Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, May 11, 2020

Eric Lutz: During Obama's final year, Republicans refused to give his Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland, a hearing. "This vacancy should not be filled by this lame duck president," Mitch McConnell said at the time, arguing it would be improper to consider a nomination in an election year. "The American people are perfectly capable of having their say on this issue, so let's give them a voice let's let the American people decide."

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

They are such total losers. Obama should have filled that vacancy by recess appointment and fought it out with them. He didn't stand up at the time. The repubs have no principals only the will to get their way whatever it takes. The Dems should be nut cutters too.

#1 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2020-05-10 04:31 PM | Reply

There's never been a case to not nominate SC justices during an election year.

McConnell did what he did to block Obama.

McConnell is worse for the nation than Trump.

Trump has the excuse of being a dumb fffk.

McConnell is just evil.

#2 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-05-10 04:35 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

I mean... This was never in doubt. Nobody needed an article to expose the rampant hypocrisy and flagrant disregard of Constitutional by the GOP over USA party.

Do you want to get Eberly? Because this is how you get Ebelry.

#3 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-05-10 04:39 PM | Reply

Obama should have filled that vacancy by recess appointment and fought it out with them. He didn't stand up at the time.

The blame is on Obama.

McConnell blocked him and Obama decided to punt it rather than fight.

Maybe it was overconfidence in Hillary.

Maybe it was in order to motivate voters.

Regardless.

Due to McConnell's actions and Trump's inactions. The GOP picked up to Supreme Court Justices.

One is a well know rapist whose only qualification is complete loyalty to Donald Trump.

#4 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-05-10 04:39 PM | Reply

Do you want to get Eberly? Because this is how you get Ebelry.

Here. I'll channel him:

"Talking about GOP corruption will cause more people to vote for the GOP. Both parties are the same. Nothing can be done. I voted for Hillary."

#5 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-05-10 04:42 PM | Reply

Spare us your faux outrage, Clownshack.

#6 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-05-10 04:43 PM | Reply

I prefer fox outrage.

It's fair and balanced.

#7 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-05-10 04:44 PM | Reply

There was nothing Obama could have done because there was never a recess. The Senate has pro-forma sessions that keep a formal recess from being declared.

Obama fought this practice and was defeated in the SCOTUS. There is no language in the Constitution that would have allowed Obama or any President to circumvent what Mitch McConnell did. The Founders never anticipated that a future Senate leader would turn the absence of a formal time line for constitutional advise and consent into a pocket veto where the nominee never even gets any Senate vote, be it committee or the whole body.

Were you asleep when all of this was going on?

#8 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-05-10 04:47 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

He's being fair and balanced.

Some things have just gotta be Obama's fault, you know.

#9 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-05-10 04:48 PM | Reply

Obama fought this practice and was defeated in the SCOTUS.

Court strikes down recess appointments: In Plain English

#10 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-05-10 04:49 PM | Reply

There is no language in the Constitution that would have allowed Obama or any President to circumvent what Mitch McConnell did.

He could have made a bigger stink about.

Garnered public support.

Fought for Garland.

I'm pretty sure Obama was hoping the SC nomination would help motivate voters.

#11 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-05-10 04:51 PM | Reply

Some things have just gotta be Obama's fault, you know.

I understand McConnell was blocking him.

I don't think Obama pursued all his options.

#12 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-05-10 04:52 PM | Reply

Obama should have filled that vacancy by recess appointment and fought it out with them. #1 | POSTED BY EFFETEPOSER

I agree, even without a recess, he should have just appointed him and let the courts fight it out.

#13 | Posted by TFDNihilist at 2020-05-11 04:04 AM | Reply

"Were you asleep when all of this was going on?"

Thanks Tony, I was hoping someone would bring up that fact.

"I don't think Obama pursued all his options."

He had no options.

#14 | Posted by danni at 2020-05-11 09:38 AM | Reply

The blame is on Obama.
McConnell blocked him and Obama decided to punt it rather than fight.

#4 | POSTED BY CLOWNSHACK AT 2020-05-10 04:39 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Maybe Obama fought by bringing it to the people and the people just didn't feel like getting off their butts. Instead they called the Dem candidate names because they wanted to be cool.

#15 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2020-05-11 10:01 AM | Reply

This would be some poetic justice: Trump wins re-election but the GOP loses the Senate. A couple of months later a SCOTUS vacancy. Schumer walks into McConnell's office with a list of judges the Senate majority will consider and they are ALL hyper-partisan left-wing judicial activists.

Of course Trump won't nominate anyone on that list which means the seat may stay open for years. If that happens you will NOT see me rip the Democrats one iota. It will simply be the natural and understandable response to the whole Garland thing.

By all means, Hans this post.

#16 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-05-11 11:48 AM | Reply

What's the point of your drivel? Dems don't nominate political partisans to the courts. They're doing what's best for the whole country.

#17 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2020-05-11 01:19 PM | Reply

ALL hyper-partisan left-wing judicial activists.

You're still clueless.

Merrick Garland is who democrats try to nominate. Democrats are the moderate party.

The left wing doesn't have a voice.

We have AOC and Bernie and they're demonized by Democrats.

Jeff,

I've explained this to you before. You're unwilling to accept the truth.

Try reading this again:

You opinions are so far to the right, moderates seem like the left to you.

#18 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-05-11 01:30 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"If that happens you will NOT see me rip the Democrats one iota."

^
JeffJ bravely dreams up hypotheticals to rationalize his continued support for the GOP's politicization and weaponization of the DOJ.

#19 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-05-11 01:31 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"It will simply be the natural and understandable response to the whole Garland thing."

Two wrong make a right, when you're Deplorable.

#20 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-05-11 01:32 PM | Reply

they called the Dem candidate names because they wanted to be cool.
#15 | POSTED BY BRUCEBANNER

You should have this butthurt of yours engraved on your tombstone.

#21 | Posted by ClownShack at 2020-05-11 01:32 PM | Reply

Okay, I give.

What should Obama had done?

#22 | Posted by brass30 at 2020-05-11 01:53 PM | Reply

At this point, if the GOP were to try and make a SC nomination, the backlash would be beyond anything we've seen thus far. Having said that, I do believe that many GOPhers are arrogant enough, hypocritical enough and have enough hubris to try and do it anyway if the opportunity arises.

#23 | Posted by moder8 at 2020-05-11 01:57 PM | Reply

They'll easily make the case that Trump has only served one term, and could serve two.

Hence, he should get to make a choice regardless of the time period.

With Obama, he was leaving office no matter what. You were having a brand new president.

How was that lame attempt?

#24 | Posted by brass30 at 2020-05-11 02:03 PM | Reply

Of course Trump won't nominate anyone on that list which means the seat may stay open for years. If that happens you will NOT see me rip the Democrats one iota. It will simply be the natural and understandable response to the whole Garland thing.

WTF? Why would you even begin to rip Democrats? It would be Republicans AGAIN holding up the process........

#25 | Posted by brass30 at 2020-05-11 02:09 PM | Reply

You should have this butthurt of yours engraved on your tombstone.

#21 | POSTED BY CLOWNSHACK AT 2020-05-11 01:32 PM | REPLY

My dog whistle works. Look, I found a Shih Tzu. Bark little one. Bark.

#26 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2020-05-11 02:41 PM | Reply

"The blame is on Obama."

The blame is on you for not giving Obama a white horse to ride into town on and solve all the nation's problems.
Since that's clearly what you were expecting.

The blame is squarely on the GOP, you're just too much of an Enlightened Centrist to see that.

#27 | Posted by snoofy at 2020-05-11 03:19 PM | Reply

This would be some poetic justice: Trump wins re-election but the GOP loses the Senate. A couple of months later a SCOTUS vacancy. Schumer walks into McConnell's office with a list of judges the Senate majority will consider and they are ALL hyper-partisan left-wing judicial activists.
Of course Trump won't nominate anyone on that list which means the seat may stay open for years. If that happens you will NOT see me rip the Democrats one iota. It will simply be the natural and understandable response to the whole Garland thing.
By all means, Hans this post.

#16 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

I'll give you that you've been consistent in your response to this issue.

That said, the thread is about appointing someone during an election year. And this is how your party operates: whatever suits their agenda.

#28 | Posted by Sycophant at 2020-05-11 03:38 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2020 World Readable

Drudge Retort