« POPE 5 Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Feinstein and Harris would like to pick Trump's judicial nominees for him 

By: Beldin in POPE 5 | Recommend this post (3)
Tue, 20 Nov 18 9:07 PM | 50 view(s)
Boardmark this board | Pope 5
Msg. 14015 of 62138
Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

Yeah, I bet they would ... but, I wonder ... if either of them was POTUS, would they be interested in Senators Ted Cruz and Tom Cotton picking some of their judicial nominees? Hmmm??? Yeah ... that's what I thought. And besides ... you Democrats LOST Senate seats in the very recent mid-term election ... remember that or was that just too long ago for you two hags to recall? 

http://hotair.com/archives/2018/11/20/feinstein-harris-like-pick-trumps-judicial-nominees/

There are some tense negotiations getting underway in the Senate, specifically on the Judiciary Committee when it comes to some more of President Trump's judicial nominees. Or at least two California Democrats would like to think so. Senators Dianne Feinstein and Kamala Harris have sent a request to the White House in hopes of cutting a deal whereby they will agree to a couple of Trump's nominees to the Ninth Circuit if he will, in turn, nominate a couple of people from their list. (Washington Times)

Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Kamala Harris, both members of the Judiciary Committee, called on the White House Monday to make a deal to fill court vacancies.

The two California senators asked Pat Cipollone, tapped to be the acting White House counsel in October, to broker a deal over three 9th Circuit Court of Appeals positions.

"While we continue to oppose the slate of nominees the White House put forward on October 10, we remain hopeful that you will work with us to reach a bipartisan agreement in a timely manner," they wrote. ...

Ah, "bipartisan," eh? You mean like the egregiously unethical, immoral clown show you put on for Justice Kavanaugh's hearings ... is that what you mean???!!! Nah ... you two disreputable bitches need to take your ridiculous notion of "bipartisanship" and shove it right up your gargantuan, bovine asses. 

The desire for a deal is certainly understandable, and arrangements such as this have been made regularly over the years, particularly when control of the Senate and the White House are split between the parties. But if you'll forgive me for being so rude as to point this out, that's not the case these days. Perhaps nobody stopped by to let Feinstein and Harris know about the results of the midterms, but the Democrats actually lost seats in the upper chamber. That means there are still going to be 21 members of the Judiciary Committee and eleven of them will be Republicans. With the departure of Jeff Flake, there will be even fewer headwinds for Trump's nominees to make it out of committee.

So why would the President have to make a deal on any of the nominees? There was a time when things were more friendly in the Senate, but now the Democrats rarely cast a vote in favor of any of Trump's candidates. He doesn't exactly owe them a great deal of courtesy in these matters. ...




Avatar

The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer. It has never yet melted. ~ D.H. Lawrence


- - - - -
View Replies (1) »



» You can also:
« POPE 5 Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next