Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by yaxomoxay, Jan 30, 2017.
Hardiman is said to be the front-runner
"Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) stressed after the meeting they want the president to pick a "mainstream" nominee to fill the high court's open ninth seat."
How does it fell to want Chucky?
Protests to follow.... News at 11....
Seems a bit optimistic to think the protests will wait until after. I'm sure you can find a protest right now somewhere about it.
Right, their version of "mainstream", both from political outlier states completely controlled by Democrats... Which means a Ruth Bader Ginsburg or Sonia Sotomayor. Everyone else is "Extreme Right".
And this is how screwed up the Dems on the Judiciary Committee are. Feinstein is not a lawyer, and she will be the first to tell you that. But somehow, she's the Ranking Member on the Judiciary Committee?
Judges should be as neutral as possible electing a conservative or liberal judge is just trying to buy your ideals.
Where were you when Sotomayor and Kagan were appointed.
The point being, what? His opinion is his opinion and unless he posted at the time any differently, it's irrelevant. In other words - your post is just deflection.
Let me ask you - do you think Judges should not be neutral?
The current president desperately needs to change the narrative - he's getting rightfully slaughtered on his butcher job on immigration.
Hope the Dems find the backbone to refuse cloture regardless of who it is.
They should balance the court, which means offset those two political hacks.
That wasn't the question.
Trump-lickers here never answer the question asked, they answer the alternative-question based on alternative-facts.
Well a lot of posters here like to pivot/deflect.
If they do, hopefully the Republicans will invoke the nuclear option that the Democrats put into place when they had the majority.
His tweet says "I have made my decision on who I will nominate for The United States Supreme Court. It will be announced live on Tuesday at 8:00 P.M. (W.H.)"
If he has made the decision, why not just make the nomination? Why must Trump treat everything like a reality show?
"I have made my decision, and it ... will be announced tomorrow, stay tuned!" "Welcome back to reality-president, my decision is very important, bigly, and the nomination goes to ... after the break! Stay tuned!" "Welcome back to reality-president, sponsored by Trump University - the bigliest education, more than 1 or 1.5 million satisfied students and counting."
No, they should balance the court, which means offset those two political hacks.
The question wasn't about 1 judge. The question was about all/any judge on the SC.
So you're now the 2nd person to not answer the question.
Alternative facts are like watching the hurricane reports and predictive models, one from Europe and one from the US. Both use facts and may in some cases yield different results. Usually one is more right than the other but it is possible both could be wrong too.
--- Post Merged, Jan 30, 2017 ---
I stand by my no.
--- Post Merged, Jan 30, 2017 ---
You're confusing facts with speculation or prediction.
Nah, it's normal. Trump is just more direct.
Never used on a Supreme Court nominee, because even McConnell, Graham, and McCain know better.
Merrick Garland was pretty mainstream.
Tim Kaine and Schumer sure did like the thought of using it last October when they thought they would win.
Thank you Harry Reid
where was I no clue and what would it matter I did not vote for them.