And democrats have come to regret changing the 60 vote to simple majority - and watch them get creamed.

I cant believe they're this incompetent even at corruption and Hubris. What a useless bunch of dolts. Seriously, if you walked into a democrat run pizza place, you'd find pizzas in the oven and all the sauce on the floor cos they cant open the bottle and are showing that bottle how strong they are by smashing the bottles on the floor.

Cool.
Srinath.

https://i1.wp.com/www.citizenfreepress.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/rng-gin...

Serowbot wrote on 09/20/20 at 09:16:54:



Really? Show me where I had a different position then,

WebsterMark wrote on 09/20/20 at 07:30:11:

I do not believe for one second that was her dying sentence. I think her granddaughter is lying about that. I’m sure she said something like that at some point in the last few days but I doubt with that was her last words. If it was, that’s an utterly pathetic way to end your life. And it shows just how much she believed herself to be more important than the system.

TOTALLY believe,
that was,  NOT, her dying sentence.

So far that statement can be traced to NPR,
(Rather well known UL, FDS Socialistic, propaganda)
With the rest of the TDS affected media repeating it.

Not gonna be any way to prove, or not prove, it was said.

Unless the granddaughter tells the truth.
Which has the same likelihood of a poncho,
stopping a bullet !

The Senate deferred action on the Garland nomination because at that time, the White House was in Democrat hands while the Senate was majority-Republican. It was an appropriate exercise of discretion in a split-control situation. The election of Hillary Clinton would have made it impossible to avoid a straight up-or-down Senate vote on Merrick Garland. The loss of the Senate majority to the Democrats would have had the same effect. But the election of Donald Trump and the GOP’s retention of the Senate majority would – and did – put the Garland nomination in a different light, one where the Senate could reasonably allow the incoming president to put forward a different nominee.

    Today, there is no split-control situation. The White House and the Senate are both Republican-dominated. It is reasonable for the president to submit a nominee to the Senate for its advice and consent. It is also reasonable for the Senate to act or not act on such a nomination in its own good time. What President Trump will do, and what Majority Leader McConnell will do, we shall soon see.

    But on a larger and more important point, Schumer’s nonsense about “the American people” deserving “a voice” in the selection of the nominee is contrary to the Constitutional design. Such a “voice” is expressed through their selections of Senators and President. With both those institutions in Republican hands, it is wholly within reason that the president should put forward the nominee of his choice, and leave what follows to the Senate.

http://bastionofliberty.blogspot.com/

Some context for it all

Regarding the original removal of the filibuster for that was forced upon the democrats by Moscow Mitch's absolute obstructionist stand, Mconnell then removed the Filibuster to ram through Kavanaugh. It's time the the Democrats to eliminate the final filibuster hurdle. So if the Republican steal a second Supreme Court seat, what can the Democrats do, well as they say in the article below, if they win the presidency but lose the Senate, then the Democrats will have to suck it up.

However if they win both the Presidency and the Senate, there are a few options, all of them good for democracy and are summed up here...

https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/can-trump-and-mcconnell-push-thr...

If the Democrats fail to retake the majority in the Senate in November, their options are few except to grin and bear it. But, if they win the majority and Joe Biden wins the Presidency, there are four major possibilities for retribution—which all happen to be good policy as well. The first is the abolition of the filibuster, which should have happened decades ago. Even in the minority, McConnell will do everything he can to thwart Biden, and the filibuster will be the tool. This antidemocratic relic should be retired once and for all.

Second, statehood for the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, with two senators apiece, would be another appropriate rejoinder. Third, Congress should pass a law expanding the number of lower-court federal judges; that number has not increased since Jimmy Carter was President. Finally, the greatest and most appropriate form of retribution involves the Supreme Court itself.

The number of Justices is not fixed in the Constitution but, rather, established by statute. If Republicans succeed in stealing two seats—the Scalia and Ginsburg vacancies—the Democrats could simply pass a law that creates two or three more seats on the Supreme Court. To do so would be to play hardball in a way that is foreign to the current Senate Democrats. But maybe, in light of all that’s happened, that’s a game they should learn to play.

as usual JoG completely misses the point, which is then covered by disparaging Ford, the filibuster was removed by the Republicans in order to force an unelectable not so much that it was shouty Kavanaugh it could have been anyone because this is Mitch's project. If the Democrats win control of the Senate then they have carte blanche to pursue all the options in the red paragraph in my previous post. So the next election is not about the Presidency it's about the Sentate and the future of the Republic and  "if you can keep it"

If you can impeach a President in an election year, hard to argue that same President can’t appoint a replacement Supreme Court Justice in the same year.

Well maybe its hard for you to argue that but that is expected. Now there's nothing in the Constitution that says a President cannot appoint a SC Judge. The issue is that McConnell stole one from Obama in the name of Merrick Garland on his newly invented 'principle' that you cannot appoint a Judge this close to an election, which was at the time nine months.

The Democrats will have finally woken up that being 'nice guys' and playing by the rules is just for suckers and losers. This is going to be a handy attitude to have if they win the Senate and the Presidency. McConnell will have overplayed his hand and the electorate might very well understand the importance of giving Biden a Senate majority.

The "McConnell rule" goes out the window when it's convenient. However it's only convenient to McConnell. Pretty soon Trump will realise that it's in his own interest to not appoint another SC judge. Why? Because then he can dangle that as a carrot to the hypocritical evangelics. If the Supreme Court has a super majority, then Trump has nothing more to offer them.

Remember Trump is just a useful idiot. So it's my prediction that Trump will not appoint anyone, or he might appoint someone and convince McConnell to make sure it doesn't happen and then blame it on the Democrats.

It's tricky because McConnell only cares about raw power and remaking the Judiciary, he won't give a toss about what Trump wants. He knows if they lose the Presidency then he'll have missed his chance.

But Trump doesn't care about any of that, his only consideration as always is what benefits him personally.