Senate Democrats get one-week delay on Gorsuch vote... anti-Americans

[WVU82_rivals]

Senate Democrats on the Judiciary Committee on Monday asked for and were granted a one-week delay on a vote to approve sending the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Senate floor.

The 20-member committee had scheduled a noon business meeting to vote on whether to favorably send the nomination, but rules allow any senator to ask for a one-week delay.

Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, announced a vote on President Trump's nominee will now happen April 3 at 10 a.m.

The full Senate is then expected to immediately take up whether to make Gorsuch the 113th Supreme Court Justice. By Fox News’ count, at least 15 Democrats and Independents have publicly announced their opposition to Gorsuch.

The GOP majority would need at least eight Democrats to vote with them in order to overcome the 60-vote threshold to allow a final vote.

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has the option to invoke the so-called “nuclear option” -- eliminating the 60-vote cloture requirement and allowing the nominee to be confirmed with a simple majority.

 

[Airport]

Senate Democrats on the Judiciary Committee on Monday asked for and were granted a one-week delay on a vote to approve sending the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Senate floor.

The 20-member committee had scheduled a noon business meeting to vote on whether to favorably send the nomination, but rules allow any senator to ask for a one-week delay.

Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, announced a vote on President Trump's nominee will now happen April 3 at 10 a.m.

The full Senate is then expected to immediately take up whether to make Gorsuch the 113th Supreme Court Justice. By Fox News’ count, at least 15 Democrats and Independents have publicly announced their opposition to Gorsuch.

The GOP majority would need at least eight Democrats to vote with them in order to overcome the 60-vote threshold to allow a final vote.

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has the option to invoke the so-called “nuclear option” -- eliminating the 60-vote cloture requirement and allowing the nominee to be confirmed with a simple majority.

Why delay the vote? It doesn't matter one way or the other. The dems are going to vote no, anyway.

 

[TN EER]

April recess. All of Congress want to go home without a vote so they have cover....and a chance to shake the money tree. Several dems are in areas that voted for Trump. They will have to tread lightly during the break. Look for organized rallies on both sides.

 

[WVPATX]

Why delay the vote? It doesn't matter one way or the other. The dems are going to vote no, anyway.

Chris Coons on Morning Joe this morning said the Dems will force the GOP to nuke the filibuster. Music to my ears. The Dems don't know just how stupid this is.

 

[WVU82_rivals]

the 2018 elections are going to be another 'wake-up' call for these idiots...

33 seats up for grabs...

be nice to see Ellison lose his seat in '18...

 

[CAJUNEER_rivals]

Chris Coons on Morning Joe this morning said the Dems will force the GOP to nuke the filibuster. Music to my ears. The Dems don't know just how stupid this is.

If middle America becomes disillusioned with Trump it could turn back on the GOP quickly. Not such a dumb move by Dems because Trump is not winning on his agenda.

 

[mule_eer]

Senate Democrats on the Judiciary Committee on Monday asked for and were granted a one-week delay on a vote to approve sending the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Senate floor.

The 20-member committee had scheduled a noon business meeting to vote on whether to favorably send the nomination, but rules allow any senator to ask for a one-week delay.

Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, announced a vote on President Trump's nominee will now happen April 3 at 10 a.m.

The full Senate is then expected to immediately take up whether to make Gorsuch the 113th Supreme Court Justice. By Fox News’ count, at least 15 Democrats and Independents have publicly announced their opposition to Gorsuch.

The GOP majority would need at least eight Democrats to vote with them in order to overcome the 60-vote threshold to allow a final vote.

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has the option to invoke the so-called “nuclear option” -- eliminating the 60-vote cloture requirement and allowing the nominee to be confirmed with a simple majority.

That seat opened up over a year ago. The previous nominee never got so much as a hearing for more than 9 months. A one-week delay gets you angry now? I think you need to think about that for a minute.

 

[WVUCOOPER]

That seat opened up over a year ago. The previous nominee never got so much as a hearing for more than 9 months. A one-week delay gets you angry now? I think you need to think about that for a minute.

LOLpuppet...anti-american

 

[mule_eer]

LOLpuppet...anti-american

I thought he wanted to debate his position.

 

[WVU82_rivals]

just nuke it and get it over with already...

there's your debate...

 

[mule_eer]

just nuke it and get it over with already...

there's your debate...

Make sure you don't cry foul over that when the tables are turned. I think the guy should be confirmed. He's an intelligent federal judge who is extremely qualified. I would say the same for Garland as well. You defended the treatment Garland received, and now you cry foul about a quarter 1-week delay on a committee vote on this guy. What's changed outside of your opinion of the person who made the appointment?

 

[WVU82_rivals]

it's retarded that the Democrats are slow-playing the nomination...

they know the nuclear option is there...

Garland was nominated by the obamapuppet, so you know it wasn't good for the US...

 

[mule_eer]

it's retarded that the Democrats are slow-playing the nomination...

they know the nuclear option is there...

Garland was nominated by the obamapuppet, so you know it wasn't good for the US...

So your answer is that you didn't like the person who made the Garland appointment, but you do like the person who made the Gorsuch appointment. By that you are saying that it is OK to stone wall a nominee if it is being done by people you agree with politically, but it's bad if it's done by other people. You can consult with Mr. Webster if you like, but that fits with the definition of hypocrite.

 

[WVU82_rivals]

 

[WVU82_rivals]

obamapuppet should be in jail for what he did to this country...

Trump can fix it...

but the snakes in the swamp are already bought & paid for...

it's going to be tough...

 

[mule_eer]

Where did I say that Gorsuch shouldn't be confirmed? That's not my point. I definitely think he should be confirmed. I also think that Garland should have had hearings and a vote. Have the balls to vote the guy down at least. I'm against a filibuster of the vote. I'm not going to cry over a procedural 1-week delay to clear the committee.

 

[WVU82_rivals]

even the Republicans are bought & paid for...

Border wall funds hit snag among some Republicans

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-wall-idUSKBN16Z31R

President Donald Trump's call for $1.5 billion this year to help build a wall along the border with Mexico could be in jeopardy as fellow Republicans in Congress weigh delaying a decision on the request.

Republican Senator Roy Blunt, a member of his party's leadership, told reporters on Tuesday that money for the wall likely would not be coupled with a spending bill that must pass by April 28 to avoid shutting down federal agencies whose funding expires then.

Blunt said the must-do funding "comes together better" without Trump's additional request for the border wall and military programs and could be considered "at a later time."

Democrats are threatening to block the bill funding federal agencies from April 29 to Sept. 30, the end of the current fiscal year, if money for the border wall is included.

They object to one of Trump's premier 2016 campaign promises, saying it is poorly planned and that there are other border security measures already constructed or under consideration.

When he ran for president, Trump pledged Mexico would pay to build the wall, designed to keep illegal immigrants and drugs from entering the United States. The Mexican government has said it will not do so.

The initiative has also faced resistance among Republicans, including lawmakers representing some border towns. The federal government would have to purchase land in many locations in order to construct the edifice, which could make construction costs soar.

Reuters reported the wall could end up costing as much as $21.6 billion, far more than the $12 billion Trump cited.

Representative Mario Diaz-Balart also expressed skepticism about Congress' ability to approve funds for the wall, given the super-majority vote needed in the Senate for most major legislation.

Asked about the wall, Diaz-Balart, a senior member of the House of Representatives' Appropriations Committee and a leading voice on immigration policy, said: "I'm always willing to look at other things we can do to try to get that 60-vote threshold" on border and interior security.

Lawmakers said progress was being made on legislation to keep the government running beyond April 28.

House Speaker Paul Ryan removed another potential land mine on Tuesday when he said a Republican drive to end federal funding for women's healthcare provider Planned Parenthood would be best accomplished on legislation other than the upcoming funding bill.

Democrats have vowed to stop the must-do money bill if it ended Planned Parenthood's federal funds.

 

[mule_eer]

obamapuppet should be in jail for what he did to this country...

Trump can fix it...

but the snakes in the swamp are already bought & paid for...

it's going to be tough...

If Jesus had a D after his name, you'd be driving the nails into the cross.

 

[WVU82_rivals]

Garland's nomination expired in January...

that story is over...

unless Trump chooses him for the next seat...

and I don't expect Trump to pick an obamapuppet reject...

 

[WVU82_rivals]

lol...

I don't like either party...

I've posted several anti-Republican stories this week...

but I DO KNOW the obamapuppet will be remembered as the worst president in history...


How Ryan kept his job with that pathetic excuse of a healthcare plan... wow.

 

[WVU82_rivals]

Trump might have to wait until 2018 to get anything passed...

A total of 468 seats in the U.S. Congress (33 Senate seats and all 435 House seats) are up for election on November 6, 2018...

he gets 10 of those Senate seats and he's off to the races...

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

So your answer is that you didn't like the person who made the Garland appointment, but you do like the person who made the Gorsuch appointment. By that you are saying that it is OK to stone wall a nominee if it is being done by people you agree with politically, but it's bad if it's done by other people. You can consult with Mr. Webster if you like, but that fits with the definition of hypocrite.

Mule, its a bit disingenuous in my opinion to try and compare the two situations. Not entirely, but still its not apples to apples. I was of the opinion they should have walked the dog with Garland. They didn't, that was their prerogative. They had the position to be able to delay and roll the dice for the election and there really wasn't anything the Dems could do about it. In the current situation, the Dems are being obstinate for the sake of being obstinate. They can't stop it and they have zero reason to do so. It's petulant obstructionism at best. They have no end state where Gorsuch doesn't get confirmed, so why do the procedural dumb ****?

 

[mule_eer]

Mule, its a bit disingenuous in my opinion to try and compare the two situations. Not entirely, but still its not apples to apples. I was of the opinion they should have walked the dog with Garland. They didn't, that was their prerogative. They had the position to be able to delay and roll the dice for the election and there really wasn't anything the Dems could do about it. In the current situation, the Dems are being obstinate for the sake of being obstinate. They can't stop it and they have zero reason to do so. It's petulant obstructionism at best. They have no end state where Gorsuch doesn't get confirmed, so why do the procedural dumb ****?

I'm looking at it from the position that they have and had a job to do. You lose the right to complain about people playing political games with an appointment when you just did the same thing for nearly a year.

I'll add that these positions, judges and justices, are politicized partially because politicians do these sorts of things with their appointments. When push comes to shove, the litmus tests need to go. A qualified candidate with a good judicial record should be an easy confirmation, politics be damned.

 

[WVU82_rivals]

 

[dave]

If Jesus had a D after his name, you'd be driving the nails into the cross.

If Jesus had a D after his name his mom would have aborted him to save the shame of birthing out of wedlock.