Senate
Minority Leader Chuck Schumer in 2013: "We much prefer the risk of up
or down votes and majority rule [on judicial nominees], than the risk
of continued total obstruction. That's the bottom line no matter who's
in power."
Schumer now: "The
irresistible,
immutable logic is, if the nominee doesn't get 60 [votes], you change
the nominee, not the rules."
Senator
Tim
Kaine in October 2016: "If [Republicans] think they're going to
stonewall the filling of [the SCOTUS] vacancy or other vacancies, then
a Democratic Senate majority will say, 'We're not going to let you
thwart the law.' And so we will change the Senate rules to uphold the
law."
Kaine now: "The way I look
at it
is the Supreme Court is the only position that requires you to get to a
60-vote threshold, which means it mandates that there be some
bipartisanship and that is appropriate. Life tenure. Highest court in
the land. Should have to get to 60 votes." And, "I will oppose his
nomination."
Senator
Elizabeth Warren in November 2013: "If Republicans continue to
filibuster these highly qualified nominees for no reason than to
nullify the president's constitutional authority, then senators not
only have the right to change the filibuster, senators have a duty to
change the filibuster rules." And she also said, "We need to call out
these filibusters for what they are — naked attempts to nullify the
results of the last presidential election."
Warren now: "I believe
Judge Gorsuch's nomination should be blocked."
Not
that reporting any of this matters; the USofA having jumped the shark. |
Worse than liars; the three you named are commie scum. Around here our Sen. Kaine is "Kommie Kaine". He probably has a criminal bent as well, seeing as how he allied himself with a known criminal - Herself Clinton - as her VP nominee.
ReplyDeleteLt. Col. Gen. Tailgunner dick
At this time, I think the proper method is the nuclear option. After that, I think at least one of the Democrat senators should be tarred and feathered.
ReplyDelete