Jump to content

Wouldn't it be funny if we could dig thru posts from 2016 when McConnell refused to give hearings on moral grounds to a new USSC nominee??


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 300
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Typical Republican HYPOCRISY, eh?  

One cannot show what one does not have...

I'll tell you stupid...   It's what's been going on in DC for decades.. Let's get even rather than Trying to fix things...    

2 minutes ago, Scout said:

Typical Republican HYPOCRISY, eh?  

The democrats screaming for the Biden rule after disavowing it are hilarious. If Obama was robbed not getting Garland, then obviously denying Trump would be robbery. Trump isn't even a lame duck president. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NeoConvict said:

The democrats screaming for the Biden rule after disavowing it are hilarious. If Obama was robbed not getting Garland, then obviously denying Trump would be robbery. Trump isn't even a lame duck president. 

 

There is no BIden rule. This is 100% lies and reveals NEO ignorance on yet another topic.

 

You are not participating in this conversation, NEO, because you have revealed your stupidity. 

 

Look it up.  He is lying to you.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Scout said:

Typical Republican HYPOCRISY, eh?  

 

You are telling more lies, as usual.

 

MitchMc specifically said no hearings when The U.S. President does not have a party majority in the Senate.  Obama did not have a Senate majority, in 2016, and Trump does have a Senate majority in 2020.

 

Please, stop telling lies for a change. Then you might be able to post an intelligent response which gives fair remarks to MitchMc's rule.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Scout said:

 

There is no BIden rule. This is 100% lies and reveals NEO ignorance on yet another topic.

 

You are not participating in this conversation, NEO, because you have revealed your stupidity. 

 

Look it up.  He is lying to you.  

There was a Biden rule when Bush was serving his second term. Conservatives cited this bullshit rule when withholding a hearing on Garland. So was Obama screwed or not?

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, kfools said:

Where is hypocrisy?

 

All you rightwingers will be found claiming that 

a President should NOT be allowed to nominate

a USSC justice in the last year of his term.

 

If you can't figure it out from there on your own, you need to leave. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NeoConvict said:

There was a Biden rule when Bush was serving his second term.

100% LIE. 

 

Name this person who was deprived of hearings before the Senate because of this "Biden rule".  Good luck.

And you know what it means when I say "good luck"..........

You have already fucked yourself. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Scout said:

100% LIE. 

 

Name this person who was deprived of hearings before the Senate because of this "Biden rule".  Good luck.

And you know what it means when I say "good luck"..........

You have already fucked yourself. 

Merrick Garland. Karma.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NeoConvict said:

Merrick Garland. Karma.

 

100% lie

I knew you didn't know anything about this subject either.

Another dumb rightwinger motherfucker.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, BatteryPowered said:


Remember...Schumer was demanding Garland get a Senate vote.  Will he demand the same for this nomination or show himself as a hypocrite?

How does McConnell defying the Constitution make Schumer a hypocrite?

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, NeoConvict said:

The democrats screaming for the Biden rule after disavowing it are hilarious. If Obama was robbed not getting Garland, then obviously denying Trump would be robbery. Trump isn't even a lame duck president. 

Nobody is screaming for a Biden rule.

You dumbfuck, got this from a rightwing commentator.

My god, it is so easy to see thru you people.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Scout said:

100% LIE. 

 

Name this person who was deprived of hearings before the Senate because of this "Biden rule".  Good luck.

And you know what it means when I say "good luck"..........

You have already fucked yourself. 

This vacancy arose during Obama's final year as president, and shortly after Scalia's death was announced, Republican Senate leaders declared that because Scalia's seat had become vacant during an election year, the Senate would not even consider a nomination from the president. Senate Democrats criticized the move as being unprecedented and responded saying that there was sufficient time to vote on a nominee before the election.[1] Garland's nomination expired on January 3, 2017, with the end of the 114th Congress, 293 days after it had been submitted to the Senate.[2] Obama's successor, Donald Trump (a Republican), nominated Judge Neil Gorsuch to fill the vacancy on January 31, 2017, soon after taking office.[2]

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Scout said:

How does McConnell defying the Constitution make Schumer a hypocrite?


Show me where and how he defied the Constitution?  The Senate must “advise and consent”...not holding a vote obviously shows they do not consent.

 

Anyway...you didn’t answer the question.  Will Schumer demand this nomination get a vote or show himself to be a hypocrite?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...