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.

(KCCI Des Moines)   Grassley on potential Supreme Court nominee: "I get paid to do a job." No word on when he will repay his 2016 salary   (kcci.com) divider line
    More: Asinine, United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, Chuck Grassley, IOWA SENATOR CHUCK GRASSLEY, CHAIRMAN OF THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, Supreme Court of the United States, United States, President of the United States  
•       •       •

639 clicks; posted to Politics » on 24 Sep 2020 at 11:35 AM (4 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



30 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2020-09-24 9:10:05 AM  
"I get paid to do a job."

by whom is what is in question
 
2020-09-24 9:24:04 AM  
And that job is....
 
2020-09-24 9:33:37 AM  

Alphax: And that job is....


...obstruction.

Except when it's not.
 
2020-09-24 10:13:27 AM  

Alphax: And that job is....


Not a huge fan of Chuck, and I really want the winner of this election to pick the next Justice, however, Grassley isn't chairman of the committee, so he's just saying he's not going to boycott any hearing.  Since he's actually been less than enthusiastic about rushing this, I'm fine with him being there.  Hell, at least he's in favor of having hearings - as opposed to the "We don't need them let's just vote now - there's an election to steal!" wing of the GOP.

Grassley isn't a good guy, but he is a process guy.  With him, it will be best to let Donnie break the process enough for Grassley to lose it.
 
2020-09-24 10:29:45 AM  
It's just so brazen
 
2020-09-24 10:31:32 AM  

TommyDeuce: Alphax: And that job is....

Not a huge fan of Chuck, and I really want the winner of this election to pick the next Justice, however, Grassley isn't chairman of the committee, so he's just saying he's not going to boycott any hearing.  Since he's actually been less than enthusiastic about rushing this, I'm fine with him being there.  Hell, at least he's in favor of having hearings - as opposed to the "We don't need them let's just vote now - there's an election to steal!" wing of the GOP.

Grassley isn't a good guy, but he is a process guy.  With him, it will be best to let Donnie break the process enough for Grassley to lose it.


He wasn't a process guy in 2016. The process answer would be to give Garland a hearing, grill him publicly over every left-of-Mussolini ruling he'd made, and then reject his nomination with a vote.

All official nominations, regardless of which party is in power, should include language that says something like "should the Senate decline to initiate the hearing process within 60 days of this nomination, the Executive Branch will accept this as a waiver of the Senate's powers under Article II Section 2 and the nominee shall be immediately sworn into office" or similar.

Checks and balances only work if they're actually used.
 
2020-09-24 11:41:03 AM  
That's not very far off from:

"We were only following orders."
 
2020-09-24 11:41:47 AM  
We know what you get paid to do, you farking vampire.
 
2020-09-24 11:42:09 AM  

clkeagle: TommyDeuce: Alphax: And that job is....

Not a huge fan of Chuck, and I really want the winner of this election to pick the next Justice, however, Grassley isn't chairman of the committee, so he's just saying he's not going to boycott any hearing.  Since he's actually been less than enthusiastic about rushing this, I'm fine with him being there.  Hell, at least he's in favor of having hearings - as opposed to the "We don't need them let's just vote now - there's an election to steal!" wing of the GOP.

Grassley isn't a good guy, but he is a process guy.  With him, it will be best to let Donnie break the process enough for Grassley to lose it.

He wasn't a process guy in 2016. The process answer would be to give Garland a hearing, grill him publicly over every left-of-Mussolini ruling he'd made, and then reject his nomination with a vote.

All official nominations, regardless of which party is in power, should include language that says something like "should the Senate decline to initiate the hearing process within 60 days of this nomination, the Executive Branch will accept this as a waiver of the Senate's powers under Article II Section 2 and the nominee shall be immediately sworn into office" or similar.

Checks and balances only work if they're actually used.


guys hes just following orders you guys
 
2020-09-24 11:42:21 AM  
Protecting and defending the country from all enemies, foreign and domestic, is part of your job, Senator. Do that.
 
2020-09-24 11:42:26 AM  
Fark Grasshole, his breath reeks of the chaos goblin's shoe polish.
 
2020-09-24 11:42:36 AM  
Open your eyes, Grassely, you squinty old c*nt.
 
2020-09-24 11:44:32 AM  
How about those 500 bills sitting on your foreman's desk?
 
2020-09-24 11:44:46 AM  

Barricaded Gunman: Open your eyes, Grassely, you squinty old c*nt.


When 900 years old you reach, look less squinty you will not.
 
2020-09-24 11:45:04 AM  
Actually, he's there to fark spiders.
 
2020-09-24 11:46:57 AM  

clkeagle: TommyDeuce: Alphax: And that job is....

Not a huge fan of Chuck, and I really want the winner of this election to pick the next Justice, however, Grassley isn't chairman of the committee, so he's just saying he's not going to boycott any hearing.  Since he's actually been less than enthusiastic about rushing this, I'm fine with him being there.  Hell, at least he's in favor of having hearings - as opposed to the "We don't need them let's just vote now - there's an election to steal!" wing of the GOP.

Grassley isn't a good guy, but he is a process guy.  With him, it will be best to let Donnie break the process enough for Grassley to lose it.

He wasn't a process guy in 2016. The process answer would be to give Garland a hearing, grill him publicly over every left-of-Mussolini ruling he'd made, and then reject his nomination with a vote.

All official nominations, regardless of which party is in power, should include language that says something like "should the Senate decline to initiate the hearing process within 60 days of this nomination, the Executive Branch will accept this as a waiver of the Senate's powers under Article II Section 2 and the nominee shall be immediately sworn into office" or similar.

Checks and balances only work if they're actually used.


And here's the danger there. A true monster, just for fun let's say an actual member of the KKK, and it's someone that Trump wants gets nominated. Lindsay doesn't want to have to make his members have to vote for him, so he holds off for the sixty days so Trump can appoint the guy and Lindsay can say, "I didn't want to, but that's the rule." And more importantly a number of GOP senators can say, "I never would have voted for him."
 
2020-09-24 11:49:51 AM  
FUN FACT: Slurping Trump taint issn't what you're being paid to do, Chuck. Do that on your own time. Or just... don't.
 
2020-09-24 11:50:22 AM  
It's been a 40 year journey - and Grassley has witnessed and aided it the entire time. Does anyone really think any of these guys are going to give up now? At the precipice of completion? Over some moral construct or conscience??

They know that they're done as a party going forward, so now is the time to lock in their minority party power as permanent. Scary times in the USA.
 
2020-09-24 11:52:08 AM  

RasIanI: It's been a 40 year journey - and Grassley has witnessed and aided it the entire time. Does anyone really think any of these guys are going to give up now? At the precipice of completion? Over some moral construct or conscience??

They know that they're done as a party going forward, so now is the time to lock in their minority party power as permanent. Scary times in the USA.


Nothing is permanent.
 
2020-09-24 11:53:14 AM  
Republican Paystub Calculator.

https://www.google.com/search?q=rubels​+to+usd
 
2020-09-24 11:53:38 AM  

meat0918: RasIanI: It's been a 40 year journey - and Grassley has witnessed and aided it the entire time. Does anyone really think any of these guys are going to give up now? At the precipice of completion? Over some moral construct or conscience??

They know that they're done as a party going forward, so now is the time to lock in their minority party power as permanent. Scary times in the USA.

Nothing is permanent.


Well - they seem to think that they can - and are actively trying.
 
2020-09-24 12:09:52 PM  
Yes, we all know Putin pays you to betray your country, you crusty old f*cker.
 
2020-09-24 12:13:27 PM  
Fine, Democrats can say the same thing while adding two new states and some more justices, and republicans can just get over it.
 
2020-09-24 12:21:57 PM  
Yes, Republicans are hypocrites, how is this even remotely news.
 
2020-09-24 12:25:58 PM  

Alphax: And that job is....


Stigginit
 
2020-09-24 12:31:40 PM  

Barricaded Gunman: Open your eyes, Grassely, you squinty old c*nt.


It's hard to see through the flag.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-24 12:39:12 PM  
GOP: Heads I win. Tails you fist your asshole.
 
2020-09-24 12:41:03 PM  

meat0918: RasIanI: It's been a 40 year journey - and Grassley has witnessed and aided it the entire time. Does anyone really think any of these guys are going to give up now? At the precipice of completion? Over some moral construct or conscience??

They know that they're done as a party going forward, so now is the time to lock in their minority party power as permanent. Scary times in the USA.

Nothing is permanent.



It's gonna last long enough to where climate change goes far beyond the point of no return and no political revolution is gonna fix billions of refugees moving around the globe to pack into the few hospital spots left. I'd call that pretty permanent.
 
2020-09-24 12:42:56 PM  
Another reason why congress shouldn't be "paid".
 
2020-09-24 1:37:41 PM  

It's Bensane Garrison!: Barricaded Gunman: Open your eyes, Grassely, you squinty old c*nt.

It's hard to see through the flag.

[Fark user image image 377x263]


Profiles in Republican courage.
 
Displayed 30 of 30 comments

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.