Page 1 of 3

Senate must not consent to Merrick Garland

Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2016 9:08 am
by mojo84
This guy will do significant damage to 2nd Amendment rights. Word is quite a few republican GOP establishment highly regard him.

http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-mem ... ck-garland

He would reverse Heller.

On top of that, he is from Chicago.

Re: Senate must not consent to Merrick Garland

Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2016 9:57 am
by Pariah3j
I'm hoping this election cycle has taught the 'establishment' republicans a thing or 2 and that they will stick to their guns and not even allow the POTUS nomination a hearing, much less confirm any 'moderates' that he puts up.

Re: Senate must not consent to Merrick Garland

Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2016 9:57 am
by RPBrown
They should not accept any nominations from Obama

Re: Senate must not consent to Merrick Garland

Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2016 10:14 am
by The Wall
Call your Congressman.

Re: Senate must not consent to Merrick Garland

Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2016 10:23 am
by joe817
mojo84 wrote:This guy will do significant damage to 2nd Amendment rights. Word is quite a few republican GOP establishment highly regard him.

http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-mem ... ck-garland

He would reverse Heller. On top of that, he is from Chicago.
Good article mojo84. Thanks for posting. It would mean the end of 2A rights as we know it, if this guy makes it to the S.C.

Re: Senate must not consent to Merrick Garland

Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2016 10:42 am
by puma guy
joe817 wrote:
mojo84 wrote:This guy will do significant damage to 2nd Amendment rights. Word is quite a few republican GOP establishment highly regard him.

http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-mem ... ck-garland

He would reverse Heller. On top of that, he is from Chicago.
Good article mojo84. Thanks for posting. It would mean the end of 2A rights as we know it, if this guy makes it to the S.C.
:iagree: Thanks for posting.

Re: Senate must not consent to Merrick Garland

Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2016 11:08 am
by atx2a
Looks like McConnell made it pretty clear again today that they will not even allow a hearing. Hope that's true.

Re: Senate must not consent to Merrick Garland

Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2016 11:30 am
by Redneck_Buddha
Pariah3j wrote:I'm hoping this election cycle has taught the 'establishment' republicans a thing or 2 and that they will stick to their guns and not even allow the POTUS nomination a hearing, much less confirm any 'moderates' that he puts up.
Oh...not even. They are doubling down in fact by trying to steal the nomination from Trump and install a Ryan/Kasich ticket. And I am most decidedly NOT a Trump voter, I just hate subversion of the will of the voters.

Re: Senate must not consent to Merrick Garland

Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2016 12:33 pm
by Bitter Clinger
Redneck_Buddha wrote:
Pariah3j wrote:I'm hoping this election cycle has taught the 'establishment' republicans a thing or 2 and that they will stick to their guns and not even allow the POTUS nomination a hearing, much less confirm any 'moderates' that he puts up.
Oh...not even. They are doubling down in fact by trying to steal the nomination from Trump and install a Ryan/Kasich ticket. And I am most decidedly NOT a Trump voter, I just hate subversion of the will of the voters.
It's come down to the last two people the establishment wanted vying for candidacy. It's a beautiful thing. :cheers2:

Re: Senate must not consent to Merrick Garland

Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2016 1:38 pm
by Pariah3j
Bitter Clinger wrote:
Redneck_Buddha wrote:
Pariah3j wrote:I'm hoping this election cycle has taught the 'establishment' republicans a thing or 2 and that they will stick to their guns and not even allow the POTUS nomination a hearing, much less confirm any 'moderates' that he puts up.
Oh...not even. They are doubling down in fact by trying to steal the nomination from Trump and install a Ryan/Kasich ticket. And I am most decidedly NOT a Trump voter, I just hate subversion of the will of the voters.
It's come down to the last two people the establishment wanted vying for candidacy. It's a beautiful thing. :cheers2:
:iagree:

Some talking heads have suggested Ryan/Kasich - but others have said they plan to allow the process work, and the likelyhood of someone other then the 2 frontrunners being a valid or accepted choice would be a fools errand. I wonder if in the end that Cruz will get their backing because there has been alot of 'guess we'll have to eat crow' type comments about Cruz from people like Gramnesty and others of his ilk.

Re: Senate must not consent to Merrick Garland

Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2016 2:16 pm
by mojo84
The Biden Rule.

:clapping: :lol:

Re: Senate must not consent to Merrick Garland

Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2016 2:49 pm
by mr1337
mojo84 wrote:The Biden Rule.

:clapping: :lol:
Liberals like to think that only applied to when it benefited them, not when it could benefit the other side! :thumbs2:

Re: Senate must not consent to Merrick Garland

Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2016 3:08 pm
by NotRPB
VIA Twitter:
https://twitter.com/SenateDems/status/7 ... 4999806976
from
@SenateDems
Senate Democrats
Verified account
284,000 Followers

8 Republicans now willing to meet with Garland:

Collins
Flake
Ayotte
Kirk
Portman
Inhofe
Grassley
Cochran
`


McConnell spoke to Garland by phone today. He won't meet with him. Readout via McConnell's office: see https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/7 ... 2330080257
Image
mc.jpg