Posted on 09/22/2018 9:02:23 AM PDT by rktman
Vote is scheduled for monday.
“You are a waste of bandwidth.”
Well, we will see now won’t we! There was a time when California was #1 in the nation in every respect. including being a Conservative Bastion. Funny how that’s all gone today. So TexasGator, you can go out to the barnyard and kick some cow $hit, twiddle your thumbs, and wait for the end of Texas as you think you know it!
Being a smug ba$tard won’t help you!
“You have a moronic attitude.”
I think TG’s problem is he never wipes his mirror! He’s all horn and no driveshaft!
Seems that ‘tg’ has sumfin’ lodged in his/her/their craw this morning. Again. FReerepublic is open range for the most part.
Ordinarily, Tucker Carlson is pretty reliable. According to my understanding ( and I am cheerfully willing to stand corrected if I am mistaken), Justice Gorsuch was nominated and confirmed after - not before - the 2016 presidential election after Mitch McConnell refused to confirm Obama’s pick Merrick Garland.
In this case, it is my understanding that Justice Kennedy resigned his SCOTUS seat in order to give Donald Trump enough time to nominate another Supreme Court Justice and have him confirmed by the Senate. There was some whining from the Democrats about appointing a Supreme Court justice before midterms, but Mitch McConnell promptly responded to their whining by reminding them that midterm elections were not the same as presidential elections - presumably since the Senate can only advise and consent.
Now up until today I would have agreed with you, but would have still continued to wonder why the accuser, Ms. Ford’s lawyer was insisting on Thursday to conduct the hearing.
Then I saw the Tucker Carlson video which appeared to provide the answer. Moreover, he said that the aforementioned deadline for confirming a Supreme Court Justice was according to Senate rules which he said were complex.
Now if Tucker Carlson is just plain mistaken here, I would be very grateful if you would tell me what I am missing here.
BTW, I didn’t mean to offend with caps and bold fonts.
Wow. So by Grassley refusing to end the sham “negotiation” he’s enabling them to run out the clock.
This is my understanding after listening to Tucker Carlson who is usually pretty reliable. Tucker Carlson said that the deadlines are according to Senate rules which he described as “complex.”
I have been wondering for the last few days why Ms. Ford and her lawyers are insisting on next Thursday to testify.
Tucker Carlson seemed to provide the answer.
It’s Flake, I bet. His parting shot....his tribute to JM.
He makes me sick.
Is Grassley a slithering slimey swamp eel? I say yes from the deepest pool.
When a vacancy occurs on the Supreme Court, the President may nominate a replacement, at any time he pleases. The Senate must confirm the nomination and may do it whenever they please. When the nominee is confirmed, he joins the Court, usually within days of his/her confirmation. You can find out when that has occurred over any term of the Court by looking back at history. The Constitution is silent on timing.
Both parties have taken different positions on when and how to nominate replacement Justices. Since it is a lifetime appointment, each party wants to get an advantage if they can. When the Senate refused to consider Mr Garland, they claimed a Democrat invented tactic to delay a nomination in the year of a Presidential election. The rationale was that it wasn’t fair to allow a lame duck President to exercise his appointment authority. This only occurs if one party occupies the White House and another holds the Senate. It’s politics. This cockamamie theory says that after 1 October, the Senate can’t get a Justice confirmed between now and the mid term election and after the mid term election, we are in a presidential election season, albeit two years in the future. All of this is nonsense, but the President can nominate whenever a vacancy occurs and the Senate can consider that nomination as they please. The outcome will depend on who has the power and how they exercise it.
Since the likelihood is that the Senate will remain in Republican hands, there will be many Federal Court appointments in the next two years, including another Supreme Court appointment if there is another vacancy. Of course, the makeup of the New Senate will be important, depending on the results of the November election. If the Republicans have 60 Senators in the next Congress, the Democrats will woe the day that they pulled these silly stunts.
I watched the confirmation hearings and I have to say that Grassley calmly stood firm against "out of order" demands on the part of the usual Democrat suspects to delay the hearings until they were provided with 100,000 more documents relating to Kavanaugh's background.
BTW, Cori Booker's "Spartacus" moment later took the cake during that dog and pony show......especially after it was learned that the "classified" documents he claimed to have knowingly - and illegally - leaked, were actually not "classified" after all when he released them.
One Day More
Christine Ford:
One day more,
Another day, another destiny,
This never ending road to Calvary;
These men who seem to know my crime
Will surely come a second time,
One day more...Brett Kavanaugh:
One more day before the storm!
At the barricades of Freedom!
When our ranks begin to form,
Will you take your place with me?Chuck Schumer:
One more day to revolution,
We will nip it in the bud!
We'll be ready for these schoolboys,
They will wet themselves with blood!Chuck Grassley & Mitch McConnell:
Watch'm run amuck,
Catch'm as they fall,
Never know your luck
When there's a free-for-all,
Here a little dip
There a little touch,
Most of them are goners
So they won't miss much!Us:
One day to a new beginning
Raise the flag of freedom high!
Every man will be a king
Every man will be a king
There's a new world for the winning
There's a new world to be won
Do you hear the people sing?All:
Tomorrow we'll discover
What our God in Heaven has in store!
One more dawn
One more day
One day more!
-PJ
This was the first time I had heard that “complex” Senate rules determined the shelf life of a Supreme Court nominee before midterms.
In any case, thanks.
But that still leaves me wondering why Ms. Ford & Co, are insisting on next Thursday to testify.
When I was a new C.O. at Auburn Prison in NY State, we were told that the best thing to do was pick a lifer who was respected, and didn't take any crap from any of the younger inmates, and make him the Waterman on the gallery. Each gallery in a cell block had a slop sink at the end of it. At various times, the Waterman would fill pails of water, and carry them down the gallery, and give each inmate the amount of water he needed. It was a sort of honor position, because the Waterman was allowed to stay out on the gallery at various times while the rest of the gallery was still locked in. That was usually after the count had cleared, and before they were run to the mess hall, programs, and yard. The Waterman would run magazines, headphones, and other legal and probably unlegal items among the cells for the rest of the cons, so you wanted to stay in his good graces.
We were told to pick the biggest and baddest for Waterman. They were usually guys who were doing life for murder. All they wanted was to do their time as simply as possible, and they were basically the enforcers on the gallery. The last thing the older cons wanted was for some new convict to be drawing attention to the gallery. So, when one of them acted up, they were taken aside by the Waterman, and "advised" to keep a low profile or else.
The Congress is reconstituted after every Congressional election in the January following a Congressional election, every two years. A new Congress cannot be bound by the decisions and actions of a previous Congress. In practice, they pick up where they left off, but they must agree to do so and one thing that doesn’t survive into a new Congress are any nominations that have not been acted on. Clean Slate.
Troll thread hijacker alert
There is no time before the midterms for the White House to introduce and vet a new candidate. Democrats will have prevented the president from filling this vacancy. We’ll have just eight justices for the foreseeable future. And probably until there is another Democratic president.
That makes no sense unless he's assuming a Democrat Senate.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.