Dems falsely project their BS court-packing scam onto GOP to justify it ahead of time

[artichoke]

Point being what dumb f**k?

Yikes. If you're too stupid to comprehend this, you don't belong on adult debate sites.



I'll try it one more time before awkwardly shuffling to the door and hoping you eventually find your missing chromosome.

1) The McConnell rule is that you don't approve SCOTUS appointees during an election year if the previous election turned the Senate over to the opposition party.

2) Election 2014 turned the Senate over to the opposition party, Election 2018 did not.

3) Therefore, it makes sense to not have approved in Obama's case, and to approve in Trump's case.

4) Nothing about this is contradictory. Democrats are just stupid.

Comprehend it yet?

This is why we have dictionaries. So low IQ types like you can look up the meaning of words. "Recent" is not over a year since past. Doesn't matter when the election was. It was still a year gone by that your Repugnant ones had control of BOTH HOUSES of Congress.

The irony of the guy who can't comprehend that "recently" means the most recent election...smearing anyone else as "low IQ."

And I still have seen nothing showing that the Repugnant ones used your bull shit lie as an excuse to violate the Constitution.

Wouldn't it make sense to identify a violation of the Constitution first before trying to figure out what reasoning they used to supposedly violate it?

In any event, what I have learned in coming to these forums is the complete lack of integrity, values, or common sense, liars have. And you continue to prove that it is about a zero.

Yeah, it's OTHER PEOPLE who are the subpar performers.

[Into the Night]

First there are liars, and then there are damned liars. You are both. Your repugnant ones had control of the Senate for 2 years before Scalia died.

You don't get to overrule the Senate. You are not the king.

[TexanManWithPlans]

Bullshit

Show us other than in a Trump campaign ad where Democrats said they were going to pack the Court, not talked about packing the Court, but actually running on packing the Court

And the majority of Americans think the election should decide who picks the next Supreme Court Justice, now does that mean Trump is abusing his power

Nothing to see here, typical radio rhetoric

It's no use talking to these bozos. Just wait it out until Biden win.

[Into the Night]

Point being what dumb f**k?

Insult fallacy.

This is why we have dictionaries. So low IQ types like you can look up the meaning of words.

Dictionaries do not define words. No dictionary owns any word. False authority fallacy. Semantics fallacy.

"Recent" is not over a year since past.

Semantics fallacy. The word 'recent' has no period specified. You don't get to arbitrarily assign one as 'official'.

Doesn't matter when the election was.

Yes it does.

It was still a year gone by that your Repugnant ones had control of BOTH HOUSES of Congress.

So?

And I still have seen nothing showing that the Repugnant ones used your bull shit lie as an excuse to violate the Constitution.

You are describing yourself. You deny the Constitution. Trump has broken no law.

In any event, what I have learned in coming to these forums is the complete lack of integrity, values, or common sense, liars have. And you continue to prove that it is about a zero.
...deleted Holy Link...

Insult fallacies.

No argument presented.

[katzgar]

Many Democrats are literally just too constitutionally illiterate to comprehend that their abuse of the courts to work around the American people is completely unconstitutional...the rest are just being dishonest scumbags.

your low IQ and opioid addiction has made you delusional

[Old Trapper]

[SIZE=3]

Yikes. If you're too stupid to comprehend this, you don't belong on adult debate sites.

Stupidity, hypocrisy, ignorance, lack of integrity, all are traits of the right wing ideologue.

I'll try it one more time before awkwardly shuffling to the door and hoping you eventually find your missing chromosome.

"Shuffling" sounds about right for you one brain cell types.

1) The McConnell rule is that you don't approve SCOTUS appointees during an election year if the previous election turned the Senate over to the opposition party.

Wasn't the "rule" in 2016. The "rule" in 2016 had to do ONLY with the current year, and if it was an election year.

2) Election 2014 turned the Senate over to the opposition party, Election 2018 did not.

And that matters to degenerates who care nothing for the Constitution.

3) Therefore, it makes sense to not have approved in Obama's case, and to approve in Trump's case.

Only to those who, as I have said, care nothing for the Constitution, tradition, and only have concerns for keeping a lying, cowardly, adulterous, thief, in office. In other words, those with no core values, or principles.

4) Nothing about this is contradictory. Democrats are just stupid.

It is contradictory to the Constitution, and to the words of liars like you, McConnell, Graham, and virtually anyone that would agree with it.

Comprehend it yet?

I agree that you are a lying fool with no principles.

The irony of the guy who can't comprehend that "recently" means the most recent election...smearing anyone else as "low IQ."

Where did even a fool like you come up with that trash definition at?

Wouldn't it make sense to identify a violation of the Constitution first before trying to figure out what reasoning they used to supposedly violate it?

As if you gave a shit about the Constitution. If your gawd says the Constitution is wrong you get on your knees, kiss his ass, and swear he is right. He was right in 2016 when he said he could shoot someone on 5th. Ave., and some would still follow him. The Constitution says that the President has the power to appoint replacement Justices, not the Senate. It does not place time limits on such, nor does it say only in certain times.

Yeah, it's OTHER PEOPLE who are the subpar performers.

As liars like you consistently prove.

[Old Trapper]

Insult fallacy.

Dictionaries do not define words. No dictionary owns any word. False authority fallacy. Semantics fallacy.

Semantics fallacy. The word 'recent' has no period specified. You don't get to arbitrarily assign one as 'official'.

Yes it does.

So?

You are describing yourself. You deny the Constitution. Trump has broken no law.

Insult fallacies.

No argument presented.

LOL, your attempts at appearing intelligent are the prominent fallacy in your responses.

[Micawber]

Back your mobility scooter out of my driveway and go to the park and feed the pidgins.

[NiftyNiblick]

Adding Trump's three perverts to the Uncle Tom Clarence Thomas and the moron Southside Sammy Alito will result in a SCOTUS that will completely destroy American democracy.

Packing the court with appropriate jurists will be nothing less than a last ditch effort to prevent the complete demise of the republic.
It is a more humane alternative to assassination of the miscreant justices.

Instead of bemoaning it, responsible Americans will flat out demand it. The SCOTUS must be rehabilitated as it comprises a third of the national government.

[Nordberg]

Who said a Supreme should not be seated within a year of an election? Why it was Repugs. Who stole Garland's seat? Why it was the reds using that justification. This entire episode is an exposure of Reds dishonesty and lack of values. Say one thing and do another. Lindsey killed any grudging respect he had left. He may pay with his seat in the Senate.
Trump claims he did not specifically interview Barrett. He did not have to, The Federalist Society has been grooming her for this spot since she was in law school. They know he positions on everything and it is all locked in. She was handed to Trump who does not like judges. He has had lots of bad experiences with them.

[Micawber]

They know her positions on everything and it is all locked in. .

Truth

[Into the Night]

Stupidity, hypocrisy, ignorance, lack of integrity, all are traits of the right wing ideologue.
"Shuffling" sounds about right for you one brain cell types.

Insult fallacies.

Wasn't the "rule" in 2016. The "rule" in 2016 had to do ONLY with the current year, and if it was an election year.

Paradox. Which is it, dude??

And that matters to degenerates who care nothing for the Constitution.

You deny the Constitution. Strawman fallacy.

Only to those who, as I have said, care nothing for the Constitution,

Such as you.

tradition,

Tradition is not a law.

and only have concerns for keeping a lying, cowardly, adulterous, thief, in office.

Trump has broken no law. Insult fallacies. TDS.

In other words, those with no core values, or principles.

Inversion fallacy. You are describing Democrats.

It is contradictory to the Constitution, and to the words of liars like you, McConnell, Graham, and virtually anyone that would agree with it.

You are still locked in paradox. Arguing both sides of a paradox is irrational. You must clear you paradox. Nothing in the Constitution restricts when a judge may be appointed or confirmed. You are denying the Constitution again.

I agree that you are a lying fool with no principles.

Inversion fallacy.

Where did even a fool like you come up with that trash definition at?

Eytomology.

As if you gave a shit about the Constitution.

He does. You don't. Inversion fallacy.

If your gawd says the Constitution is wrong you get on your knees, kiss his ass, and swear he is right.

I assume you mean Trump. Trump is not a god or gawd. He cannot change the Constitution. He has not tried to. Trump has broken no law.

He was right in 2016 when he said he could shoot someone on 5th. Ave., and some would still follow him.

Trump never said any such thing, liar.

The Constitution says that the President has the power to appoint replacement Justices, not the Senate.
It does not place time limits on such, nor does it say only in certain times.

While correct, you are still locked in paradox. You are being irrational. Which is it, dude?

As liars like you consistently prove.

You are lying even to yourself. You must clear your paradox.

[Into the Night]

LOL, your attempts at appearing intelligent are the prominent fallacy in your responses.

Insult fallacies. Denial of logic.

[Into the Night]

Adding Trump's three perverts to the Uncle Tom Clarence Thomas and the moron Southside Sammy Alito will result in a SCOTUS that will completely destroy American democracy.

The United States is not a democracy and never was. It is a federated republic. It has layers of constitutions. Democracies have no constitution or representatives.

Packing the court with appropriate jurists will be nothing less than a last ditch effort to prevent the complete demise of the republic.

I see you favor packing the court. Changing the number of justices on the supreme court will require a bill passed by both houses and signed by the president.

It is a more humane alternative to assassination of the miscreant justices.

So you favor assassinations as well. You are truly sick. I hope someone puts a bullet in your brain if you ever try such a stunt.

Instead of bemoaning it, responsible Americans will flat out demand it.

You don't get to speak for Americans. You only get to speak for you. Bigotry.

The SCOTUS must be rehabilitated as it comprises a third of the national government.

Non-sequitur fallacy.

You are not making sense, you are being a bigot, you are promoting assassinations and murder, and you are denying the Constitution of the United States.

[Into the Night]

Who said a Supreme should not be seated within a year of an election? Why it was Repugs. Who stole Garland's seat? Why it was the reds using that justification. This entire episode is an exposure of Reds dishonesty and lack of values. Say one thing and do another. Lindsey killed any grudging respect he had left. He may pay with his seat in the Senate.
Trump claims he did not specifically interview Barrett. He did not have to, The Federalist Society has been grooming her for this spot since she was in law school. They know he positions on everything and it is all locked in. She was handed to Trump who does not like judges. He has had lots of bad experiences with them.

You don't get to overrule the President, the Senate, or the Constitution of the United States. You are not the king. Sour grapes.