The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Can someone expain what McConnell actually did re Garland?
Poast new message in this thread
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:33 PM Author: Red Pistol Half-breed I understand it was kind of dirty pool but isn't the answer that if the Dems took the Senate he wouldn't have been able to do it? Genuine Q, I don't know how it works. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848711) |
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:35 PM Author: Self-absorbed market ladyboy what did he do w the nom? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, thank god. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848727) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:35 PM Author: obsidian irradiated really tough guy He just refused to put the candidate through for a vote (or even consideration). And yes that's because GOP had the senate. 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 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848728) |
 |
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:40 PM Author: Red Pistol Half-breed then this doesn't really seem like the same thing as the Ford thing. in the first case you're playing with political power you won because you have the senate. in the second you're just smearing someone with allegations at the last minute. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848769) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:43 PM Author: free-loading zombie-like faggot firefighter right (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848793) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:45 PM Author: stubborn native Wrong. According to libs, the Garland thing is just as bad, if not worse, than this Kavanaugh thing (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848808) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:45 PM Author: obsidian irradiated really tough guy Depends how you frame it I guess. Dems are using whatever leverage they have. One could make the argument that GOP acted in bad faith to not even consider it since constitutionally they're supposed to advise and consent. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848810) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:47 PM Author: Magical Dull Cruise Ship True. If you frame it in the most generic terms possible, they're practically the same exact thing. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848833) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:48 PM Author: Red Pistol Half-breed yes but "leverage" that you have because you won senate seats isn't the same as "leverage" from making shit up. you can't just point a gun at someone and say "i'm using the leverage I have, it's all the same." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848843) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:51 PM Author: Big canary stag film ratface You're presuming it's made up. What Dems have clearly done wrong *without* the need to determine truth/falsity of the allegations is sit on the allegation until after the hearings were over in an attempt to delay consideration/vote. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848865) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:55 PM Author: Red Pistol Half-breed I suppose so. I'm presuming it's made up because if you're DiFi and you don't think it's made up then I don't see the virtue of using the delay tactic at all. By brining it up earlier then investigators are only going to have more time to substantiate it and it will only get worse. But I see your point. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848909) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:57 PM Author: stubborn native (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848921) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:58 PM Author: Big canary stag film ratface Eh, Feinstein doesn't know if it's true or not. How could she? She probably knows that even if it's true it can't be proven to any degree of certainty. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848927) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:59 PM Author: Red Pistol Half-breed Maybe made up is too strong. Totally unverifiable. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848943) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:52 PM Author: free-loading zombie-like faggot firefighter (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848874) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:53 PM Author: obsidian irradiated really tough guy It's within a minority party's prerogative to advance bad facts/allegations about a nominee up for consideration (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848889) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:57 PM Author: Big canary stag film ratface I agree. But it's dirty/disingenuous to complain the whole time that the Republicans aren't letting you really vet the candidate, sit on allegations during this whole process, then raise the allegations after the hearing process and demand further investigation in an attempt to delay the proceedings, when you could have been investigating and asking questions earlier. It's even dirtier if you pretend to actually give a shit about sexual assault allegations, because it's obvious you are just using this as a procedural/political tool. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848916) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:58 PM Author: Red Pistol Half-breed Really? So it's fair to allege the Barack Obama is a Muslim not born in the US? That's the same as using your Senate majority to control the Senate? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848933) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 2:26 PM Author: Deranged business firm Fun game here. If Dems control the Senate with a GOP President, no judges get confirmed at all on any level.
Just leverage, right? |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 3:48 PM Author: Charismatic crackhouse This is likely to happen. I think we will still survive. Magistrates are solid. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36849959) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:49 PM Author: Brass comical milk stage at what point is it bad faith?
if Scalia had died on September 15, bad faith to say let's wait for the new President? what about during a lame duck period? |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:50 PM Author: obsidian irradiated really tough guy Not sure. It's a slippery slope :) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848855) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:53 PM Author: Brass comical milk stage I'm actually really asking and not being a douche.
At some point everyone would agree that, with a 2-term outgoing president, there is a date where a supreme court death/resignation should be filled by the new guy. |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:56 PM Author: obsidian irradiated really tough guy True but I think Scalia was clearly outside that point for most reasonable people. How long was it again? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848911) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 1:00 PM Author: Brass comical milk stage February 16, after caucuses and primaries had started.
Garland was nominated march 16, after Super Tuesday I and II. |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:57 PM Author: histrionic claret trailer park Incorrect. It requires the advice and consent of the Senate. This was a way of not giving consent. That's not bad faith. It's what the Constitution provides. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848920) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 1:01 PM Author: Brass comical milk stage I think it's also pretty clear that, had Hillary won, her nominee would have been confirmed, so long as she wasn't a total dingbat. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848957) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 1:03 PM Author: Big canary stag film ratface Yeah, this is why I'm less upset by the Garland thing. It was a gamble, using their power as the elected Senate majority, that unexpectedly paid off for Republicans. It easily could have resulted in a younger, more liberal justice. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848969) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 1:12 PM Author: Brass comical milk stage 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. |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 1:15 PM Author: histrionic claret trailer park But the point is that a nomination requires consent of the Senate. There is no requirement to fill an empty position. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36849029) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 1:17 PM Author: Big canary stag film ratface Sure, but people can understandably think Senators are doing a bad job if they refuse to fill a vacant position with a well-respected nominee.
Just like there's not requirement that the Supreme Court have only 9 justices, but people can still get validly pissed at court-packing proposals. |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 1:19 PM Author: Brass comical milk stage I agree with this (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36849047) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 2:49 PM Author: motley site Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz) said Monday that if Hillary Clinton is elected, Republicans will unite to block anyone she nominates to the Supreme Court.
|
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 4:06 PM Author: Brass comical milk stage I disagree with that position.
Btw, why wasn't this mentioned during the McCain funeral coverage? |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 4:08 PM Author: motley site Okay - but Republicans were very clear on their intent. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36850065) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 4:17 PM Author: Brass comical milk stage I don't think they would have done it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36850124) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 4:24 PM Author: motley site Well, on the one hand we have Republicans saying they would do it, and on the other hand we have you saying they wouldn't...... (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36850173) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 2:04 PM Author: Charismatic crackhouse How did they not advise? They talked about it for months. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36849293) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:48 PM Author: Big canary stag film ratface It's not the same thing. There are valid reasons to criticize both tactics, but they are bad for different reasons. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848844) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:52 PM Author: free-loading zombie-like faggot firefighter (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848875) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:44 PM Author: Magical Dull Cruise Ship Wasn't it because Obama was a lame duck president and democrats did the same thing last time Reps had a lame duck in office? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848807) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:47 PM Author: obsidian irradiated really tough guy Not saying it didn't happen but when did Dems sit on a scotus nomination? They nuked some but don't remember any flat out "we won't consider any nominees" position (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848830) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 1:15 PM Author: shaky sneaky criminal "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. |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 2:57 PM Author: motley site 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.
|
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 4:23 PM Author: Deranged business firm 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. |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 2:02 PM Author: Charismatic crackhouse Presidents could appoint moderates. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36849289) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 12:53 PM Author: slimy galvanic brunch 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. |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 1:06 PM Author: histrionic claret trailer park This is the CR. Read the Constitution. It requires advice and consent of the Senate. There was no way Garland was going to get the consent of the Senate. So it was pointless to run through the nomination process. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36848994) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 2:17 PM Author: maroon sweet tailpipe crotch This is basically right except Mitch also made it so cucks didn't even have an opportunity to cuck by never moving on the nomination or having a vote. Maybe Dems couldve peeled off a few cucks but Mitch stopped it from ever happening. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36849360) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 2:50 PM Author: motley site You and VonNeumman need to get your bullshit stories justifying this straight. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36849558) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 2:51 PM Author: maroon sweet tailpipe crotch Huh? No clue what youre talking about (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36849564) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 2:52 PM Author: motley site He says it was pointless so a waste of time, you say it was a brilliant strategic move by mcconnell to stop the senate from being able to vote on it.
|
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 2:53 PM Author: maroon sweet tailpipe crotch Oh, well, I stick with my version (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36849579) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 2:54 PM Author: motley site Yours is correct. And we will find a way to make sure Republicans pay for it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36849589) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 2:57 PM Author: frozen maniacal location cuckold Old cloture rules were still in effect, so would have needed 14 GOP votes for cloture (and four to confirm). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36849618) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 2:59 PM Author: maroon sweet tailpipe crotch Hmmm, thats a good point. Forgot about that. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36849623) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 3:10 PM Author: frozen maniacal location cuckold For context, 9 GOPers voted for Sotomayor and 5 for Kagan (with Ben Nelson voting no for good measure). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36849686) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 4:28 PM Author: Vengeful frum parlor knife Also , didn't Dems delay Bush judge confirmations so obama would get to fill the seats? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36850188) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 4:28 PM Author: Flushed gas station elastic band (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36850191) |
|
Date: September 20th, 2018 1:12 PM Author: vigorous mewling codepig filthpig The Turtle cucked the shit out of the Kenyan (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4082255&forum_id=2#36849020) |