Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

The Slimes even lead the article with a photo of their "savoir" - complete with a halo:


Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader, said his party would insist on having a mainstream Supreme Court candidate

BUT THERE'S ONE PROBLEM:

The claim that Democrats "excluded" the nuclear option for SCOTUS nominations is a complete lie because:

1) The Democrats "never had a chance to use" the nuclear option for SCOTUS nominations since that option is only in the hands of the party that controls the Senate for use when the minority has and uses 40 or more of their votes to block a nomination.

During Obama's term, the Democrats only had control of the Senate from 2009-2015 ( "Senate Elections 2014: Republicans Seize Control of the Senate" ). During that time Obama made only 2 nominations to the SCOTUS and GOP votes gave both filibuster proof majority approval. [ Sotomayor by 68-31 in 2009 and Kagan by 63-37 in 2010]

Only after the Dems lost control of the Senate did Obama make his only unsuccessful 3rd nomination (Garland in 2016).

"Barack Obama Supreme Court candidates"

2) While the Democrats did not have occasion to use the nuclear option for SCOTUS nominations before they lost the Senate, they fully intended to use if and when the retook control.

"Reid: If Hillary wins and Dems retake the Senate, expect Dems to use the Nuclear Option for SCOTUS"

"Harry Reid's Parting Shot: Dems Will Nuke The Filibuster For SCOTUS"

"Kaine: Dems will use 'nuclear option' if GOP blocks court nominee"

The 2nd link includes Schumer being questioned about his position on Reid's admission of this intention for the Senate after Reid leaves and Schumer takes over. Schumer refused to answer.

3) Since Reid made this proclamation after he endorsed Schumer to be his successor [ "Harry Reid endorses Chuck Schumer to lead Senate Democrats" ] can anyone really believe Reid would not have anointed Schumer without his agreement on this critical issue? And If Schumer disagreed, Reid would have already known and Schumer would have been free to disclaim, or at least distance himself from, this intention - if in fact he did disagree.

McConnel and the GOP could not have wished for a better invitation and justification for a GOP nuclear option for SCOTUS appointments?

If they don't they'll be taking a dive and should driven out of the party for life.

1 posted on 01/25/2017 6:52:29 AM PST by drpix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: drpix

To hell with Garland. He’s anti-Bill of Rights.


2 posted on 01/25/2017 6:55:33 AM PST by FlingWingFlyer (As long as tyranny exists, the Constitution and Bill of Right will never be "outdated" or "obsolete")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson