RBG Hospitalized for Gallbladder Condition
-
If she'd die or step down tomorrow (or in the next few weeks), could Trump replace her before the election?
wrote on 30 Jul 2020, 13:51 last edited by@Klaus said in RBG Hospitalized for Gallbladder Condition:
If she'd die or step down tomorrow (or in the next few weeks), could Trump replace her before the election?
Short answer, yes. The word is that the short list has been selected and vetted. Since Dingy Harry changed the rules, the Murder Turtle could probably get a new Justice through in 30 days.
-
wrote on 30 Jul 2020, 13:53 last edited by
If it wasn't for double standards, they'd have no standards at all.
-
If it wasn't for double standards, they'd have no standards at all.
wrote on 30 Jul 2020, 14:01 last edited by@Doctor-Phibes said in RBG Hospitalized for Gallbladder Condition:
If it wasn't for double standards, they'd have no standards at all.
Wasn't the GOP that shoved through a new set of rules, podnuh. They're just playing to win by the rules they were given.
Which is why the Senate leans (or should lean) so heavily on tradition. The Dems nuked the nomination process with Bork, refined it with Thomas and now I don't give a damn if they die of apoplexy during a rushed process.
Trump could nominate Jesus Christ, and there would be at least 40 Democrats vote against him.
-
wrote on 30 Jul 2020, 14:04 last edited by Mik
So far there has been no reason to criticize his appointments. They have been very much what a justice should be - impartial.
-
wrote on 30 Jul 2020, 14:11 last edited by
Didn't Mitch McConnell refuse to countenance an Obama appointee close to the election, as it would be inappropriate?
The idea that the GOP have more principles than the DEMs is very amusing and everything, but guys, nobody important cares what we write - a little honesty is in order here.
-
Didn't Mitch McConnell refuse to countenance an Obama appointee close to the election, as it would be inappropriate?
The idea that the GOP have more principles than the DEMs is very amusing and everything, but guys, nobody important cares what we write - a little honesty is in order here.
wrote on 30 Jul 2020, 14:23 last edited by@Doctor-Phibes said in RBG Hospitalized for Gallbladder Condition:
Didn't Mitch McConnell refuse to countenance an Obama appointee close to the election, as it would be inappropriate?
Yes, he did. And as Jolly points out, he was playing by the rules of the Senate. The majority makes the rules.
Was it wrong? I'm of mixed thought on that.
Would it be hypocritical now? Sure.
-
Didn't Mitch McConnell refuse to countenance an Obama appointee close to the election, as it would be inappropriate?
The idea that the GOP have more principles than the DEMs is very amusing and everything, but guys, nobody important cares what we write - a little honesty is in order here.
wrote on 30 Jul 2020, 14:27 last edited by@Doctor-Phibes said in RBG Hospitalized for Gallbladder Condition:
nobody important cares what we write
-
Didn't Mitch McConnell refuse to countenance an Obama appointee close to the election, as it would be inappropriate?
The idea that the GOP have more principles than the DEMs is very amusing and everything, but guys, nobody important cares what we write - a little honesty is in order here.
wrote on 30 Jul 2020, 14:50 last edited by@Doctor-Phibes said in RBG Hospitalized for Gallbladder Condition:
Didn't Mitch McConnell refuse to countenance an Obama appointee close to the election, as it would be inappropriate?
The idea that the GOP have more principles than the DEMs is very amusing and everything, but guys, nobody important cares what we write - a little honesty is in order here.
Don't forget, Obama (a sitting President) was not running.
-
wrote on 30 Jul 2020, 14:53 last edited by
Oh yeah, that makes it a completely different situation.
-
wrote on 30 Jul 2020, 14:55 last edited by jon-nyc
Come on Jolly, just have the courage to say it was opportunistic then and it would be opportunistic now. The only principle applied was ‘because we can’.
-
Come on Jolly, just have the courage to say it was opportunistic then and it would be opportunistic now. The only principle applied was ‘because we can’.
wrote on 30 Jul 2020, 14:56 last edited by@jon-nyc said in RBG Hospitalized for Gallbladder Condition:
Come on Jolly, just have the courage to say it was opportunistic then and it would be opportunistic now.
There are shades of opportunism.
-
wrote on 30 Jul 2020, 14:56 last edited by Doctor Phibes
Shades? They're more like curtains.
-
In theory. The senate might have to change their rules.
He has to nominate and the senate has to approve. I think it's only Senate rules that would prevent that from happening in rapid succession. And the Senate is GOP controlled.
wrote on 30 Jul 2020, 15:00 last edited by@jon-nyc said in RBG Hospitalized for Gallbladder Condition:
In theory. The senate might have to change their rules.
He has to nominate and the senate has to approve. I think it's only Senate rules that would prevent that from happening in rapid succession. And the Senate is GOP controlled.But I assume a president Biden could "retaliate" by increasing the number of judges until they have a democrat majority?
-
@jon-nyc said in RBG Hospitalized for Gallbladder Condition:
In theory. The senate might have to change their rules.
He has to nominate and the senate has to approve. I think it's only Senate rules that would prevent that from happening in rapid succession. And the Senate is GOP controlled.But I assume a president Biden could "retaliate" by increasing the number of judges until they have a democrat majority?
wrote on 30 Jul 2020, 15:01 last edited by@Klaus said in RBG Hospitalized for Gallbladder Condition:
@jon-nyc said in RBG Hospitalized for Gallbladder Condition:
In theory. The senate might have to change their rules.
He has to nominate and the senate has to approve. I think it's only Senate rules that would prevent that from happening in rapid succession. And the Senate is GOP controlled.But I assume a president Biden could "retaliate" by increasing the number of judges until they have a democrat majority?
Roosevelt tried that. It was met with outrage by both parties.
-
@George-K I don't know the historic context, but why would that upset the Democrat party today?
wrote on 30 Jul 2020, 15:05 last edited by@Klaus said in RBG Hospitalized for Gallbladder Condition:
@George-K I don't know the historic context, but why would that upset the Democrat party today?
Good question. I don't know.
-
wrote on 30 Jul 2020, 15:17 last edited by
The time for principled outrage in politics is over. The only thing keeping any political party from doing anything to win is prison.
-
wrote on 30 Jul 2020, 15:29 last edited by
Which party? Which prison?
-
wrote on 30 Jul 2020, 15:33 last edited by
California's secession can't come fast enough. Let them have their own prisons and politicians. And let the disadvantaged vote with their feet as they flock to that nirvana.
-
@jon-nyc said in RBG Hospitalized for Gallbladder Condition:
In theory. The senate might have to change their rules.
He has to nominate and the senate has to approve. I think it's only Senate rules that would prevent that from happening in rapid succession. And the Senate is GOP controlled.But I assume a president Biden could "retaliate" by increasing the number of judges until they have a democrat majority?
wrote on 30 Jul 2020, 17:03 last edited by@Klaus said in RBG Hospitalized for Gallbladder Condition:
@jon-nyc said in RBG Hospitalized for Gallbladder Condition:
In theory. The senate might have to change their rules.
He has to nominate and the senate has to approve. I think it's only Senate rules that would prevent that from happening in rapid succession. And the Senate is GOP controlled.But I assume a president Biden could "retaliate" by increasing the number of judges until they have a democrat majority?
One of the main reasons I really would hate to see Trump force through a candidate at the last minute is it would give huge energy to the ‘pack the court’ faction in the party. (For the record Biden has consistently opposed it.)