Printable View
No idea!!! You really have no idea as to whether or not the dems would do the same thing???Quote:
Originally Posted by GGGGG-Men
No aggressive fight!!! Like the impeachment that had no chance to go anywhere???
Come on. You lost all your credibility with that post.
If they had the numbers…they wouldn't keep losing.Quote:
Originally Posted by GGGGG-Men
Do you need another lesson on the electoral system??
be upset. don't like how the Senate does things, control the Senate.Quote:
Originally Posted by GGGGG-Men
but I don't think the right is going to to care when if things were reversed Democrats would do the same thing.
how about not making threats, this should not be allowed.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/n...e-election-day
there's more in the link go ahead.Quote:
Former CNN host Reza Aslan joined several other verified Twitter accounts in threatening violence if Senate Republicans attempt to fill the Supreme Court seat of the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
“Over our dead bodies. Literally,” Aslan wrote in response to a tweet saying Sen. Mitch McConnell intends to fill Ginsberg's seat, shortly after it was announced Friday that she had died at the age of 87.
Aslan also tweeted, “If they even TRY to replace RBG we burn the entire f---ing thing down.”
“If McConnell jams someone through, which he will, there will be riots,” Washington Post and GQ writer Laura Bassett said.
If McConnell jams someone through, which he will, there will be riots.
— Laura Bassett (@LEBassett) September 18, 2020
calling for this has influence over people that will be radicalized.
Why did the impeachment have no chance to go anywhere? Why was it dirty?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sluggo1
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
but they certainly wouldn't be dirty.
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5...-court-nominee
Quote:
Pelosi: House will use 'every arrow in our quiver' to stop Trump Supreme Court nominee
Quote:
Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said on Sunday the House had its “options” when asked about the possibility of impeaching President Trump and Attorney General William Barr should the White House and Senate Republicans jam a Supreme Court nominee through the process during a lame duck session after Election Day.
how many days is there before the election? 43?
Sandra Day O'Connor only took 33 days after she was nominated.
apparently Ruth Bader Ginsburg had a dying wish, even though that is completely meaningless.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/sup...trump-n1240507
Quote:
Ruth Bader Ginsburg's dying wish: Not to have Donald Trump choose replacement
"My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed," Ruth Bader Ginsburg told her granddaughter, Clara Spera, in the days before her death, NPR reported.
:shrug:
the seat she held was vacated in her death, what she would want is irrelevant.
Can we pause for a minute and point out how pathetic everyone is on the back/forth on who’s right and who’s wrong for SCOTUS nods here? This isn’t the thread for that.
Bolded………Quote:
Originally Posted by ewing
Two reasons…
1. It was based on a phone conversation accusing the prez of a quid pro quo when the other participant of the cnversation said it never happened. (And FYI……quid pro quo happens all the time in government)
2. You needed 67 Senators to agree to remove the prez (you did know that, right???) That means you woul;d need about 20 repub sens to agree to impeachment. Do you think that could possible happen bases on a third party's assessment of the quid pro quo phone call.
Why was it dirty……see reasons 1 and 2 above. The entire point was to make the prez look bad. Months worth of time was wasted (during the early stages of the pandemic); billions of $$$ were wasted solely in the attempt to make the prez look bad. All for something that had no chance. So yeah, that was dirty.
You expect THIS group to stay on topic?Quote:
Originally Posted by debo
Sounds like great news.Quote:
Originally Posted by rhino17
That sounds like 14 - 19 places you could move to.
Both sides are crap. They do it different, but they are both twisted and corrupt.
No matter what we have to say it will play out the way it will play out.
I hope whoever fills that position has a mind of their own and doesn't follow "orders" as many seem to think will happen. No questions the parties are corrupt but the SC is built the way it is to give the members a chance to avoid and side step the corruption.
And four years earlier she said the process should keep going on without regard to an election.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpecialFNK