PDA

View Full Version : Don't blame President Trump for replacing RBG



Reason10
09-21-2020, 06:19 PM
The president is merely doing his job.

I know the snowflake goose steppers are still pissed that Obama nominee Merrick was not given a hearing by the
Republican Senate. That was entirely the Senate's right, just as the rejection of Robert Bork to the Supreme Court
in 1987. Both were totally LEGAL Senate proceedings.

Don't get mad at the President, just because he's doing his fucking job.
He IS going to nominate a very good candidate and the Senate will probably wind up confirming that justice, and
that will be that. President Trump even hinted the nominee will be a woman.

And NAZI PELOSI has actually threatened to IMPEACH Trump to prevent him from making a nomination. I'm PRAYING
that delusional brownshirt bitch tries that move. It'll guarantee the LANDSLIDE reelection of Trump and the House
going back to the GOP.


I know you liberals don't like it. Taxpayers (also known as conservatives) didn't like ANY nominee from KKKlinton and the
KENYAN VILLAGE IDIOT. But we aren't threatening anyone, burning cities or generally being childish ass holes just because
we didn't get our way.

Grow up, children. You look like MORONS.

ripmeister
09-21-2020, 06:27 PM
I for one don’t blame the President. He’s doing what he’s supposed to do. McConnel et al have pulled a 180. Therin lies the criticism.

Reason10
09-21-2020, 06:33 PM
I for one don’t blame the President. He’s doing what he’s supposed to do. McConnel et al have pulled a 180. Therin lies the criticism.

McConnell has done no such thing. He has merely exhibited the SAME blind partisanship as Democrats in the past when they pulled this crap on Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas and other Republican nominees.


He is well within his rights to either give a nominee a hearing or reject that hearing entirely, and there's not a goddam thing anyone can do about it.

ripmeister
09-21-2020, 06:39 PM
McConnell has done no such thing. He has merely exhibited the SAME blind partisanship as Democrats in the past when they pulled this crap on Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas and other Republican nominees.


He is well within his rights to either give a nominee a hearing or reject that hearing entirely, and there's not a goddam thing anyone can do about it.
You are correct. He has the power. He still pulled a 180 though. That’s undeniable.

hanger4
09-21-2020, 06:45 PM
You are correct. He has the power. He still pulled a 180 though. That’s undeniable.

Not really, this situation is not the same. Trump is not a lame duck President and the Senate Majority and WH are the same party.

testsubjectalpha
09-21-2020, 06:50 PM
The Dems are acting like big babies. In a word, tricksters, pretending they would act differently. What politician told America, "if you like your plan, you can keep your plan?" For God's sake, take a pill.

ripmeister
09-21-2020, 07:19 PM
Not really, this situation is not the same. Trump is not a lame duck President and the Senate Majority and WH are the same party.
That’s a BS argument and never mentioned in the Garland move.

hanger4
09-21-2020, 07:35 PM
That’s a BS argument and never mentioned in the Garland move.

The facts aren't BS and it matters not whether they were mentioned, they are still facts.

Also, you can bet you last dollar, the Senate Majority had been Democratic in 2016 they would have done all in their power to put Garland on the SC.

carolina73
09-21-2020, 07:56 PM
That’s a BS argument and never mentioned in the Garland move.

Lindsey Graham specifically did make that point about the different parties and the the Lame Duck comment.

McConnell did not. To tell you the truth he shouldn't. When you are going to do it then you do not offer conditions. You just say this is what we are doing and get it done. Why invite more lines of argument that go nowhere when you are just going to do it. Give the minimum. Let them argue with themselves.

The Booman
09-21-2020, 07:58 PM
Telling them to not blame Trump is like telling them to not breathe.

ripmeister
09-21-2020, 08:07 PM
Telling them to not blame Trump is like telling them to not breathe.
Trumps not to blame. Sneaky Mitch is.

The Booman
09-22-2020, 08:33 PM
Trumps not to blame. Sneaky Mitch is.

No he's not. There is nothing to be blamed for. Trump is the president and he is doing his job. As is McConnell. What has happened in the past has nothing to do today.

ripmeister
09-22-2020, 08:58 PM
No he's not. There is nothing to be blamed for. Trump is the president and he is doing his job. As is McConnell. What has happened in the past has nothing to do today.

Uhhhh..... sure.

The Booman
09-22-2020, 09:01 PM
Uhhhh..... sure.

Ripping response! You cut me to the quick with your political cutlass. I fear the wound may be fatal.:rollseyes:

Crepitus
09-22-2020, 09:07 PM
The president is merely doing his job.

I know the snowflake goose steppers are still pissed that Obama nominee Merrick was not given a hearing by the
Republican Senate. That was entirely the Senate's right, just as the rejection of Robert Bork to the Supreme Court
in 1987. Both were totally LEGAL Senate proceedings.

Don't get mad at the President, just because he's doing his fucking job.
He IS going to nominate a very good candidate and the Senate will probably wind up confirming that justice, and
that will be that. President Trump even hinted the nominee will be a woman.

And NAZI PELOSI has actually threatened to IMPEACH Trump to prevent him from making a nomination. I'm PRAYING
that delusional brownshirt bitch tries that move. It'll guarantee the LANDSLIDE reelection of Trump and the House
going back to the GOP.


I know you liberals don't like it. Taxpayers (also known as conservatives) didn't like ANY nominee from KKKlinton and the
KENYAN VILLAGE IDIOT. But we aren't threatening anyone, burning cities or generally being childish ass holes just because
we didn't get our way.

Grow up, children. You look like MORONS.

Blatant hypocrisy.

Don't you expect your leaders to keep third word? To tell the truth? To stand by their convictions?

Look at Moscow Mitch for God's sake. Do you really wanna follow a weasley liar who's ethics are purely circumstantial? Do you want your kids to grow up acting like that? So used to lying to people that they can do it without blinking an eye? Constantly talking outta both sides of their faces?

Think about who you are supporting here, kids! This is just sad.

The Booman
09-22-2020, 09:14 PM
Blatant hypocrisy.

Don't you expect your leaders to keep third word? To tell the truth? To stand by their convictions?

Look at Moscow Mitch for God's sake. Do you really wanna follow a weasley liar who's ethics are purely circumstantial? Do you want your kids to grow up acting like that? So used to lying to people that they can do it without blinking an eye? Constantly talking outta both sides of their faces?

Think about who you are supporting here, kids! This is just sad.

So your argument is hypocrisy is an argument to stop the president of the United States from doing his job, from exercising his constitutional duties. "Mitch said this in 2012 and said this in 2020 therefore we cannot allow the president to do his job and full a vacant SCOTUS seat".

Brilliant.:rollseyes:

Captdon
09-23-2020, 09:22 AM
You are correct. He has the power. He still pulled a 180 though. That’s undeniable.

He did. That's how power can work.Hypocrisy is the norm in politics.

carolina73
09-23-2020, 09:26 AM
Blatant hypocrisy.

Don't you expect your leaders to keep third word? To tell the truth? To stand by their convictions?

Look at Moscow Mitch for God's sake. Do you really wanna follow a weasley liar who's ethics are purely circumstantial? Do you want your kids to grow up acting like that? So used to lying to people that they can do it without blinking an eye? Constantly talking outta both sides of their faces?

Think about who you are supporting here, kids! This is just sad.

What about your leaders? You realize they argued the opposite in 2016 and now have turned 180 degrees because they want a different outcome.

This is why I preach not to give excuses. McConnell only needed to to say that we are no going to vote on consent under these conditions. That's it. It was his choice. He acted for the GOP led Senate.

gamewell45
09-23-2020, 10:18 AM
Not really, this situation is not the same. Trump is not a lame duck President and the Senate Majority and WH are the same party.

He's a lame duck since there are no guarantees that he'll get elected.

hanger4
09-23-2020, 12:34 PM
He's a lame duck since there are no guarantees that he'll get elected.

Nope, a lame duck President is after his reelection failed or the end of second term.

gamewell45
09-23-2020, 05:24 PM
Nope, a lame duck President is after his reelection failed or the end of second term.

Okay, good point. Thanks for the clarificaton.

Crepitus
09-23-2020, 05:44 PM
So your argument is hypocrisy is an argument to stop the president of the United States from doing his job, from exercising his constitutional duties. "Mitch said this in 2012 and said this in 2020 therefore we cannot allow the president to do his job and full a vacant SCOTUS seat".

Brilliant.:rollseyes:

Wasn't Moscow Mitch saying that wasn't the proper way to do it just 4 years ago?

Was he lying then or is he lying now?

Inquiring minds want to know!

carolina73
09-23-2020, 06:03 PM
You are correct. He has the power. He still pulled a 180 though. That’s undeniable.

Yes it is deniable. It is not a lame duck president. The same party holds the Senate as the President.

If you can justify what teh Democrats did to Bork and Kavannaugh then we can certainly do this without any concern.
Go wallow in what your party did.

Peter1469
09-23-2020, 06:06 PM
Wasn't Moscow Mitch saying that wasn't the proper way to do it just 4 years ago?

Was he lying then or is he lying now?

Inquiring minds want to know!
Asked and answered.

jet57
09-23-2020, 07:39 PM
The president is merely doing his job.

I know the snowflake goose steppers are still pissed that Obama nominee Merrick was not given a hearing by the
Republican Senate. That was entirely the Senate's right, just as the rejection of Robert Bork to the Supreme Court
in 1987. Both were totally LEGAL Senate proceedings.

Don't get mad at the President, just because he's doing his $#@!ing job.
He IS going to nominate a very good candidate and the Senate will probably wind up confirming that justice, and
that will be that. President Trump even hinted the nominee will be a woman.

And NAZI PELOSI has actually threatened to IMPEACH Trump to prevent him from making a nomination. I'm PRAYING
that delusional brownshirt $#@! tries that move. It'll guarantee the LANDSLIDE reelection of Trump and the House
going back to the GOP.


I know you liberals don't like it. Taxpayers (also known as conservatives) didn't like ANY nominee from KKKlinton and the
KENYAN VILLAGE IDIOT. But we aren't threatening anyone, burning cities or generally being childish ass holes just because
we didn't get our way.

Grow up, children. You look like MORONS.

Well, here's my question: why are the Republicans doing a complete reversal from what they told Obama?

jet57
09-23-2020, 07:43 PM
Not really, this situation is not the same. Trump is not a lame duck President and the Senate Majority and WH are the same party.
A "lame duck" president excuse doesn't fly here. The situation is exactly the same. In fact the right took a lot longer to screw Obama around during an election year, wherein today we have election weeks. Graham, Mcconnell, Cruz and the rest of them are lying through their teeth and putting the screws to the majority of the country to satisfy their agenda.

I don't see how you can so offhandedly reconcile that.

jet57
09-23-2020, 07:45 PM
The Dems are acting like big babies. In a word, tricksters, pretending they would act differently. What politician told America, "if you like your plan, you can keep your plan?" For God's sake, take a pill.
Uh, noooo, the Dems are taking the Republicans at their word.

So, what you're communicating here is that the "word" of the right is truly no good and that's okay with you.

jet57
09-23-2020, 07:46 PM
No he's not. There is nothing to be blamed for. Trump is the president and he is doing his job. As is McConnell. What has happened in the past has nothing to do today.

Uh, Obama was the president; remember?

Peter1469
09-23-2020, 07:50 PM
A "lame duck" president excuse doesn't fly here. The situation is exactly the same. In fact the right took a lot longer to screw Obama around during an election year, wherein today we have election weeks. Graham, Mcconnell, Cruz and the rest of them are lying through their teeth and putting the screws to the majority of the country to satisfy their agenda.

I don't see how you can so offhandedly reconcile that.
No it isn't the same.

hanger4
09-23-2020, 08:13 PM
A "lame duck" president excuse doesn't fly here. The situation is exactly the same. In fact the right took a lot longer to screw Obama around during an election year, wherein today we have election weeks. Graham, Mcconnell, Cruz and the rest of them are lying through their teeth and putting the screws to the majority of the country to satisfy their agenda.

I don't see how you can so offhandedly reconcile that.

No, the situation isn't the same, as I said, Trump isn't a lame duck President, yet and the WH and Senate Majority are the same.

Do you honestly believe that if the Senate Majority in 2016 had been Democratic they wouldn't have replaced Scalia with Garland ??

Crepitus
09-23-2020, 08:18 PM
Asked and answered.

By who? When?

Which was it?

Then or now?

Don't you care that he's a liar?

Do you want to be associated with the party of lies?

You should renounce the party of lies and vote Democratic. Honesty helps you sleep better at night, makes you more friends, and keeps your heavenly ledger clearer.

hanger4
09-23-2020, 08:29 PM
By who? When?

Which was it?

Then or now?

Don't you care that he's a liar?

Do you want to be associated with the party of lies?

You should renounce the party of lies and vote Democratic. Honesty helps you sleep better at night, makes you more friends, and keeps your heavenly ledger clearer.

Yes, the party of lies, Bork, Thomas, Kavanaugh. Ignore some more Crepitus.

jet57
09-24-2020, 03:45 AM
No it isn't the same.


I don't see how they are not.

jet57
09-24-2020, 03:47 AM
No, the situation isn't the same, as I said, Trump isn't a lame duck President, yet and the WH and Senate Majority are the same.

Do you honestly believe that if the Senate Majority in 2016 had been Democratic they wouldn't have replaced Scalia with Garland ??

The lame duck thing is a dodge. Obama was president and yes a democratic senate would have passed Garland.

hanger4
09-24-2020, 04:00 AM
The lame duck thing is a dodge. Obama was president and yes a democratic senate would have passed Garland.

A "dodge", hardly. Two facts that clearly indicate a different situation.

And thanks for admitting the Democrats would have done the same as the Republicans are seemingly doing now.

Elections still have consequences.

stephenpe
09-24-2020, 05:05 AM
Don't blame President Trump (https://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/127169-Don-t-blame-President-Trump-for-replacing-Ruth-Buzzy-Ginsu)I think this encapsulates the entire presidency so far. Good point. The blameless president. Takes no responsibility except for all that he imagines he has done to MAGA.........LMAO

Peter1469
09-24-2020, 05:11 AM
I don't see how they are not.
That's fine.

That doesn't mean that it has not been posted by a couple of members several times.

We think it is different and listed the differences. In reality it doesn't matter. Its politics. To quote Harry Reid: "we won." (Meaning the Progs can't defeat the next Justice rising to the Court.)

DGUtley
09-24-2020, 05:50 AM
The lame duck thing is a dodge. Obama was president and yes a democratic senate would have passed Garland.

I doubt that Mitch could've held his team together to deny Garland the seat if they voted. I always thought (and said here) that Mitch should've called a vote and kept his people in line.

Peter1469
09-24-2020, 05:58 AM
I doubt that Mitch could've held his team together to deny Garland the seat if they voted. I always thought (and said here) that Mitch should've called a vote and kept his people in line.
I saw no reason for Mitch to chance a yes vote. Don't seek political power if you are afraid to use it.

jet57
09-24-2020, 04:20 PM
That's fine.

That doesn't mean that it has not been posted by a couple of members several times.

We think it is different and listed the differences. In reality it doesn't matter. Its politics. To quote Harry Reid: "we won." (Meaning the Progs can't defeat the next Justice rising to the Court.)

What others have posted on this means nothing to me. What means something to me and a majority of Americans is that Mcconnell and the rest of the cabal lied through their teeth. They cheated to deprive one president of a pick and are now cheating yet again to get their pick rushed through before Nov 3rd.

The Republican leadership is as reprehensible as Trump.

jet57
09-24-2020, 04:21 PM
A "dodge", hardly. Two facts that clearly indicate a different situation.

And thanks for admitting the Democrats would have done the same as the Republicans are seemingly doing now.

Elections still have consequences.

There are no differences. It involves two sitting presidents.

jet57
09-24-2020, 04:25 PM
I doubt that Mitch could've held his team together to deny Garland the seat if they voted. I always thought (and said here) that Mitch should've called a vote and kept his people in line.
I agree with you there. Instead Mitch chose to show everybody what he's really like. I think he's gonna retire after the election.

hanger4
09-24-2020, 04:43 PM
There are no differences. It involves two sitting presidents.

You can ignore it if you wish, but Obama was lame duck, Trump is not and Obama had a Republican majority in the Senate to his Democratic administration and the Republican Trump administration has a Republican Senate majority.

Those are major differences jet57 and again thanks for admitting the Democrats would have done the same as the Republicans are seemingly doing now.

jet57
09-24-2020, 04:48 PM
You can ignore it if you wish, but Obama was lame duck, Trump is not and Obama had a Republican majority in the Senate to his Democratic administration and the Republican Trump administration has a Republican Senate majority.

Those are major differences jet57 and again thanks for admitting the Democrats would have done the same as the Republicans are seemingly doing now.
First I don't remember saying that the Dems would do the same. I remember saying that Dems in a majority would have installed Garland under Obama: they had months.

Secondly, there is nothing in law anywhere that says that a lame duck president cannot appoint a justice to the supreme court. Mcconnell and the cabal are cheating again and you are backing the cheating as well.

That's what's wrong with Republicans.

hanger4
09-24-2020, 05:12 PM
First I don't remember saying that the Dems would do the same. I remember saying that Dems in a majority would have installed Garland under Obama: they had months.

Secondly, there is nothing in law anywhere that says that a lame duck president cannot appoint a justice to the supreme court. Mcconnell and the cabal are cheating again and you are backing the cheating as well.

That's what's wrong with Republicans.

*I remember saying that Dems in a majority would have installed Garland under Obama*

That's what I said jet57, if it had been a Dem Senate majority Garland would have been appointed. Your "months" screed is irrelevant.

*Secondly, there is nothing in law anywhere that says that a lame duck president cannot appoint a justice to the supreme court.*

Right you are, the only thing important to a President's nomination is 'advise and consent', Obama was advised consent for his nominee is denied.

"cheating" ?? what a joke, Bork, Thomas, Kavanaugh.

jet57
09-24-2020, 05:44 PM
*I remember saying that Dems in a majority would have installed Garland under Obama*

That's what I said jet57, if it had been a Dem Senate majority Garland would have been appointed. Your "months" screed is irrelevant.

*Secondly, there is nothing in law anywhere that says that a lame duck president cannot appoint a justice to the supreme court.*

Right you are, the only thing important to a President's nomination is 'advise and consent', Obama was advised consent for his nominee is denied.

"cheating" ?? what a joke, Bork, Thomas, Kavanaugh.

Your argument has not got a leg to stand on.

hanger4
09-24-2020, 05:45 PM
Your argument has not got a leg to stand on.

Yet you refuted nothing.

jet57
09-24-2020, 05:58 PM
Yet you refuted nothing.

There's nothing to refute! You're trying to process BS like it means something. So if you can't produce a law that validates your nonsense, which you say you can't, then you have no argument to begin with other than "nuh uhh".

hanger4
09-24-2020, 06:25 PM
There's nothing to refute! You're trying to process BS like it means something. So if you can't produce a law that validates your nonsense, which you say you can't, then you have no argument to begin with other than "nuh uhh".

The situation is different jet57, I factually substantiated that.

The only law that applies is the Constitution. The President "shall" nominate and with the Senate's "advice and consent" the President can appoint.

jet57
09-24-2020, 06:47 PM
The situation is different jet57, I factually substantiated that.

The only law that applies is the Constitution. The President "shall" nominate and with the Senate's "advice and consent" the President can appoint.
You substantiated nothing; you have no competent argument, so you are now resorting to trolling again.

/

ripmeister
09-24-2020, 07:50 PM
You can ignore it if you wish, but Obama was lame duck, Trump is not and Obama had a Republican majority in the Senate to his Democratic administration and the Republican Trump administration has a Republican Senate majority.

Those are major differences jet57 and again thanks for admitting the Democrats would have done the same as the Republicans are seemingly doing now.
This argument has become tiresome. What you say may be true but the bottom line is what McConnel said, that being let the people decide since it’s an election year. That is irrefutable.

hanger4
09-24-2020, 07:55 PM
You substantiated nothing; you have no competent argument, so you are now resorting to trolling again.

/

Here's what you said that's been refuted;


A "lame duck" president excuse doesn't fly here. The situation is exactly the same.

carolina73
09-24-2020, 08:05 PM
This argument has become tiresome. What you say may be true but the bottom line is what McConnel said, that being let the people decide since it’s an election year. That is irrefutable.

We did 3-1/2 years ago and our choice is still President and will not be out of office until January. We decided and we decided for a 4 year term.

hanger4
09-24-2020, 08:05 PM
This argument has become tiresome. What you say may be true but the bottom line is what McConnel said, that being let the people decide since it’s an election year. That is irrefutable.

The people did decide.

The Booman
09-24-2020, 08:21 PM
This argument has become tiresome. What you say may be true but the bottom line is what McConnel said, that being let the people decide since it’s an election year. That is irrefutable.

Do you know what is also irrefutable? Filling a court vacancy is the president's job during all four years of his term. Give it up, sunshine.

ripmeister
09-26-2020, 08:22 PM
Do you know what is also irrefutable? Filling a court vacancy is the president's job during all four years of his term. Give it up, sunshine.
Yep. Of course I’m not talking about the president. Why do you all keep diverting to that, Sunshine.

carolina73
09-26-2020, 09:40 PM
This argument has become tiresome. What you say may be true but the bottom line is what McConnel said, that being let the people decide since it’s an election year. That is irrefutable.

Not a lame Duck President and the same party is in the Senate and the White House.

But in reality they Senate Majority leader did what he wanted to do because he could. Just like Pelosi deemed the ACA passed and Reid held the vote before Scott Brown could be seated. Just like Reid lied about Romney's tax returns and then laughed about it when he got caught ans said "It worked, didn't it"

So we are doing this and you are not going to stop us because we are doing what we want to do. We have the Senate. Just like you did. Pretending the Democrats are worried about rules is just a laugher.

So get ready. We will pretend to listen to the crap that the Dems in the Senate will make up. I heard Bill Maher talk about the wrong religion tonight when he described Pentecostal Charismatics instead of Catholic Charismatics .

There will be no apologies from either side when this is done. Just more false claims by Democrats that they would never have done that.

The Booman
09-26-2020, 09:45 PM
This argument has become tiresome. What you say may be true but the bottom line is what McConnel said, that being let the people decide since it’s an election year. That is irrefutable.

let's put this to bed then. Should the president do his job and nominate someone or not do his duty because of what McConnell said a few years ago when Trump was not in office? Which is it?

ripmeister
09-26-2020, 10:04 PM
let's put this to bed then. Should the president do his job and nominate someone or not do his duty because of what McConnell said a few years ago when Trump was not in office? Which is it?

like I’ve said several times with regard to this issue POTUS is not out of line. This has nothing to do with Trump. It’s about McConnel and what he said his position was.

Peter1469
09-27-2020, 05:58 AM
Not a lame Duck President and the same party is in the Senate and the White House.

But in reality they Senate Majority leader did what he wanted to do because he could. Just like Pelosi deemed the ACA passed and Reid held the vote before Scott Brown could be seated. Just like Reid lied about Romney's tax returns and then laughed about it when he got caught ans said "It worked, didn't it"

So we are doing this and you are not going to stop us because we are doing what we want to do. We have the Senate. Just like you did. Pretending the Democrats are worried about rules is just a laugher.

So get ready. We will pretend to listen to the crap that the Dems in the Senate will make up. I heard Bill Maher talk about the wrong religion tonight when he described Pentecostal Charismatics instead of Catholic Charismatics .

There will be no apologies from either side when this is done. Just more false claims by Democrats that they would never have done that.

Bingo.

ripmeister
09-27-2020, 01:47 PM
Not a lame Duck President and the same party is in the Senate and the White House.

But in reality they Senate Majority leader did what he wanted to do because he could. Just like Pelosi deemed the ACA passed and Reid held the vote before Scott Brown could be seated. Just like Reid lied about Romney's tax returns and then laughed about it when he got caught ans said "It worked, didn't it"

So we are doing this and you are not going to stop us because we are doing what we want to do. We have the Senate. Just like you did. Pretending the Democrats are worried about rules is just a laugher.

So get ready. We will pretend to listen to the crap that the Dems in the Senate will make up. I heard Bill Maher talk about the wrong religion tonight when he described Pentecostal Charismatics instead of Catholic Charismatics .

There will be no apologies from either side when this is done. Just more false claims by Democrats that they would never have done that.

This seems to be an end justifies the means argument with a whataboutism regarding what the D’s have done or is posited that they would do. My focus has simply been on McConnel and what he said.