4 ms·

>For instance Kavanaugh could just withdraw him nomination and the Republicans have a long list of other conservative judges that could do that job but no they

>For instance Kavanaugh could just withdraw him nomination and the Republicans have a long list of other conservative judges that could do that job but no they can't stand losing at all so they will wind up losing something bigger all while warning the Democrats that they risk looking like crazy fools who are out of touch with the American people. No they couldn't, the Democrats would try to delay any vote to after mid terms. Kavanaugh was announced July 9th for example (of course if the Republicans win again, it wouldn't matter). Worse, you'd be setting a precedent that you don't need any evidence to take down a supreme court judge nomination, which would of course carry over to politicians as well.

bikezen 8y ago
> Worse, you'd be setting a precedent that you don't need any evidence to take down a supreme court judge nomination, which would of course carry over to politicians as well. You mean like refusing to even have a confirmation hearing at all? We're already there.
- Nasrudith 8y ago
  Not to mention Robert Bork well before that even. There is no need for evidence in the first place - just like Congress can technically impeach the president for wearing an ugly tie.
  - throwaway5752 8y ago
    "On October 23, 1987, the Senate denied Bork's confirmation, with 42 Senators voting in favor and 58 voting against. Two Democratic Senators, David Boren (D-OK) and Ernest Hollings (D-SC), voted in his favor, with 6 Republican Senators (John Chafee (R-RI), Bob Packwood (R-OR), Arlen Specter (R-PA), Robert Stafford (R-VT), John Warner (R-VA), and Lowell P. Weicker Jr. (R-CT) voting against him.[34]" and "On October 20, 1973, Solicitor General Bork was instrumental in the 'Saturday Night Massacre' when President Richard Nixon ordered the firing of Watergate Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox following Cox's request for tapes of his Oval Office conversations. Nixon initially ordered U.S. Attorney General Elliot Richardson to fire Cox. Richardson resigned rather than carry out the order. Richardson's top deputy, Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus also considered the order "fundamentally wrong"[15] and resigned, making Bork acting attorney general. When Nixon reiterated his order, Bork complied and fired Cox." from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Bork https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Bork. Bork got a hearing. He just was unable to get approved - by a wide margin - because of his disgraceful conduct during Watergate.
throwaway5752 8y ago
"The nomination remained before the Senate for 293 days,[6] the longest nomination process in the history of Supreme Court nominations.[7] With the failure of Garland's nomination, President Donald Trump, a Republican, successfully nominated Neil Gorsuch in 2017." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrick_Garland_Supreme_Court_nomination https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrick_Garland_Supreme_Court_...
prolikewh0a 8y ago
There's no evidence to suggest Democrats would delay this vote. Chuck Schumer is doing everything in his power to make sure all of Trump's judicial picks get through unabated. https://www.vox.com/2018/8/30/17797770/chuck-schumer-trump-judicial-nominees https://www.vox.com/2018/8/30/17797770/chuck-schumer-trump-j... https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/schumer-plays-long-game-avoids-hardball-with-centrist-democrats-over-supreme-court-pick/2018/07/27/f3fb86dc-90d2-11e8-b769-e3fff17f0689_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.f3751624880c https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/schumer-plays-long-...
PaulHoule 8y ago
The Republicans had no problem getting Gorsuch through, they were even able to get women Democratic senators from red states to vote for him. Some people are clean, some people aren't. Some people thought Bork got blindsided is his nomination fight but he made partisan decisions in the Watergate era that limited his career.

bikezen 8y ago

> Worse, you'd be setting a precedent that you don't need any evidence to take down a supreme court judge nomination, which would of course carry over to politicians as well. You mean like refusing to even have a confirmation hearing at all? We're already there.

Nasrudith 8y ago
Not to mention Robert Bork well before that even. There is no need for evidence in the first place - just like Congress can technically impeach the president for wearing an ugly tie.
- throwaway5752 8y ago
  "On October 23, 1987, the Senate denied Bork's confirmation, with 42 Senators voting in favor and 58 voting against. Two Democratic Senators, David Boren (D-OK) and Ernest Hollings (D-SC), voted in his favor, with 6 Republican Senators (John Chafee (R-RI), Bob Packwood (R-OR), Arlen Specter (R-PA), Robert Stafford (R-VT), John Warner (R-VA), and Lowell P. Weicker Jr. (R-CT) voting against him.[34]" and "On October 20, 1973, Solicitor General Bork was instrumental in the 'Saturday Night Massacre' when President Richard Nixon ordered the firing of Watergate Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox following Cox's request for tapes of his Oval Office conversations. Nixon initially ordered U.S. Attorney General Elliot Richardson to fire Cox. Richardson resigned rather than carry out the order. Richardson's top deputy, Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus also considered the order "fundamentally wrong"[15] and resigned, making Bork acting attorney general. When Nixon reiterated his order, Bork complied and fired Cox." from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Bork https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Bork. Bork got a hearing. He just was unable to get approved - by a wide margin - because of his disgraceful conduct during Watergate.

throwaway5752 8y ago

"The nomination remained before the Senate for 293 days,[6] the longest nomination process in the history of Supreme Court nominations.[7] With the failure of Garland's nomination, President Donald Trump, a Republican, successfully nominated Neil Gorsuch in 2017." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrick_Garland_Supreme_Court_nomination https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrick_Garland_Supreme_Court_...

prolikewh0a 8y ago

There's no evidence to suggest Democrats would delay this vote. Chuck Schumer is doing everything in his power to make sure all of Trump's judicial picks get through unabated. https://www.vox.com/2018/8/30/17797770/chuck-schumer-trump-judicial-nominees https://www.vox.com/2018/8/30/17797770/chuck-schumer-trump-j... https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/schumer-plays-long-game-avoids-hardball-with-centrist-democrats-over-supreme-court-pick/2018/07/27/f3fb86dc-90d2-11e8-b769-e3fff17f0689_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.f3751624880c https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/schumer-plays-long-...

PaulHoule 8y ago

The Republicans had no problem getting Gorsuch through, they were even able to get women Democratic senators from red states to vote for him. Some people are clean, some people aren't. Some people thought Bork got blindsided is his nomination fight but he made partisan decisions in the Watergate era that limited his career.