Shep Smith goes rouge quite a bit
Posted on 11/29/2018 3:52:27 AM PST by SMGFan
The Senate advanced a controversial judicial pick for President Trump on Wednesday after Vice President Pence cast a tie-breaking vote for the nomination.
Senators were deadlocked 50-50 to end debate on Thomas Farr's nomination to be a district judge for the Eastern District of North Carolina. Pence, presiding over the chamber, then cast the tie-breaking vote.
The fate of Farr's nomination was held in suspense even going into the start of the vote on Wednesday afternoon.
Four Republicans were viewed as potential swing votes: Sens. Marco Rubio (Fla.), Tim Scott (S.C.), Susan Collins (Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska). But Collins and Rubio came out in support of Farr earlier this week and Murkowski told reporters roughly two hours before the vote that she would also vote "yes" on his nomination.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
I agree. Sasse has issues and is a fundamentally flawed Senator but I don’t think life issues are a problem with him.
Agree, judicial nominees will sail through .
Paging Amy Barrett
Founding-Fathers-turning-in-grave alert.
Marco Rubio - still dead to me.
And yet, Democrats themselves voted in lock step. But of course this hypocritical fact is lost on the smug and smarmy morally superior Democrats and their corrupt MSM.
According to this article, the hit against this judge, Farr, was very Kavanaugh-esque. A lot of innuendoes in an attempt to simply derail his nomination.
Full steam ahead.
Collins has been good on judges actually.
Shep Smith goes rouge quite a bit
Collins, Murkowski, Sass and Romney...you do the math!
Flake and McCain are gone but the Bishop arrives in January.
Roy Moore would support the president’s picks for the Judiciary.
And yet Mitch McConnell campaigned against him
You just listed three good, solid reasons to support Judge Farr.
So he’s *controversial*.
That’s code word for *dems don’t like his conservative position on anything*.
Because the only time anything is *controversial* is when the libs/dems/media don’t approve of it.
IOW, he’s *controversial* because he’s holding people accountable and responsible.
Got it.
Yeah, all three of those things are false. He didn’t write the law, he didn’t even CONSULT with the senate where that billw as written, he CONSULTED with the house that passed an unremarkable bill.
He also didn’t lie to the senate, they had some e-mail from some party hack, but it was about some entirely different effort than the one they asked him about.
He did defend the gerrymander, as he was the lawyer responsible for that, but nobody knew it was illegal until the court ruled that way; the previous court had ruled for it, and all gerrymandering is supposed to be racially biased, it’s how we guarantee that at leeast one district has a majority of black people in it so they can vote for a black person, since apparently blacks are the only epople who will vote for black people, and are expected to vote based on the color of their skin rather than what a politician will actually do.
He also didn’t “defend them”. When he found out about the postcards, he told the campaign they were wrong, and then worked with the feds to come up with a consent decree to ensure it didn’t happen again.
Four Republicans were viewed as potential swing votes: Sens. Marco Rubio (Fla.), Tim Scott (S.C.), Susan Collins (Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska). But Collins and Rubio came out in support of Farr earlier this week and Murkowski told reporters roughly two hours before the vote that she would also vote "yes" on his nomination.
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.