Democrats to give Trump Cabinet picks the Garland treatment

[Cigar]

Senate Democrats are preparing to put Donald Trump’s Cabinet picks through a grinding confirmation process, weighing delay tactics that could eat up weeks of the Senate calendar and hamper his first 100 days in office.

Multiple Democratic senators told POLITICO in interviews last week that after watching Republicans sit on Merrick Garland’s nomination to the Supreme Court for nearly a year, they’re in no mood to fast-track Trump’s selections.

But it’s not just about exacting revenge. Democrats argue that some of the president-elect’s more controversial Cabinet picks — such as Jeff Sessions for attorney general and Steven Mnuchin for treasury secretary — demand a thorough public airing.

“They’ve been rewarded for stealing a Supreme Court justice. We’re going to help them confirm their nominees, many of whom are disqualified?” fumed Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio). “It’s not obstruction, it’s not partisan, it’s just a duty to find out what they’d do in these jobs.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-cabinet-democrats-senate-232136


https://youtu.be/5vwHLMs04XA

[nic34]

https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-9fa827143e4f6b9b724081485fd51f38?convert_to_webp=t rue

[Common]

Democrats are ready to put Trumps cabinet picks through a grinding process "MY ASS" The gop already said trumps cabinet picks will have smooth sailing thanks to HARRY REIDS NUCLEAR OPTION. I posted an entire thread how good Ole harry has royally screwed the few democrats left in the house and senate. THERE WILL BE NO FILIBISTERS by the whiney left.

[MisterVeritis]

https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-9fa827143e4f6b9b724081485fd51f38?convert_to_webp=t rue
Coming from you this is ironic. Harry Reid changed the rules. Reid pushed over the first domino.

[Subdermal]

:biglaugh:

Sad sack liberals. You've lost in nearly every conceivable way, including cutting your own throats on matters such as these. It's positively lovely.

[Common]

Oh and that goes for all trumps supreme court picks too.

Senate Republicans told Reid dont do it, it WILL come back to bite you on the ass. The democrats thought their run would never end.

DONT complain and whine when they nuke the shit out of you. YOU MADE IT HAPPEN

[Amadeus]

Constitutionally, the next SCOTUS appointment is Obama's, not Trump's.

[DGUtley]

The Nuclear Option will bite them. Amazing how things happen, isn't it. I'd really like to see the Senate go back to traditional rules, though.

[Tahuyaman]

Constitutionally, the next SCOTUS appointment is Obama's, not Trump's.


Aint gonna happen.......

[Tahuyaman]

So far the reaction to the election has just been hysterical bed wetting. However, I see it changing to a very angry and confrontational tone. The left is going to lose even more support by going in that direction.

[NapRover]

The Nuclear Option will bite them. Amazing how things happen, isn't it. I'd really like to see the Senate go back to traditional rules, though.

I really think the dems used the nuke option because they thought the reps were finished and would never have power again.

[Bethere]

I really think the dems used the nuke option because they thought the reps were finished and would never have power again.

Or maybe we did it because we knew that the party that refused to give hearings or votes to our 10th circuit judges etc would do it the first chance they got no matter what we dd.

[hanger4]

Oh and that goes for all trumps supreme court picks too.

Senate Republicans told Reid dont do it, it WILL come back to bite you on the ass. The democrats thought their run would never end.

DONT complain and whine when they nuke the shit out of you. YOU MADE IT HAPPEN

The nuc-option doesn't apply to SCOTUS nominees, Trump still needs 60 Senators for closure.

[hanger4]

Constitutionally, the next SCOTUS appointment is Obama's, not Trump's.

That horse done been beat to death. The Senate denied confirmation to Garland, any delay afterward is on Obama for not nominating an acceptable SC justice.

[Amadeus]

Aint gonna happen.......
Either you respect the Constitution or you don't.

[Tahuyaman]

Either you respect the Constitution or you don't.

Obama is not going to get to get another Supreme Court appointment. Deal with it.

[hanger4]

Either you respect the Constitution or you don't.

Why didn't/hasn't Obama submitted another SCOTUS nominee Amadeus ?? respect for the Constitution and all that.

[Amadeus]

Why didn't/hasn't Obama submitted another SCOTUS nominee @Amadeus (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=2152) ?? respect for the Constitution and all that.
Why would he have to? He wasn't given a vote on this one. Garland is a moderate judge.

[NapRover]

Or maybe we did it because we knew that the party that refused to give hearings or votes to our 10th circuit judges etc would do it the first chance they got no matter what we dd.
I thought that was legit, it would be the same if the shoe was on the other foot.
i take it you don't buy the Scalia was murdered theory.

[Bethere]

I thought that was legit, it would be the same if the shoe was on the other foot.
i take it you don't buy the Scalia was murdered theory.

I don't, although I can see why it might have happened.

I trust that you had a nice holiday?

[Subdermal]

Or maybe we did it because we knew that the party that refused to give hearings or votes to our 10th circuit judges etc would do it the first chance they got no matter what we dd.
Yeah that's it, spunky.

:biglaugh:

[Subdermal]

Either you respect the Constitution or you don't.

Do you not believe that the proper ideological majority in Congress possesses the Constitutional power to block the appointment suggestions of the POTUS?

[hanger4]

Why would he have to? He wasn't given a vote on this one. Garland is a moderate judge.

Again, for the umpteenth time the Senate denied confirmation, before, during or after hearings is irrelevant. Obama was told no to Garland, he did nothing.

Do you understand the text of Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution Amadeus ?? Especially this part, "he shall nominate" he did and consent denied and then he ignored the Constitution. Tell Obama to get off his hands and do his job, he shall nominate.

[Trish]

Either you respect the Constitution or you don't.
I'm a middle of the road person. I can be conservative or liberal depending on the issue. Not allowing a vote was slimy. I'm sad that we have become so divided that some have no problem dismissing our constitution and pretending as if that's not what happened. It was wrong what the Republican leadership did.

[hanger4]

I'm a middle of the road person. I can be conservative or liberal depending on the issue. Not allowing a vote was slimy. I'm sad that we have become so divided that some have no problem dismissing our constitution and pretending as if that's not what happened. It was wrong what the Republican leadership did.

Why is it slimy ?? The Senate preformed it's duty, Obama has not.

You do realize hearings for nominees is a relatively recent phenomena.

[Amadeus]

Why is it slimy ?? The Senate preformed it's duty, Obama has not.

You do realize hearings for nominees is a relatively recent phenomena.

The senate didn't confirm or deny, they didn't allow the vote to proceed. They said that it was a fill for the next president. So no matter who Obama nominated, he wasn't going to get a vote.

[Trish]

Why is it slimy ?? The Senate preformed it's duty, Obama has not.

You do realize hearings for nominees is a relatively recent phenomena.
Yes Hanger, I am familiar with the process and it's history.....sigh. I'm simply saying that I felt it was slimy. I stick by that opinion. They should have held the hearings and voted. This stunt coupled with their history of doing nothing for almost 4 years has left me less inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt. I'm very angry that I've paid the Representatives in both the House and Senate to do absolutely nothing. Grrrrrr (that's me growling....hahahaha)

[birddog]

The senate didn't confirm or deny, they didn't allow the vote to proceed. They said that it was a fill for the next president. So no matter who Obama nominated, he wasn't going to get a vote.

That's a traditional method perpetrated by the dimocrats in past years.

[Amadeus]

That's a traditional method perpetrated by the dimocrats in past years.
If that's the case, what makes Republicans better than Democrats? Right. Nothing.

[hanger4]

The senate didn't confirm or deny, they didn't allow the vote to proceed. They said that it was a fill for the next president. So no matter who Obama nominated, he wasn't going to get a vote.

What part of denied consent don't you understand Amadeus ?? Nowhere in the Constitution are hearings and or votes a requirement.

Do you honestly believe if Obama had nominated a Scalia type justice the Senate would have denied consent off hand ?? That's funny.

[birddog]

If that's the case, what makes Republicans better than Democrats? Right. Nothing.

Same way with the "nuclear" thing, if the dims want to be jerks, that's inviting us to throw it back in their face! Some call it "Karma." :grin:

[NapRover]

I don't, although I can see why it might have happened.

I trust that you had a nice holiday?
It was pretty special, thanks. Really enjoyed it!

[Peter1469]

If that's the case, what makes Republicans better than Democrats? Right. Nothing.


Bingo, they are the same thing.

[maineman]

Democrats are ready to put Trumps cabinet picks through a grinding process "MY ASS" The gop already said trumps cabinet picks will have smooth sailing thanks to HARRY REIDS NUCLEAR OPTION. I posted an entire thread how good Ole harry has royally screwed the few democrats left in the house and senate. THERE WILL BE NO FILIBISTERS by the whiney left.

except when the Scalia replacement comes up.... hmmmmmmm

[resister]

except when the Scalia replacement comes up.... hmmmmmmmHoliday??

[maineman]

nonsensical

[patrickt]

With their talent for lying and cheating the Democrats can't "Garland" anyone. All they can do is "Bork". And, who led the first borking. The conscience of the Democrat Party, Sen. Ted Kennedy. Everyone listened when he spoke from the moral high ground. Well, leftists listen. For them, Mary Jo Kopechne was no one.

[maineman]

they can certainly Garland any SCOTUS nominee. You only need 41 to do that.... we have eight extras.

[MisterVeritis]

they can certainly Garland any SCOTUS nominee. You only need 41 to do that.... we have eight extras.
Leet's see what happens.

[maineman]

Leet's see what happens.

do I have a choice? Other than willfully shutting my eyes, that is?