Antonin Scalia's Replacement

WhatsHisNuts

WhatsHisNuts

Woke
Forum Member
Aug 29, 2006
28,317
1,507
113
50
Earth
www.ffrf.org
Skulnik said:
View attachment 5113


:0corn
Click to expand...

Since you and Jaxx really think you got something great here, I'll take a moment to shit all over it.

#1. The Dems passed that resolution in 1960 for RECESS APPOINTMENTS. That's when the Senate is not in session and the President takes it upon himself to make the appointment without confirmation. It wasn't brought up over a specific appointment, it was brought up after it happened a THIRD time. It's not the same situation, not even close. Wake up.

#2. Kennedy was appointed by Reagan and confirmed by the Senate. The fact that Bork didn't get confirmed is neither here nor there. The Senate has the right to confirm or pass on a Presidential appointment for the SCOTUS. Let me know how this applies because, unless I'm missing something, it makes you guys look stupid.

#3. As a Senator, you have the right to vote against a Presidential appointment for the SCOTUS. Both SCOTUS appointees referenced are ON THE SUPREME COURT!!!! Holy shit, you can't be this dumb.:facepalm:
 
  • Like
Reactions: JT
J

JT

Degenerate
Forum Member
Mar 28, 2000
3,597
81
48
61
Ventura, Ca.
WhatsHisNuts said:
Since you and Jaxx really think you got something great here, I'll take a moment to shit all over it.

#1. The Dems passed that resolution in 1960 for RECESS APPOINTMENTS. That's when the Senate is not in session and the President takes it upon himself to make the appointment without confirmation. It wasn't brought up over a specific appointment, it was brought up after it happened a THIRD time. It's not the same situation, not even close. Wake up.

#2. Kennedy was appointed by Reagan and confirmed by the Senate. The fact that Bork didn't get confirmed is neither here nor there. The Senate has the right to confirm or pass on a Presidential appointment for the SCOTUS. Let me know how this applies because, unless I'm missing something, it makes you guys look stupid.

#3. As a Senator, you have the right to vote against a Presidential appointment for the SCOTUS. Both SCOTUS appointees referenced are ON THE SUPREME COURT!!!! Holy shit, you can't be this dumb.:facepalm:
Click to expand...

Yes they are.
 
Skulnik

Skulnik

Truth Teller
Forum Member
Mar 30, 2007
21,216
494
83
Jefferson City, Missouri
WhatsHisNuts said:
Since you and Jaxx really think you got something great here, I'll take a moment to shit all over it.

#1. The Dems passed that resolution in 1960 for RECESS APPOINTMENTS. That's when the Senate is not in session and the President takes it upon himself to make the appointment without confirmation. It wasn't brought up over a specific appointment, it was brought up after it happened a THIRD time. It's not the same situation, not even close. Wake up.

#2. Kennedy was appointed by Reagan and confirmed by the Senate. The fact that Bork didn't get confirmed is neither here nor there. The Senate has the right to confirm or pass on a Presidential appointment for the SCOTUS. Let me know how this applies because, unless I'm missing something, it makes you guys look stupid.

#3. As a Senator, you have the right to vote against a Presidential appointment for the SCOTUS. Both SCOTUS appointees referenced are ON THE SUPREME COURT!!!! Holy shit, you can't be this dumb.:facepalm:
Click to expand...


Let me burst your bubble, you said SHIT.


:0008
 
Skulnik

Skulnik

Truth Teller
Forum Member
Mar 30, 2007
21,216
494
83
Jefferson City, Missouri
WhatsHisNuts said:
https://www.yahoo.com/gma/senate-ju...eme-court-203556021--abc-news-topstories.html

Hypocrite pieces of shit.
Click to expand...

I'll see your HYPOCRITE and raise you TWO.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/N1SUn0zTGUQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/qnpjs45D7OY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/CqkcTQWQVgY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
WhatsHisNuts

WhatsHisNuts

Woke
Forum Member
Aug 29, 2006
28,317
1,507
113
50
Earth
www.ffrf.org
Skulnik: Keep digging, Bud. Huge difference in recess appointments, the world of the hypotheticals, and the situation we are in now.

1. If a justice is considering retiring, and the President has influence over that SCJ, they could try to convince that justice to retire before the election so they can get another one of their like-minded peeps on the court. That's the kind of thing Biden is talking about. He's also speaking directly to the President about a hypothetical situation. McConnell is not speaking to the President and, unfortunately, the situation is REAL.

2. Recess appointments aren't the same thing. I already fucking explained this about the Schumer clip.

3. As a Senator, Obama has the right to turn down an appointment. It says so right there in the Constitution.

I just heard on CBS This Morning that every Presidential Appointee for SCOTUS has had a hearing since 1875. That's probably because everyone has respected the Constitution for the last 140 years.

All they have to do is hold the hearings. They don't have to confirm his appointment, just hold the hearing like the Constitution says.

Let's start the impeachment hearings for McConnell. :brows:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Bet on MyBookie
Top