Good answer by Trump when he learned about RGB’s death. Classy is not what he usually does, no even by a long shot, but “an amazing woman, whether you agree with her or not, an amazing woman who led an amazing life” was surprising.
He maybe was doing cartwheels in the plane, but, good answer.
You know, I remember how some right-wing types were suggesting, hell, outright saying that Obama had Scalia whacked. And we all know how projection is such a thing with Republicans. Just making observations.
He’s not selfless; he just isn’t a unique figure in the GOP. If Trump and a majority of senators want to fill the seat they’ll push him aside.
9 posts were merged into an existing topic: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died. - Oh, shit
Grassley’s comments were “If I’m leading the judiciary committee, I wouldn’t take up a replacement”. It’s a meaningless statement today since Grassley doesn’t chair the Judiciary committee, Graham does. And Graham will do whatever gives the GOP the most power, morals, ethics or hypocrisy be damned.
I wouldn’t place much hope in Grassley not voting for a replacement.
Let’s keep our heads. It’s always a new river you step into.
Aren’t there delaying tactics good for 46 days? It seems so small a window for the rebupkis to work in.
I know! What would they do if they were us?
sorry, I think I accidentally closed this thread a couple of minutes ago. That was just a mistake on my part. I’m still trying to learn the ropes. It should be open again.
I, for one, am excited. We have a definite perjurer and probable rapist on the court. I’m really wondering how they are going to top that? Charlie Manson is dead, so he can’t be appointed. Maybe that Scum-bag cop who… Oh, never mind. I’m drinking.
Tom Cotton wanted to sic the military on protestors. He sounds like a good choice. /s
Or so furious that every one of them turns out.
The only reason I’m not more certain to vote than I was before – whether McConnell tries to call the vote before or after the election – is that I couldn’t be more certain to vote than I was before.
A massive thank you to the mod that corrected my spelling of her last name. I was working through a blur of tears when I typed it. 
Name one other country where the death of a judge warrants its own ZOMG! freakout thread.
But “Relax, guys. 'Merikuh’s got this. Been there, done that.”
'k.
Somebody ought to tell The Donald that nominating somebody now is proof that he’s scared he’s going to lose the election.
One of my senators, Marco Rubio, had this to say:
"And I agree with that. There’s been precedent established over 80 years that, in the last year, especially in the last 11 months, you do not have a lame-duck president make a lifetime appointment to the highest court on the land – in the land.
So, we are going to have election in November. This vacancy is going to be an issue in this election. The voters are going to get to weigh in and then they will choose a new president. And then that new president, which I expect will be me, will then be able to nominate someone and work with the Senate to confirm them." Source
"And I agree with that decision.
The precedent’s been set. It’s been over 80 years now since, in the last year of the last term of a sitting president, there isn’t Supreme Court nominees, 80 years. And there’s a reason for that.
And the reason is that the next president should have a chance to fill that void, not someone who’s never going to answer to the electorate again. We’re going to have an election this year. And in the election, people are going to get to choose a candidate for president.
And part of that vote will be, what kind of nominee do you want, because we’re going to be asked now who – what kind of person or what kind of justice would you put on the Supreme Court? So, let the voters weigh in, in November, and then we will have an appointment. The court can function with eight justices. It does it all the time." Source
Rubio was being very misleading since I don’t believe any lame-duck presidents had the opportunity, in their last year, to nominate someone to a vacant seat on the Supreme Court. LBJ did nominate Justice Fortas to take Chief Justice Warren’s place, and Homer Thornberry to take Fortas’s place, but public outcry forced him to withdraw the nominations. Warren stayed on and his seat didn’t actually go vacant. And former Justice Kennedy was nominated by Reagan less than a year before the 1988 election (nominated Nov 30 1987, election day was Nov 8 1988) and confirmed with 11 months left in Reagan’s presidency.
It’s not like I trust Rubio’s word though. He was supposed to retire from the Senate after his presidential bid.
Unfortunately, I’m 100% sure my other senator, Rick “sue-me-if-you-don’t-like-midnight-appointments” Scott, is in favor of letting Trump nominate the new Justice.
~Max
There is no way he wrote that.
If I win the Presidency, we will swamp Justice Ginsburg with real judges and real legal opinions!
Even the
and
Editorial Boards condemned Justice Ginsburg for her ethical and legal breach. What was she thinking?
Jul 12, 2016 11:54:40 PM Justice Ginsburg of the U.S. Supreme Court has embarrassed all by making very dumb political statements about me. Her mind is shot - resign!
(Since been deleted.)
Source Trump Twitter Archive
Merikuh’s got freedumz. #RBGStrong!
Christ, I was thinking that #rbgstrong was a joke hashtag. But, it’s a thing on twitter now.
4 more months plus change. You just know if the current occupant of the Oval Office loses, there will be lots of crud ge’ll pull before his term is over.
So the line I’m hearing from McConnell and Graham, is that this is totally different from Garland because this time the Senate and the presidency is owned by the same party. Which really boils down to last time we didn’t want the nomination to go through and this time we do.
Do they really expect anyone to be fooled by that?
Come on just have the balls to come out and admit, “Yes the excuse we gave last time was self serving bullshit what’cha gonna do about it!”
No, but he doesn’t care. Hypocrisy is McConnell’s brand.