RSS

Tag Archives: nuclear option

Why “Going Nuclear” By Senate Republicans May Be Catastropic

Republicans decided today to end the Democrat filibuster of Putin’s Bitch selection for the Supreme Court.

They just waltzed their way into a Constitutional crisis.

The Chumph is going to be impeached. The most likely reason is his collusion with Putin to submarine the election.

Ergo – Putin’s Bitch illegally “won” the election.

If (or when) that happens, everything done by Putin’s Bitch is illegitimate. It is the “Fruit of the Poisoned Tree”, meaning every executive order, law signed by the Chumph, or move made in terms of the Executive Branch gets reset to the day Obama left office.

Gorsuch’s nomination is illegitimate.

And that’s where things get really messy.

The issue being, how do you remove him?

Senate GOP goes ‘nuclear’ on Supreme Court filibuster

The historic move paves the way for Neil Gorsuch to be confirmed.

Senate Republicans invoked the “nuclear option” to gut the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees Thursday, a historic move that paves the way for Neil Gorsuch’s confirmation and ensures that future high court nominees can advance in the Senate without clearing a 60-vote threshold.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell moved to change the Senate rules after Democrats blocked Gorsuch’s nomination minutes before, 55-45. All 52 Republicans then supported the vote to go nuclear, and Gorsuch subsequently advanced to a final confirmation vote with a simple majority.

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

Nuke ‘Em, Harry!

Harry Reid has had enough…

So have virtually all Democrats in the Senate.

Let’s hope at least 51 Democrats have the cajones to hang on – and not go Yellowback Donkey.

Reactionary Rethugs have derailed and objected to virtually every President Obama appointee, abusing rules which were put there to protect the Minority Party Vote in the Senate…Not as a tool to bring the entire legislative process to it’s knees as a policy.

Senate poised to limit filibusters in party-line vote that would alter centuries of precedent

The Senate on Thursday opened a contentious debate about striking down the long-standing filibuster rules for most presidential nominations, with Democrats appearing poised to do so on a party-line vote that would alter nearly 225 years of precedent.

Infuriated by what they see as a pattern of obstruction and delay over President Obama’s nominees, Democrats tried to trigger the so-called “nuclear option” by bringing up one of the judicial nominees whom Republicans recently blocked by a filibuster.

“It’s manifest we have to do something to change things,” Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) said in remarks on the Senate floor to open the debate. Reid argued that the Senate has wasted way too much time on things that should be relatively routine — like approving judges and executive-branch nominees.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) responded by accusing Democratsof a power grab and suggesting that they will regret their decision if Republicans regain control of the chamber.

“We’re not interested in having a gun put to our head any longer,” McConnell said. “Some of us have been around here long enough to know that the shoe is sometimes on the other foot.”

McConnell then addressed Democrats directly, saying: “You may regret this a lot sooner than you think,” he said.

Shortly after 11 a.m., the senators began voting on a motion to reconsider the nomination of Patricia Millet to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. That vote could set in motion a complicated parliamentary process that would end with a simple-majority vote to set a new rule, allowing for swift confirmation of executive branch nominees and most selections for the federal judiciary without having to clear a 60-vote hurdle.

If Democrats go through with the threat, it will pave the way for confirmation of several nominees to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit who have recently been stymied by GOP filibusters, amid Republican assertions that the critical appellate court simply did not need any more judges…

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Judicial Wars

Here we go again with the wars over Judicial appointments.

The 1969 Pontiac GTO Judge - With Stage IV Option, Most powerful and fastest Pontiac production car ever built.

OK – so much for the eye-candy. As of today, President Obama has had fewer fo his judicial appointments approved than either Clinton or the Bushit. By this time in Bushit’s first year in office, he had nominated a total of 64 judges, compared with 26 for Obama. By this time, Bush had won confirmation of 18, including both appeals court and district court judges, compared with 6 for Obama. The numbers assume an even greater disparity when you realize that Obama has a hefty Senate majority of Democrats, while Bush actually faced a Democratic-controlled Senate in 2001.

Obama needs to get a move on – and the Senate Democrats need to develop some spine – and go “nuclear” if necessary.

Sessions to Filibuster Obama’s 7th Circuit Nominee

Jeff Sessions, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, today told reporters that he plans on filibustering David Hamilton, President Obama’s nominee to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. “I intend not to support going forward on the Hamilton vote,” Sessions said. “Unlike Justice Sotomayor, when asked to discuss the empathy standard he has embraced it.”

Sessions’ announcement marks an about face for the Alabama senator. Sessions, a nominee to the federal bench under Reagan who was blocked by a committee vote, has for his 13 years in the Senate said he would never filibuster a judicial nominee. “One of the many reasons why we shouldn’t have a filibuster, an important one, is Article I of the Constitution. It says the Senate shall advise and consent on treaties by a two-thirds vote and simply ‘advise and consent’ on nominations,” he said in a 2003 floor statement. “Historicaly, we have understood that provision to mean — and I think there is no doubt the Founders understood that to mean — that a treaty confirmation requires a two-thirds vote, but confirmation of a judicial nomination requires only a simple majority vote.”

Sessions, in fact, was a leader pushing then Majority Leader Bill Frist to invoke the nuclear option – a parliamentary tactic to strip the minority of the power of judicial filibusters – in 2005 in an attempt to stop Democratic filibusters of Republican nominees. The showdown was averted when the so-called Gang of 14 – seven moderate Republicans and seven moderate Democrats – joined together to select which nominees were too “extraordinary” to pass the Senate.

Sessions to Filibuster Obama’s 7th Circuit Nominee

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on November 18, 2009 in Stupid Republican Tricks

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

 
%d bloggers like this: