Can someone expain what McConnell actually did re Garland?
| spruce well-lubricated alpha parlour | 09/20/18 | | khaki alcoholic school cafeteria indirect expression | 09/20/18 | | pearly exciting library | 09/20/18 | | spruce well-lubricated alpha parlour | 09/20/18 | | appetizing clown | 09/20/18 | | racy macaca space | 09/20/18 | | pearly exciting library | 09/20/18 | | Stimulating Translucent National Telephone | 09/20/18 | | spruce well-lubricated alpha parlour | 09/20/18 | | Cracking Crusty Market | 09/20/18 | | spruce well-lubricated alpha parlour | 09/20/18 | | racy macaca space | 09/20/18 | | Cracking Crusty Market | 09/20/18 | | spruce well-lubricated alpha parlour | 09/20/18 | | appetizing clown | 09/20/18 | | pearly exciting library | 09/20/18 | | Cracking Crusty Market | 09/20/18 | | spruce well-lubricated alpha parlour | 09/20/18 | | carmine spot | 09/20/18 | | massive hominid home | 09/20/18 | | Pungent parlor rigpig | 09/20/18 | | pearly exciting library | 09/20/18 | | Pungent parlor rigpig | 09/20/18 | | pearly exciting library | 09/20/18 | | Pungent parlor rigpig | 09/20/18 | | brass stag film hairy legs | 09/20/18 | | Pungent parlor rigpig | 09/20/18 | | Cracking Crusty Market | 09/20/18 | | Pungent parlor rigpig | 09/20/18 | | brass stag film hairy legs | 09/20/18 | | Cracking Crusty Market | 09/20/18 | | Pungent parlor rigpig | 09/20/18 | | underhanded excitant temple liquid oxygen | 09/20/18 | | Pungent parlor rigpig | 09/20/18 | | underhanded excitant temple liquid oxygen | 09/20/18 | | Pungent parlor rigpig | 09/20/18 | | underhanded excitant temple liquid oxygen | 09/20/18 | | massive hominid home | 09/20/18 | | Cracking Crusty Market | 09/20/18 | | appetizing clown | 09/20/18 | | Stimulating Translucent National Telephone | 09/20/18 | | pearly exciting library | 09/20/18 | | Sick buck-toothed business firm | 09/20/18 | | underhanded excitant temple liquid oxygen | 09/20/18 | | carmine spot | 09/20/18 | | massive hominid home | 09/20/18 | | bearded pocket flask theater stage | 09/20/18 | | brass stag film hairy legs | 09/20/18 | | Rough-skinned scarlet karate | 09/20/18 | | underhanded excitant temple liquid oxygen | 09/20/18 | | Rough-skinned scarlet karate | 09/20/18 | | underhanded excitant temple liquid oxygen | 09/20/18 | | Rough-skinned scarlet karate | 09/20/18 | | underhanded excitant temple liquid oxygen | 09/20/18 | | Hairraiser jet-lagged site | 09/20/18 | | Rough-skinned scarlet karate | 09/20/18 | | Hairraiser jet-lagged site | 09/20/18 | | up-to-no-good set | 09/20/18 | | Flatulent marketing idea | 09/20/18 | | Electric Mustard Headpube | 09/20/18 |
Poast new message in this thread
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 1:12 PM Author: Pungent parlor rigpig
Yeah. Their position was basically that Obama was on his way out and we are knee deep in a Presidential election. Let the new President have the nomination.
They would have confirmed Hillary's appointment.
Let's all be honest and say that, supposing RBG died in 2016 with a Republican President but a Dem Senate, the Dem Senate would have done the exact same thing, and the Dem electorate would have clamored for them to do the very same thing.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36849022) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 1:15 PM Author: Sick buck-toothed business firm
"It's going to be a clusterfuck next time Dems get senate. Basically no one is ever going to be able to get a candidate through for the foreseeable future unless the have both POTUS and senate"
Is there any indication whatsoever that the Obama administration reached out to the GOP senate leadership to try and work out a compromise candidate? I have never been able to locate a definitive answer to this question. It is my humble opinion that the answer to this question largely determines whether the GOP acted in "bad faith."
If the Obama administration never reached out to the GOP senate leadership, fuck the dems. They have no basis for complaining. If the Obama administration did reach out to the GOP senate leadership in a genuine effort to select a true compromise candidate, and the GOP did not respond in kind, that reflects poorly on the GOP.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36849030) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 2:57 PM Author: underhanded excitant temple liquid oxygen
Garland would have been confirmed. Mcconnel didnt want dems to get another appointment.
Republicans openly said they would block all of Clinton's appointments if she were elected.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36849611)
|
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 4:23 PM Author: carmine spot
11 GOP seantors signed a letter saying they would refuse to consider any Obama nominee on February 23. Scalia died on February 13. 10 fucking days and no nominee named.
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2719115/Senate-SCOTUS-Letter.pdf
Pure, unfettered bad faith.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36850163) |
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:53 PM Author: bearded pocket flask theater stage
It's a giant Lib lie that Republicans "stole" the Garland nomination. GOP controlled the Senate. That means some GOP would have had to vote for Garland to confirm him. If the GOP collectively had no intention of confirming the nomination, then debating Garland at all was a giant waste of time.
Garland didn't get confirmed because libs didn't have the votes. Plain and simple.
What libs are doing to Kavanaugh is entirely different. They are accusing him of a 35+ year old crime, which is laughably vague and unverifiable.
Equating the two situations is dishonest. The only corrolarly between the two is in both cases, libs didn't get their way so they cry like fucking children and make shit up.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848886) |
|
|