Like

Elect Putin.

2 Likes

According to the Judicial Act of 1969, the Court is to consist of a Chief Justice and 8 associate justices, with a minimum of 6 judges constituting a quorum.

The part I don’t understand is the “or what?” part. What happens if it falls to five and the Republicans still refuse to do anything?

5 Likes

Guess Clinton could act without the Senate if the Senate does not flip to Democrat control. Then again the GOTP would shout impeachment right away.

1 Like

I guess the civil war is coming again. The only problem it will all be local and neighbor against neighbor.

I posted this earlier this month, partly in jest. I think it’s time for me to take myself more seriously.

The US Code sets the number of Supreme Court justices at nine with a minimum of six to conduct business (28 US Code §1). You could make a plausible argument that McConnell is violating Federal Law by refusing to allow the Senate to advise and consent on Garland’s nomination based on the clear language in 28 USC §1 that “The Supreme Court of the United States shall consist of a Chief Justice of the United States and eight associate justices . . .”

With the addition of McCain, Cruz, Burr and Cornyn it has become a conspiracy to violate Federal law.

13 Likes

BrainDead.

1 Like