Posted on 01/22/2017 7:40:41 AM PST by ColdOne
I am convinced the plan was:
HRC gets in, Obummer replaces Scalia. The SC is tipped way left for a decade at least. This is why O and the rats didn’t push harder to get his guy in there. Trump shocked them by winning so Chuckie is throwing a fit. I don’t see him going full out for Scalia’s replacement though because it will be a conservative for a conservative. If one of the Rat hacks leave look out, total war and the R’s will have to go nuclear.
That is true BUT WE can VOTE to INCLUDE IT!!! We are NOW IN CONTROL!!!
Alternatively, tell Chuck he can bite your shiny metal daffodil and nuke the filibuster like Hiroshima.
SCALIA WAS MAINSTREAM.
Nuclear option. With Trump looking for at least 2 picks or more, the nuclear option is viable.
The advice and consent of the Senate means 51 votes, not 60.
The filibuster was fine and a useful tool to share democratic principles, but the left has continuously shown they’re willing to break prior political agreements (Reid’s nuclear option) for transient gains.
We should not hold back. The filibuster is dead and if there’s any doubt in your mind that they wouldn’t have broken it for a Supreme court pick then I have a bridge to sell you.
Pass Scotus nominations using the Reid method. Pass a few. Then go back and ask the Democrats in Congress if they wish to renegotiate and restore the Filibuster in a manner that can’t be changed so callously.
One would think the Dims couldn’t pick out anyone more odious than Dingy Harry Reid. Then they pick Up-Chuck Schumer.
Another strident, nasty, mean-spirited clown to be the public face of the far-leftist party the Dims have become.
Let’s hope Trump doesn’t back down Send a full-bore, full-spectrum, conservative constitutionalist as the first nominee If Schumer balks, keep sending them, each one more hard-core than the previous one.
Also the reason why Ginsburg stuck around. If she thought there was the slightest chance that Hillary would lose she would have retired and been replaced last year.
Chuck does not think that eight Democrat and all the Republican Senators can be brought to 60 votes to break a filibuster by himself or at his direction.
He is assuming he can drag it out for months and call any nominee “extreme” and the press and academics will parrot his prejudice.
A song on right now...
“Nothing can stop our God.”
They didn’t stop Him from bringing in Trump and they can’t stop the recovery of our Free Constitutional Republic.
Trump will tweet that Schumer is obstructing the will of the people who elected him, and he will call on his base to pressure Democrats.
Schumer will resist and call these people "extremists."
Trump will say that Schumer's "extremists" are the same as Clinton's "deplorables," and will urge his base to redouble their efforts to pressure Democrats into supporting Trump's nominees, because that's what they voted for.
Schumer will dig in and further alienate Democrats from the American people.
-PJ
Actually, he said in late October that the ‘rats should do it after the election.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/harry-reid-if-gop-blocks-scotus-in-2017-dems-should-go-nuclear-again
“Also the reason why Ginsburg stuck around”
No doubt about it. Their clueless arrogance really bit them in the rear. Delicious.They are petty and bitter so maybe Chuck will go all out.
One pickle in your sandwich is this: RECESS APPOINTMENT.
Wait a minute. Seems to me he can do this - what am I missing?
Presently STILL takes 60 votes for a SC nominee, does it not?
AND, to change that rule and go for a simple majority (nuclear option) - wouldn’t that also take 60 votes?
Or could the nuclear option be done with only 51 votes?
Someone help please........
Bipartisan + Mainstream = Good Old boy Member
Chain Chuckie and McCain together and drop them from the steepest wall of the Grand Canyon.
Or I would settle for the Royal Gorge, I’m in a generous mood.
(a) all Senators eligible to and desiring to speak have done so, or
(b) there is a super majority (60 votes) to cut off debate.
When either of these occurs, the Senate is able to move to a vote where only a simple majority is required for approval.
I believe there is a rule that restricts any one senator from speaking on the floor more than once in any “legislative” day. While a “calendar” day is only 24 hours, a “legislative” day is whatever length the majority wants it to be. Extending the legislative day beyond the calendar day is how the traditional one senator filibuster is broken. When a determined minority is intent on stopping a nomination it would be more complicated to break the joint filibuster, but not impossible.
Considering the average age and infirmity of the Democratic senators, they could probably engage in non-stop speaking on the floor for an average of less than 5 hours each. If up to 45 of them could be counted on to participate, this would be a maximum of 225 hours or a little over 9 calendar days. If the Republican leadership would demonstrate they were willing to play hard ball, they could break this nonsense of allowing the minority to control the process. The democrats would likely cave within a couple of days when they realized they were going to lose. If nothing else, it would be good theater.
Sorry Chucky - give the Repubs even the slightest reason to carry out the nuclear option which Y’All did when you ran things.....
Don’t forget Linda, in fact start with Linda.
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.