General Discussion

malaise

(269,172 posts) Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:34 PM Feb 2016

The consequences of Scalia's death sent ReTHUGs into a complete meltdown

They lost it and even as they crawl down from their Constitutional obstructionism. they are going to pay for what was said on Saturday and Sunday. Anything they do after those outbursts will make it worse.
Imagine the Senate Majority Leader ordering the violation of the Constitution live on TV - this will be fun.

Obama will fuck you up...watch the proceedings - butter please

6 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The consequences of Scalia's death sent ReTHUGs into a complete meltdown (Original Post) malaise Feb 2016 OP

Article II, Section 2, BITCHES. Manifestor_of_Light Feb 2016 #1

That's why this is huge malaise Feb 2016 #2

Best part..they won't even realize it's happening until it's over. shraby Feb 2016 #3

Good malaise Feb 2016 #4

How is it a violation? davidn3600 Feb 2016 #5

They took an oath to uphold the constitution, and then said they wouldn't even consider an shraby Feb 2016 #6

Manifestor_of_Light

(21,046 posts)

1. Article II, Section 2, BITCHES.

Reply to malaise (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:40 PM

Feb 2016

"The president SHALL nominate". "Shall" is a MANDATORY word. The President HAS to nominate someone.

As was brilliantly woman-splained by the amazing Senator Elizabeth Warren.

malaise

(269,172 posts)

2. That's why this is huge

Reply to Manifestor_of_Light (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:41 PM

Feb 2016

The Senate Majority Leader set out to violate the Constitution - notice how quickly he's walking it back - too late.

shraby

(21,946 posts)

3. Best part..they won't even realize it's happening until it's over.

Reply to malaise (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:43 PM

Feb 2016

malaise

(269,172 posts)

4. Good

Reply to shraby (Reply #3)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:46 PM

Feb 2016

This is all their fault. Having shut down the legislative branch, they now want to shut down the Judiciary. They will pay.

davidn3600

(6,342 posts)

5. How is it a violation?

Reply to malaise (Original post)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:47 PM

Feb 2016

The Senate has a right to either confirm, reject, or even withhold consent on a nominee to the Supreme Court.

Can you point me to the area in the Constitution that says they MUST to vote within a specific time frame?

shraby

(21,946 posts)

6. They took an oath to uphold the constitution, and then said they wouldn't even consider an

Reply to davidn3600 (Reply #5)

Tue Feb 16, 2016, 09:53 PM

Feb 2016

Obama appointment to the bench before he even nominated someone.
The constitution states "with the advise and consent" of the Senate.
They said they had no intention of giving advise or consent.
They didn't just say they wouldn't consider it in a timely manner, they said they wouldn't consider it at all. That's the rub.

Reply to this discussion