6 Repub Senators could vote PRESENT or Not Vote, & she will still get confirmed ...

[archives]

And, we should not give the Dems any quarter either. After their behavior with our prior picks......we need to go full speed ahead!

Keep in mind then that there could be consequences that could set the GOP back for quite some time, Mitch don't care, he'll be history when the end results arrive

[Stretch]

Dems were the ones who didn't think through the consequences of their prior behavior.

[canceled.2021.3]

Bullshit.

Besides, if they are opposed to allowing the nomination to go forward, why would they do something that would allow it?

Take a fucking common sense class, dumbass.

They could vote present to oppose the process but not oppose the candidate.

It is too early to make predictions.

Just sit back and watch

[Darth Omar]

[PostmodernProphet]

The Democrat platform that has been exposed. now ... will ensure a Trump victory.

I can't get enough of this.......watch it two, three times a day just to cheer me up.....

[Bigdog]

I can't get enough of this.......watch it two, three times a day just to cheer me up.....

LV's caterwauling reminded me I should post the vid.

[Nomad]

They could vote present to oppose the process but not oppose the candidate.

It is too early to make predictions.

Just sit back and watch

Their public statements have been that they think the nomination should take place AFTER the election.

If they think that, then they most likely would not take an action that would facilitate the nomination before the election.

[Nomad]

I can't get enough of this.......watch it two, three times a day just to cheer me up.....

LV's caterwauling reminded me I should post the vid.

If you guys think that is really a left winger, you're dumber than I thought.

[PostmodernProphet]

If you guys think that is really a left winger, you're dumber than I thought.

lol....and who do you think she is?.....

[Nomad]

lol....and who do you think she is?.....

The same thing that is in most of these types of r/w propaganda bullshit social media post... an actor paid by some goofball rwnj special interest.

[archives]

Dems were the ones who didn't think through the consequences of their prior behavior.

The Democrats didn’t refuse to even give any GOP SCOTUS nominee an interview nine months before the election nor did the Democrats make SCOTUS Justices approval a majority vote, this is all on Mitch

[Stretch]

The Democrats didn’t refuse to even give any GOP SCOTUS nominee an interview nine months before the election nor did the Democrats make SCOTUS Justices approval a majority vote, this is all on Mitch

They just ripped them to shreds in their grand inquisitions.

[PostmodernProphet]

The same thing that is in most of these types of r/w propaganda bullshit social media post... an actor paid by some goofball rwnj special interest.

if so, she's pretty good......she acted just like a fuckwitted lib'rul........

[Nomad]

if so, she's pretty good......she acted just like a fuckwitted lib'rul........

Prove it.

[Bigdog]

Their public statements have been that they think the nomination should take place AFTER the election.

If they think that, then they most likely would not take an action that would facilitate the nomination before the election.

Part of Mitch's speech on Senate floor Sept. 21 should enlighten you ...

"“The Senate has not filled a vacancy arising in an election year when there was a divided government since 1888, almost 130 years ago.” Here’s what I said the next day when I spoke to the press for the first time on the subject, “You have to go back to 1888 when Grover Cleveland was president to find the last time a vacancy created in a presidential election year was approved by Senate of a different party.”.

Mitch McConnell: (09:16)
As of then, only six prior times in American history had a Supreme Court vacancy arisen in a presidential election year. And the president sent a nomination that year to the Senate of the opposite party. The majority of those times, the outcome was exactly what happened in 2016, no confirmation. The historically normal outcome when you have divided government.

Mitch McConnell: (09:45)
President Obama was asking Senate Republicans an unusual favor that had last been granted nearly 130 years before then. But voters had explicitly elected our majority to check and balance the end of his presidency, so we stuck with the basic norm. Oh, and by the way, in so doing, our majority did precisely what Democrats had indicated they would do themselves. In 1992, Democrats controlled the Senate opposite President Bush 41. Then Senator Joe Biden, chaired the judiciary committee, unprompted, unprompted he publicly declared that his committed might refuse to cooperate if a vacancy arose and the Republican president tried to fill it. In 2007, Democrats controlled the Senate opposite President Bush 43. And with more than a year and a half left, a year and a half left in President Bush 43’s term, the current democratic leader declared that, “Except in extraordinary circumstances” the opposite party Senate should boycott any further confirmations to the Supreme Court. That the current democratic leader a year and a half before the end of the Bush administration. So on 2016, Senate Republicans did not only maintain the historical norm, we also ran the Biden- Schumer playbook.

Mitch McConnell: (11:34)
When voters have not chosen divided government, when the American people have elected a Senate majority to work closely with the sitting president, the historical record is even more overwhelmingly in favor of confirmation. Eight times in our nation’s history, new vacancies have arisen and presidents have made nominations all during the election year. Seven of the eight were confirmed and the sole exception, Justice Abe Fortas was a bizarre situation, including obvious personal corruption that extended into financial dealings. Apart from that one strange exception, no Senate has failed to confirm a nominee in the circumstances that face us right now. Aside from that one strange exception, no Senate has failed to confirm a nominee in the circumstances that face us right now.

Mitch McConnell: (12:39)
The historical precedent is overwhelmingly and it runs in one direction. If our democratic colleagues want to claim they are outraged, they can only be outraged at the plain facts of American history. There was clear precedent behind the predictable outcome that came out of 2016, and there is even more overwhelming precedent behind the fact that this Senate will vote on this nomination this year. The American people reelected our majority in 2016. They strengthened it further in 2018 because we pledged to work with President Trump on the most critical issues facing our country. The federal judiciary was right at the top of the list. Ironically, it was the democratic leader who went out of his way to declare the midterm 2018 elections, a referendum on the Senate’s handling of the Supreme Court. My friend, the occupant of the chair was running that year. The democratic leader went out of his way to declare the 2018 midterms a referendum on the Senate’s handling of the Supreme Court. In his final speech before Justice Kavanaugh was confirmed, he-

Mitch McConnell: (14:03) .... "

https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts...tus-nomination