Sounds kind of like a threat!
On that refusal, Grassley said Tuesday that, “[i]f there’s a vacancy in the last year of a presidency, people ought to have a voice.”
He pointed to a hypothetical scenario outlined by then-Sen. Joe Biden in June 1992; that if a vacancy opened up on the court during that summer, “President Bush should consider following the practice of a majority of his predecessors and not — and not — name a nominee until after the November election is completed.”
“I took the same view that Democrats did,” Grassley said. “You can be sure the Democrats are going to remind me of that.”
Fail.
Your “view” was quite different.
You did not suggest that President Obama “consider” anything. You went ahead and let him nominate a centrist and then participated in an unprecedented blockade of the consideration of that nomination for nearly a year.
1 Like
The way to fix this is that once we have the Executive and Legislative back, we add two justices to the SCOTUS.
Fuck the GOP - there is nothing to stop our adding to the court and since they have dealt with the country in a manifestly unfair way, we should do what we can to balance it out.
3 Likes
That’s how his type refers to breeding stock…
He pointed to a hypothetical scenario outlined by then-Sen. Joe Biden in June 1992; that if a vacancy opened up on the court during that summer, “President Bush should consider following the practice of a majority of his predecessors and not — and not — name a nominee until after the November election is completed.”
And once again, you republican lying liar, he said “after the election” not after the new president is in office. Though I give you credit for at least including the accurate quote in your statement.
Then again, I have to take all of that credit away (and more!) for you glossing over the actual statment and making it sound like he was agreeing with the way you played politics with Obama, instead of saying pretty much the opposite of playing politics, by asking that the nomination happen after the vote.
Thanks, I like that line of thinking!!!
I say we add four, or we add two and impeach Thomas and Gorsuch, Thomas for being a useless drag on Society, and Gorsuch for being placed on the Court illegally.
Then, we remove every Judge that Trump nominated and McConnell passed. Then put McConnell on trial for Treason for his actions as Senate Majority Leader, and send his ass to Leavenworth to break rocks for the rest of his miserable life.
Just dreamin…
1 Like
Would having a personal relationship with someone in that family translate into a likelihood of doing something for one of them? They seem most unlikeable, everyone of them.
There’s nothing to prevent a Democrat from packing the court with just simple majorities in Congress. The court has no legitimacy anymore anyway.
1 Like
Hard to know especially since I have no idea about Kennedy’s kid.
But, Ivanka was invited to the oral argument as a guest of Kennedy, Kennedy talked to Trump when he went to give a speech to Congress, they have that back channel etc.
Something to make you go 'hmm."
I agree with you. The views of those you mentioned border on something akin to the AoC. Where each state is more of a nation to itself. Because each state can totally function on its own apparently…
This was also the view after that in some respects. There is a good book on this that came out in the last five years. The SCOTUS has rarely done much to help people outside of the period from about the 50’s through the 80’s. Other than that it typically favors business and the wealthy over the liberty of any given common person.
1 Like