Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NBC News)   And here we go: McConnell intends to fill RBG's empty seat before it even has time to get cold   (nbcnews.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, Supreme Court of the United States, Democratic Party, United States Senate, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, George W. Bush, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Antonin Scalia, Bill Clinton  
•       •       •

3461 clicks; posted to Politics » on 19 Sep 2020 at 6:50 AM (9 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



485 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2020-09-19 12:28:22 PM  
And this is surprising? As soon as it hit the news the Trumpublicans had to hurry their furious masturbation so that they can get ready to install Pickle as their next Supreme Court Justice.
 
2020-09-19 12:43:13 PM  

qorkfiend: LurkLongAndProsper: qorkfiend: LurkLongAndProsper: OldRod: chuckles5: I'd like to see Pelosi initiate impeachment proceedings in the house. Let that be resolved before considering a replacement for Justice Ginsberg.

She'll never do it, but that would be awesome!

She'd never do it because it wouldn't accomplish shiat. Good lord people. This is a Nancy Pelosi free conflict. If you need to use a bogeyman Democrat to signal to everyone that the do-nothing democrats are the real problem here, at least use Chuck Schumer. What in the world makes you think McConnell would even acknowledge anything going on in the house?

Actually that sort of parliamentary trickery could work. The objective wouldn't be to actually get someone removed, it would be to force the Senate to waste time on it.

Did the first impeachment proceedings stop the senate from seating judges? I was under the impression that nothing really has this whole time excepting the brief holds individual republicans have put on the process. Is there an actual rule or law that halts traffic through the senate while an impeachment is happening?

Permanently? No, and no one said it did. For a small amount of time? Indeed yes.


Well that's fair enough then, impeach away. After a quick googling you guys are right. Blanche did agree to pause the judiciary committee hearings until after the impeachment. Of course, he'll just claim this impeachment is clearly political and ignore it out of hand, but still worth trying since there is precedent lol.

It's just my kneejerk response to roll my eyes when impeachment gets thrown about as a silver bullet. Don't get me wrong, if it ever will actually help I'm all for it. I just tend to lump it in with the "send the sergeant at arms" and "make them vote on it to embarrass them" posts. Both fine ideas on paper, both farts in the wind in practical terms. In this situation in any case. Making people vote on principled issues is a fine thing, just saying it won't ever stop the shameless from casting the votes to get what they want.
 
2020-09-19 12:48:27 PM  

Naido: You can't use a news flash tag, subby, for something that everyone knew 5 years ago


Yep, Obvious tag is more appropriate here.
 
2020-09-19 12:48:38 PM  
"The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president," Schumer tweeted, quoting McConnell, who made the same statement during Barack Obama's presidency after Justice Antonin Scalia died in 2016.

Democrats need to do more of this.
 
2020-09-19 12:53:16 PM  

Chevello: "The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president," Schumer tweeted, quoting McConnell, who made the same statement during Barack Obama's presidency after Justice Antonin Scalia died in 2016.

Democrats need to do more of this.


It remains to be seen if democrats have the balls to point out the things McConnell has said and done. But it's as Joe Biden says: desperate times call for desperate compromises.

At least, I think he said that
 
2020-09-19 12:59:15 PM  

EvilEgg: Yay, a new Justice picked by an impeached President who got a minority of the vote and confirmed by Senators who Represent the minority of the voters to enshrine opinions antithetical to the majority of the country.

Stupid has won. I don't know what we can do about it.

 
2020-09-19 1:11:23 PM  
Democrats should pledge to expand the courts if Mitch fills the seat before the election.
 
2020-09-19 1:12:51 PM  

GrizzlyPouch: Commander Lysdexic: GrizzlyPouch: Maynard G. Muskievote: Just a reminder that only about 750,000 goobers elect this farker. Tyranny of the minority, indeed.

He doesn't get to make decisions by himself.  Man you guys suck at understanding like....everything.


Hurr hurr 750k ppl in Kentucky get to decide who makes all the laws.

You are one dumb motherfarker.

This exactly what's wrong with the Democratic Party nowadays.

You guys say shiat like "you are dumb" and think that means something.  Like it's an actual reasonable retort To a political opponent.  (It's the same thing as screaming RACIST all the time)

Monkeys flinging poop


You're just lying.  It deserves much worse than calling you dumb.  But we'd probably get a time out if we actually told you what we think.
 
2020-09-19 1:18:50 PM  
FFS in discussing Republicans rushing through a confirmation hearing in 44 days, Anderson Cooper just said "the Democrats, too, wanted to rush a SCOTUS nominee through confirmation in 2016." EIGHT MONTHS IS NOT RUSHING, NIMROD. Fortunately, this has stopped my urge to watch any more news.
 
2020-09-19 1:26:01 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: I hope they nominate the biggest anti-abortion/anti-woman/anti-gay/anti​-American asshole they can find.  Another Kavanaugh.  Rip open the national psyche right before the election.


This seems very possible, but they risk the resulting rage flipping the senate bigly no?
 
2020-09-19 1:26:18 PM  

mofa: FFS in discussing Republicans rushing through a confirmation hearing in 44 days, Anderson Cooper just said "the Democrats, too, wanted to rush a SCOTUS nominee through confirmation in 2016." EIGHT MONTHS IS NOT RUSHING, NIMROD. Fortunately, this has stopped my urge to watch any more news.


If Anderson Cooper said that then he is an idiot. Sometimes both sides are not bad.
 
2020-09-19 1:31:51 PM  

willwall: Chariset: willwall: They can get the best of both worlds by waiting until the election

But Trump has the patience and attention span of a toddler, plus he's almost certainly going to use the Court to contest the election results.  He wants a person in that seat NOW, so that he 'knows' that person will support him

Individual senators have the power here. If 4 senators decide that they won't confirm and stand firm it doesn't matter what McConnell and Trump want. McConnell is throwing up trial balloons. He'll back down if he has to.

My guess is they milk it for all it's worth, Trump spends a bunch of time talking about it on the trail, he floats names for weeks getting news cycles and he appoints someone on the eve of the election to get a big announcement. At risk senators use the election as an excuse but are careful to make it sound it's because of how busy they are and how it needs their full attention. If they lose they can then say that they are able to focus during the lame duck session and vote to confirm.


So everyone write their Senators? Demonstrate in front of the Senate? Maybe leave notes at their doors?
 
2020-09-19 1:47:01 PM  
Everyone take a breath. Chill for a second

First off, if you think that nominating a conservative somehow is part of Trump's master plan, may I point out that he is an incompetent boob. He has no master plan, hell just look to how he's handled EVER crisis of his presidency.  Also, how is a 6 to 3 majority somehow MORE important than a 5 to 3 if the election hits the SCOTUS?

So stop freaking out. I fully expect Trump to appoint another justice because he is an idiot. I think McConnell will be forced to go ahead with it. But it's a penny wise/pound foolish plan, and it would only confirm that they know they wont win in November.
Otherwise, why put vulnerable senators like Collins under more heat? And it a bad plan because it will get all democrats on board with stacking the court. They will lose their majority in the SCOTUS. If they sat on the seat, or even nominated Merrick Garland, they might defuse any notion of stacking the court and hold onto their SCOTUS plundered seats
 
hk5
2020-09-19 1:47:16 PM  
My message for the farking turtle:
From the Heart (I Hate You) - PSYCHOSTICK
Youtube oww5UWEeAO4
 
2020-09-19 1:57:27 PM  

mofa: FFS in discussing Republicans rushing through a confirmation hearing in 44 days, Anderson Cooper just said "the Democrats, too, wanted to rush a SCOTUS nominee through confirmation in 2016." EIGHT MONTHS IS NOT RUSHING, NIMROD. Fortunately, this has stopped my urge to watch any more news.


Wasn't it more like 10 months?
 
2020-09-19 1:59:05 PM  

Publikwerks: Everyone take a breath. Chill for a second

First off, if you think that nominating a conservative somehow is part of Trump's master plan, may I point out that he is an incompetent boob. He has no master plan, hell just look to how he's handled EVER crisis of his presidency.  Also, how is a 6 to 3 majority somehow MORE important than a 5 to 3 if the election hits the SCOTUS?

So stop freaking out. I fully expect Trump to appoint another justice because he is an idiot. I think McConnell will be forced to go ahead with it. But it's a penny wise/pound foolish plan, and it would only confirm that they know they wont win in November.
Otherwise, why put vulnerable senators like Collins under more heat? And it a bad plan because it will get all democrats on board with stacking the court. They will lose their majority in the SCOTUS. If they sat on the seat, or even nominated Merrick Garland, they might defuse any notion of stacking the court and hold onto their SCOTUS plundered seats


5-3 is a lot better than 6-3, because there's always a chance that Roberts will care about the optics enough not to act like a total party hack.

I also wouldn't assume that the Dems take the Senate. It's more likely than no that they don't.
 
2020-09-19 1:59:41 PM  

Publikwerks: Everyone take a breath. Chill for a second

First off, if you think that nominating a conservative somehow is part of Trump's master plan, may I point out that he is an incompetent boob. He has no master plan, hell just look to how he's handled EVER crisis of his presidency.  Also, how is a 6 to 3 majority somehow MORE important than a 5 to 3 if the election hits the SCOTUS?

So stop freaking out. I fully expect Trump to appoint another justice because he is an idiot. I think McConnell will be forced to go ahead with it. But it's a penny wise/pound foolish plan, and it would only confirm that they know they wont win in November.
Otherwise, why put vulnerable senators like Collins under more heat? And it a bad plan because it will get all democrats on board with stacking the court. They will lose their majority in the SCOTUS. If they sat on the seat, or even nominated Merrick Garland, they might defuse any notion of stacking the court and hold onto their SCOTUS plundered seats


If we were dealing with rational informed actors I would (maybe) agree with you.  But as you said they are idiots and will grab whatever is in front of them with no thought of the future or consequences.  We live in dangerous times.
 
2020-09-19 2:17:44 PM  
The worst kind of shoeburyness.
 
2020-09-19 2:23:41 PM  
I can't wait for the Hughes Amendment to be thrown out!  Wooooo!
 
2020-09-19 2:26:43 PM  

VanillaEnvelope: Publikwerks: Everyone take a breath. Chill for a second

First off, if you think that nominating a conservative somehow is part of Trump's master plan, may I point out that he is an incompetent boob. He has no master plan, hell just look to how he's handled EVER crisis of his presidency.  Also, how is a 6 to 3 majority somehow MORE important than a 5 to 3 if the election hits the SCOTUS?

So stop freaking out. I fully expect Trump to appoint another justice because he is an idiot. I think McConnell will be forced to go ahead with it. But it's a penny wise/pound foolish plan, and it would only confirm that they know they wont win in November.
Otherwise, why put vulnerable senators like Collins under more heat? And it a bad plan because it will get all democrats on board with stacking the court. They will lose their majority in the SCOTUS. If they sat on the seat, or even nominated Merrick Garland, they might defuse any notion of stacking the court and hold onto their SCOTUS plundered seats

5-3 is a lot better than 6-3, because there's always a chance that Roberts will care about the optics enough not to act like a total party hack.

I also wouldn't assume that the Dems take the Senate. It's more likely than no that they don't.


Ehh, I think that the justices, while they may not all agree on issues, they agree on how the system should work. I doubt most of them would act like party hacks. Thomas would be the only pure hack on the court.

I think the Dems take the senate, especially if the GOP goes forward with trying to fill RBG.
 
2020-09-19 2:34:04 PM  
Be honest, if the president was a Democrat, you lot would be cheering for an immediate nomination.  Trump and McConnell have no reason to wait if that's what they want to do.

Besides, after how the Democrats acted during the Kavanaugh circus, I'm out of farks to give.  You wanted full-court press politics, you get full-court press politics.
 
2020-09-19 2:45:59 PM  

State_College_Arsonist: Be honest, if the president was a Democrat, you lot would be cheering for an immediate nomination.  Trump and McConnell have no reason to wait if that's what they want to do.

Besides, after how the Democrats acted during the Kavanaugh circus, I'm out of farks to give.  You wanted full-court press politics, you get full-court press politics.


Merrick Garland, dipshiat.
 
2020-09-19 2:49:50 PM  
How is this any different than Obama's lame duck appointment of Sotomayor?
 
2020-09-19 2:50:30 PM  

State_College_Arsonist: Be honest, if the president was a Democrat, you lot would be cheering for an immediate nomination.  Trump and McConnell have no reason to wait if that's what they want to do.

Besides, after how the Democrats acted during the Kavanaugh circus, I'm out of farks to give.  You wanted full-court press politics, you get full-court press politics.


That's not the point. McConnell's farking hypocrisy is the point. But if you don't get that by now you never will.
 
2020-09-19 2:52:38 PM  

Mugato: Besides, after how the Democrats acted during the Kavanaugh circus, I'm out of farks to give. You wanted full-court press politics, you get full-court press politics.


You mean the frat boy who was literally crying during the "job interview"?
 
2020-09-19 2:55:08 PM  

paygun: How is this any different than Obama's lame duck appointment of Sotomayor?


What is this shiat about Obama being a "lame duck"? McConnell said that too.
 
2020-09-19 3:27:42 PM  

mofa: sniderman: (checks watch)

Huh, less than 24 hours before he went full-on bag of cocks. Impressive.

It was less than three hours.


And it's not even Halloween yet
 
2020-09-19 3:55:36 PM  
Just strap him to the roof and leave him there already. Naked corruption from the GOP is expected, that doesn't mean it should be tolerated.
 
2020-09-19 4:14:39 PM  

Shaggy_C: AnEasyTarget: Stephen Miller is getting the nomination

Or Ivanka.  Or Jared.

Book it. Done.

How about Sheriff Joe? Let's go full "burn down the Republic."


Please don't give DJT any ideas.
 
2020-09-19 4:36:22 PM  

kyuzokai: Beau's additional thoughts up now, for those of you who value his insight (or those that haven't yet been introduced.)

[iFrame https://www.youtube.com/embed/edRE7KNa​yPI?autoplay=1&widget_referrer=https%3​A%2F%2Fwww.fark.com&start=0&enablejsap​i=1&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fark.com&​widgetid=1]


This guy's 100% right. Thanks for introducing me to the channel.
 
2020-09-19 5:44:29 PM  

joe714: OldRod: vpb: EvilEgg: Yay, a new Justice picked by a President who got a minority of the vote and confirmed by Senators who Represent the minority of the voters to enshrine opinions antithetical to the majority of the country.

Stupid has won. I don't know what we can do about it.

Expand the size of the SC and pack the court.

I would imagine any attempt to expand the size of the court would be challenged and eventually end up in front of the Supreme Court.  If Trump has a 3rd pick on there, there won't be an expansion

The size of the court has already changed through history. It just takes an act of Congress. There's no judicable controversy if Congress passes something and the President signs it.


Which President are you thinking? Barr and McConnell have ever reason to ensure Biden is neither elected or takes office.

And now they'll have the Executive, Senate, and Judicial Branches all to do it. The House will flail impotently just like with the hundreds of bills they have passed to die on McConnell's desk.

Everyone needs to quit acting like these assholes are gonna do the "right thing". We're well past where they've shown they cannot be shamed by appeals to the rule of law.

Barr is literally arguing that Trump has the power of kings as Executive, and defending his farking rape case under the Presidental umbrella. You really think he's gonna sit back and let it happen? It's delusionally dangerous to do so.
 
2020-09-19 5:52:15 PM  
Hey Mitch:

Fark user imageView Full Size


You hypocritical piece of dogshiat.
 
2020-09-19 6:04:48 PM  

MechaPyx: Tyrone Slothrop: Biohazard Banana Suit: Smirky the Wonder Chimp: So how's that protest vote working out for you?

Who are you talking to, exactly? Jill Stein voters?

Democrats still can't handle the fact that Hillary ran a terrible campaign, and was generally a terrible choice for President. So they blame anything else they can think of, including the candidate who got less votes than "write in".

Look, when your choice is cake or death it's not a difficult choice. You don't stop to ask what kind of cake it is first.


you'd think after 50 years of cake or death they'd stup picking "shiat" as the flavor.
 
2020-09-19 6:05:56 PM  

Leishu: Did anybody actually expect him to not be a hypocrite about this? The dude has the moral fortitude of a wet noodle.


I wondered if he had a live feed of her heart monitor.
 
2020-09-19 6:39:57 PM  

Publikwerks: Everyone take a breath. Chill for a second

First off, if you think that nominating a conservative somehow is part of Trump's master plan, may I point out that he is an incompetent boob. He has no master plan, hell just look to how he's handled EVER crisis of his presidency.  Also, how is a 6 to 3 majority somehow MORE important than a 5 to 3 if the election hits the SCOTUS?

So stop freaking out. I fully expect Trump to appoint another justice because he is an idiot. I think McConnell will be forced to go ahead with it. But it's a penny wise/pound foolish plan, and it would only confirm that they know they wont win in November.
Otherwise, why put vulnerable senators like Collins under more heat? And it a bad plan because it will get all democrats on board with stacking the court. They will lose their majority in the SCOTUS. If they sat on the seat, or even nominated Merrick Garland, they might defuse any notion of stacking the court and hold onto their SCOTUS plundered seats


Why worry about a lifetime appointment to the supreme court, we have to worry about the presidency!

/ - _ -
 
Displayed 35 of 485 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.