Skip to comments.
Schumer Prepared to Hold Supreme Court Seat Open
Roll Call ^
| Jan 3, 2017
| Bridget Bowman
Posted on 01/04/2017 6:53:30 AM PST by detective
Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer is preparing to block President-elect Donald Trumps Supreme Court nominee if he or she is not in the mainstream.
Its hard for me to imagine a nominee that Donald Trump would choose that would get Republican support that we could support, the New York Democrat told MSNBCs Rachel Maddow Tuesday night.
Asked if he would do his best to hold the seat open, Schumer responded, Absolutely.
(Excerpt) Read more at rollcall.com ...
TOPICS: Breaking News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 115th; democrats; nuclearoption; schmuckschemer; schumer; scotus; shmuckey; trump; trumpscotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 121-123 next last
To: ealgeone
Not true, Supremes need 60 votes to pass.
61
posted on
01/04/2017 7:45:41 AM PST
by
jpsb
(Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied. Otto von Bismark)
To: detective
Chucky can’t make mud out of sand. Fillibuster? Hmph. Strom Thurmond knew how to fillibuster. No breaks for lunch, no going home, just non-stop energizer-bunny fillibustering.
62
posted on
01/04/2017 7:45:46 AM PST
by
Eleutheria5
(“If you are not prepared to use force to defend civilization, then be prepared to accept barbarism.)
To: detective
Something tells me that Schumer is going to end up as a greasy spot under Trump’s shoe.
63
posted on
01/04/2017 7:46:47 AM PST
by
Psalm 144
(Deplorable and loving it.)
To: LS
Please explain. The Senate makes its own rules. The Dems went nuclear on all but SCOTUS appointments. Passed their rules with a 50+1 vote. So what is the reason the Pubs can’t go nuclear across the board? There is no mention of the filibuster in the Constitution. It is just a Senate rule.
64
posted on
01/04/2017 7:49:46 AM PST
by
Tunehead54
(Nothing funny here ;-)
To: detective
65
posted on
01/04/2017 7:51:20 AM PST
by
null and void
(If you defy federal law, we deny federal funds.)
To: lacrew
For the past several months, the SCOTUSblog website ran a daily calendar of the number of days that the Senate had not acted on the Merrick Garland nomination. It will be interesting to see if they run a count on the number of days that the Senate democrat minority filibusters a Trump nomination.
I for one will be making comments to that effect on their site if they do not do so. Sauce for the gander.
66
posted on
01/04/2017 7:51:26 AM PST
by
henkster
To: detective
Schmucky apparently is unaware the filibuster rule has gone bye bye.
67
posted on
01/04/2017 7:51:44 AM PST
by
Georgia Girl 2
(The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped)
To: SoFloFreeper
I’m thinkin’ Chuckie doesn’t quite know yet, who he is up against here.
68
posted on
01/04/2017 7:51:48 AM PST
by
super7man
(Madam Defarge, knitting, knitting, always knitting)
To: detective
The Republicans control the House and Senate. All that needs to happen is the Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader in the Senate declare that Congress is in recess on 21Jan. Say they do that at 12:00 noon, and say they will be in recess until 4:00PM.
President Trump then could appoint anyone he wishes to any position he wishes. Then call all of the EMS units in DC to show up at the Capitol Building to haul off all the Democrats that have stroked out, had heart attacks or just plain go nuts in general.
69
posted on
01/04/2017 7:52:04 AM PST
by
Flint
To: SoFloFreeper
We need to give president Trump a super majority so he can laugh at the rats.
70
posted on
01/04/2017 7:52:49 AM PST
by
peeps36
(Obama = the skidmark on America's underwear.)
To: detective
Schumer...YOU are out of the mainstream.
The results of the election on Nov 8 has demonstrated this as fact.
71
posted on
01/04/2017 7:54:17 AM PST
by
Ouderkirk
(To the left, everything must evidence that this or that strand of leftist theory is true)
To: databoss
The Senate sets its on rules for the session. They can make a no filibuster rule. Just as sure that I am that if the Democrats were in the majority, but did not have the numbers to break a filibuster, they would enact a no filibuster rule. I have the same confidence that the Republicans will enact a filibuster rule. But the Democrats have John McCain, his girlfriend Lindsey [Linda] Graham, Jeff Flake, etal masquerading as Republicans. Breaking their cover as needed from time to time.
72
posted on
01/04/2017 7:55:02 AM PST
by
sport
To: detective
Pissin into the wind..got your umbrella Schmuckie?...
73
posted on
01/04/2017 7:57:38 AM PST
by
VRWC For Truth
(Banned for being a jerk, FU VK's)
To: detective
For goodness sake, the 60 vote cloture is there to squash a filibuster. Simply make Schumer filibuster. He cannot hold the floor forever. When he runs out of gas, carry on with business.
74
posted on
01/04/2017 8:01:19 AM PST
by
Sgt_Schultze
(If a border fence isn't effective, why is there a border fence around the White House?)
To: detective
Do it, Chuckie - then you and your fellow Demonrats will lose BIGLY in 2018. You’ll be down to under 40 seats.
Keep up the good work!
75
posted on
01/04/2017 8:01:33 AM PST
by
Ancesthntr
("The right to buy weapons the right to be free." A. E. van Vogt)
To: Gaffer
Exactly right. They changed the rules and it backfired against them, just like Republicans warned them it would.
To: Political Junkie Too
Trump will be knifed in the back by McCain and Graham. Just like they did to Bush and Bill Frist, with the Gang of Fourteen. If a Gang of Fourteen movement develops, and I am certain it will if the nuclear option will put Trump's nominee on the bench, then Trump should treat them as Lincoln treated the Copperheads. No mercy.
77
posted on
01/04/2017 8:04:15 AM PST
by
Nuc 1.1
(Nuc 1 Liberals aren't Patriots. Remember 1789!)
To: Gaffer
I think the supreme court still has filibuster, but I could be wrong... I know the cabinet appointees do not
To: Pearls Before Swine
If democrats plan to block Supreme Court nominations for 4 years...then nuke ‘em!
79
posted on
01/04/2017 8:05:54 AM PST
by
Mr Rogers
(We're a nation of infants, ruled by their emotion)
To: Buckeye McFrog
Impeach Ginzberg for violation of code of judicial ethics for her partisan comments on Trump.
Canon 5: A Judge Should Refrain from Political Activity
(A) General Prohibitions. A judge should not:
...
(2) make speeches for a political organization or candidate, or publicly endorse or oppose a candidate for public office
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ginsburg-expresses-regret-over-remarks-criticizing-trump/2016/07/14/f53687bc-49cc-11e6-bdb9-701687974517_story.html?utm_term=.aa018c84d26b
http://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges#f
80
posted on
01/04/2017 8:09:10 AM PST
by
RKV
(He who has the guns makes the rules)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 121-123 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson