It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Gryphon66
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: kaylaluv
Oh right, like the conservatives in Congress were going to let him do that. He had every right to replace Scalia, but they stopped him, remember?
Nope, this is all on conservatives and Trump, who is kissing conservative ass.
Democrats are the origin of the don't nominate in a POTUS election year.
Yep, they talked about it, the Republicans did it.
Which group actually thwarted the Constitution?
originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: IAMTAT
This is actually evidence that Mueller and by extension, Obama, have nothing on Trump.
If they did, they'd have leaked it or released it to avoid having Trump determine who will be on the Court.
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: Gryphon66
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: kaylaluv
Oh right, like the conservatives in Congress were going to let him do that. He had every right to replace Scalia, but they stopped him, remember?
Nope, this is all on conservatives and Trump, who is kissing conservative ass.
Democrats are the origin of the don't nominate in a POTUS election year.
Yep, they talked about it, the Republicans did it.
Which group actually thwarted the Constitution?
Neither. It was not about thwarting the Constitution, but the will of the people. The will of the people was not thwarted, the direction they chose is the direction we are going. If in 2016 they wanted to continue Obama's path they would have voted for someone who would have done so.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: IAMTAT
I blame McConnell first, second and third for stealing the initial SCOTUS nomination. Then fourth I blame McConnell again for holding up all of Obama's lower court picks forcing the Democrats to implement the nuclear option so that Obama could nominate judges in the first place. Finally, all the way down at fifth I blame Democrats filibustering Gorsuch and playing their hand too early.
At no point does any of the nonsense you just typed in your OP factor into any of my blame though.
originally posted by: Gryphon66
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: Gryphon66
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: kaylaluv
Oh right, like the conservatives in Congress were going to let him do that. He had every right to replace Scalia, but they stopped him, remember?
Nope, this is all on conservatives and Trump, who is kissing conservative ass.
Democrats are the origin of the don't nominate in a POTUS election year.
Yep, they talked about it, the Republicans did it.
Which group actually thwarted the Constitution?
Neither. It was not about thwarting the Constitution, but the will of the people. The will of the people was not thwarted, the direction they chose is the direction we are going. If in 2016 they wanted to continue Obama's path they would have voted for someone who would have done so.
Nope
The will of the People made Obama the President for a four-year term not three, and it is the President's right and duty (and the will of the people who elected him) to nominate to the Supreme Court during his term.
That is clear.
The Republican Senate did not disapprove of Merrick Garland because of any logical reason ... they refused to fulfill their Constitutional duty and advise and consent.
If you truly feel that the will of the people should determine the selection of Justices, I'm sure you're in favor of waiting until after the November elections and the seating of the new Senate ... right?
...and so naturally, by default, because of that white-knight in you, you feel the need to bolster the numbers and reinforce the radical s# we've seen since this Presidency unfolded.
originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: Arnie123
When you see a neutral point of view as "extreme" then it's safe to say that you yourself are so extremely left or right that a neutral point of view can still be considered "extreme" even though you are the one who us extreme.
Look at the front page right now, which point of view is more popular around here? Left, centrist or right? And you wonder why I only seem to talk about it in threads like this one, it's because this site is right wing by and large and is becoming more and more extreme (ignorant) by the day in a certain direction.
originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Willtell
Yep.
Stupid, scattered, fractured efforts, corrupted by identity politics, special interests and causes celebres at its very worst.
What Direction?
originally posted by: schuyler
originally posted by: IAMTAT
Obama was either COMPLETELY clueless...or was so confident that loser Hillary would be the next POTUS, that he didn't ask Ginsburg to gracefully retire during his term, so as to be able to nominate a nice, young, leftist, replacement for her chair.....Folks, you know I'm right.
No, you're not. Ginsburg could easily have told Obama to go pound sand. She's not stupid. Obama has a right to his opinion, but a President's powers do not include dictating to SCOTUS members when they ought to retire.