Fairfax GOP liked Andrew Mullins @AndrewWMullins 2h2 hours ago
Every single one of these Senators voted to confirm Neil Gorsuch in 2006.
Posted on 01/31/2017 7:20:52 PM PST by bryan999
I am hard-pressed to think of one thing President Trump has done right in the last 11 days since his inauguration. Until Tuesday, when he nominated an extraordinary judge and man, Neil Gorsuch, to be a justice on the Supreme Court.
The nomination comes at a fraught moment. The new administration’s executive actions on immigration have led to chaos everywhere from the nation’s airports to the Department of Justice. They have raised justified concern about whether the new administration will follow the law. More than ever, public confidence in our system of government depends on the impartiality and independence of the courts.
There is a very difficult question about whether there should be a vote on President Trump’s nominee at all, given the Republican Senate’s history-breaking record of obstruction on Judge Merrick B. Garland — perhaps the most qualified nominee ever for the high court. But if the Senate is to confirm anyone, Judge Gorsuch, who sits on the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit in Denver, should be at the top of the list.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
They enabled the end of the filibuster.
They have to make losing sound dignified.
“The new administration’s executive actions on immigration have led to chaos everywhere”
LOL. More fake news from the New York Times.
NY Times leftist supporting Gorsuch. Maybe we should be worried.
Fairfax GOP liked Andrew Mullins @AndrewWMullins 2h2 hours ago
Every single one of these Senators voted to confirm Neil Gorsuch in 2006.
Keep in mind that he is no threat to the balance of the court because he’s replacing Scalia. It might be a very different story if he was replacing Ginsberg.
Maybe a ‘tar baby’. IOW.....’concern trolling’.
Might be a signal to not attack, and let this one pass... bigger battles ahead. This one is a lose-lose for libs no matter how they play.
And if you think about it, the RATs really can’t fight without the necessary fortitude and willing manpower. Right now they are seriously depleted of both.. ! Might be best to step aside...
Or maybe not, I guess we’ll see.
That’s funny...I cannot think of anything he has done wrong.
“Might be a signal to not attack, and let this one pass... bigger battles ahead.”
I agree. Scalia replacement. They don’t have the votes. Gorsuch will fly through the process. The Ginsberg replacement (inevitable) will be a tougher fight and Turtle will be afraid to go nuclear in that instance.
I hope they fight it, killing the rest of the damn filibuster would be a nice cherry on top of the nomination. Yes I know it can work the other way but it’s an inefficient bassackward construct. If you lose enough votes that your party is in the minority you’re not going to win much, that doesn’t give either party the right to be obstructionist.
>They have raised justified concern about whether the new administration will follow the law. <
My favorite line...... Haha. They’re worried Trump won’t follow the law???
From the news media, states, sanctuary cities, anarchists etc who are urging others to not follow the law...
I can show you what not follow the law looks like but I’m an American who just voted for a man who ran on restoring law and order.
These disposable A$$w!pe$ are stained up in the head
The rats will keep the street protests alive as long as possible, trying to goad Trump into doing something stupid. Best thing Trump Nd the Republicans can do is exactly what they are doing. Keep getting things done and force the press to look elsewhere for stories.
Laura Ingraham seems to think that in a few months another Justice will be leaving the bench..oh pretty please let that be Ginsberg
Add too that, they hope to win a seat or two in 2018, so they can put up a tougher fight on the next one.
I think it’s a miscalculation on their part.
That would pretty much leave Sotomayor and Kagan all by themselves.
This is what the Democrats are dealing with right now:
1) The ONLY REASON to oppose Gorsuch is because the Republicans would not give Obama his man. There is no question regarding his integrity and qualifications.
2) Before the election, the Democrats expected to win both the White House and the Senate, and made it PERFECTLY CLEAR that they would end the filibuster for Supreme Court picks.
3) Before Trump announced Gorsuch, some Democrats were promising to veto ANYONE that Trump chose, and some were even talking about permanently leaving the seat open. This did MAJOR DAMAGE to their cause, because it made it much easier for wavering Republicans (i.e., the RINO bunch) to understand that there was nothing they could do to restore ‘comity’ (as they call it) to the Senate - that was over with, and only because of the Democrats. The Democrats needed at least 2 Republicans to maintain the filibuster...I’m guessing that they could not find 2 of them when it came to Gorsuch.
4) As mentioned elsewhere, nuking the filibuster has HUGE downstream implications. For example, if the Republicans pick up, say, 5 seats in 2018, they will have 57 seats, and Trump will be able to plow virtually any nominee through, as there simply will not be enough RINOs to help them (and I’m talking about nominees who might be somewhat questionable, which Gorsuch certainly is not). So the Dems will be left watching the court go HARD-RIGHT and not being able to do a thing.
5) Letting Gorsuch through, on the other hand, gets him out of the way, allows the Democrats to claim to be team players, and thus gives them at least some credibility when they do try to filibuster a perhaps weaker candidate, particularly if it’s to fill a liberal seat.
And believe me, they are considering all of this...and I expect them to let Gorsuch get his vote.
No, they are trying to undermine Trump’s support. If they can do that, they know the Republican’s tea-party-supplied prosthetic backbones will quickly soften and they will return to their spelunking ways.
The Dems also trying to save their energy for the next nominee, while trying to guilt trip Mitch into taking the nuclear option off the table in the interest of old fashioned bipartisanship. Think of this article as a fake epiphany on the part of the left. “See, we’ve changed. Let’s go back to the pre-nuke days of olde.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.