Tuesday, at 8 pm Trump's Supreme Court nominee

[Value Buy]

is named. Stay tuned!
This will be interresting

[Gardening Grandma]

For  a seat that was stolen.

[Deleted]

It will be telling. If it's Hardiman or Pryor. 

[Wisconsin Beth]

Please, he's not going to be able to stop himself from tweeting his pick sooner than that.

[ken a.k.a OMK]

Will the GOP hypocrites in Congress interview this nominee? Of course they will. 

[swamp]

I'm sure it won't be any of the 4 federal judges who ruled against him in the latest immigration kerfuffle.

[Tennesseer]

Jan 30, 2017 13:17:44 GMT -5 swamp said:

I'm sure it won't be any of the 4 federal judges who ruled against him in the latest immigration kerfuffle.

I bet it will be federal Judge Gonzalo Curiel to show Trump's diversity.

[swamp]

Jan 30, 2017 13:21:37 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Jan 30, 2017 13:17:44 GMT -5 swamp said:

I'm sure it won't be any of the 4 federal judges who ruled against him in the latest immigration kerfuffle.

I bet it will be federal Judge Gonzalo Curiel to show Trump's diversity.

Nope. No anchor babies.

No Mexicans, blacks, jews, arabs, or homosexuals.

I'm betting it's a 60 something dude. Maybe a woman, but I doubt it.  

[ken a.k.a OMK]

. 

[Deleted]

Younger. Still white dude. But they want a longer life on the bench.

[Tennesseer]

Jan 30, 2017 13:23:24 GMT -5 swamp said:

Jan 30, 2017 13:21:37 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

I bet it will be federal Judge Gonzalo Curiel to show Trump's diversity.

Nope. No anchor babies.

No Mexicans, blacks, jews, arabs, or homosexuals.

I'm betting it's a 60 something dude. Maybe a woman, but I doubt it.  

I first read that as 'No nacho babies'.

[swamp]

Jan 30, 2017 13:26:36 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Jan 30, 2017 13:23:24 GMT -5 swamp said:

Nope. No anchor babies.

No Mexicans, blacks, jews, arabs, or homosexuals.

I'm betting it's a 60 something dude. Maybe a woman, but I doubt it.  

I first read that as 'No nacho babies'.

orange babies are welcome.

[Wisconsin Beth]

Jan 30, 2017 13:23:24 GMT -5 swamp said:

Jan 30, 2017 13:21:37 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

I bet it will be federal Judge Gonzalo Curiel to show Trump's diversity.

Nope. No anchor babies.

No Mexicans, blacks, jews, arabs, or homosexuals.

I'm betting it's a 60 something dude. Maybe a woman, but I doubt it.  

there were only like two non white males on his lists anyway. I think it was 21 people total.

[Deleted]

I really don't think he'll go so far as Pryor. But it would send a message/ reaffirm a message...

[Value Buy]

Jan 30, 2017 9:25:43 GMT -5 Gardening Grandma said:

For  a seat that was stolen.

Not stolen. Scalia died.
He was a conservative Judge who interpreted the Constitution as it was intended to be.
Democrats wanted Garland to get the seat.
Republicans said no, he will not.
You and others may not like it, but the truth is, if Garland had been interviewed and considered, then voted down, the Democrats would still be pissed.

Elections have consequences. Get used to it. 

[Cookies Galore]

Jan 30, 2017 13:26:36 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Jan 30, 2017 13:23:24 GMT -5 swamp said:

Nope. No anchor babies.

No Mexicans, blacks, jews, arabs, or homosexuals.

I'm betting it's a 60 something dude. Maybe a woman, but I doubt it.  

I first read that as 'No nacho babies'.

Now that is one baby I want in my belly! Mmm... nachos...

[Gardening Grandma]

Jan 30, 2017 19:04:50 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Jan 30, 2017 9:25:43 GMT -5 Gardening Grandma said:

For  a seat that was stolen.

Not stolen. Scalia died.
He was a conservative Judge who interpreted the Constitution as it was intended to be.
Democrats wanted Garland to get the seat.
Republicans said no, he will not.
You and others may not like it, but the truth is, if Garland had been interviewed and considered, then voted down, the Democrats would still be pissed.

Elections have consequences. Get used to it. 

It was stolen. The Republicans COULD have held hearings and voted (and they probably had enough votes to block him), but refusing to do their damn job was a way to say "FU" to the black guy.
If Garland had been considered andvoted down, Democrats could not say the seat was stolen.
They didn't so we can and it was.

[Tennesseer]

Five months passed between Scalia's death and the Republican convention.  Nine months passed between Scalia's death and the election.  Eleven months before the new president was sworn in. Plenty of time left in Obama's term to vote up or down on Garland's nomination.

And please don't say 'Yes, but, the Biden rule'.  When Biden brought it up, there was no open Supreme court vacancy.  There was no nomination to consider.  And there was no vote in the senate to put the Biden Rule to vote.  It was not something that was votable.  Therefore, no implementation of the Biden rule.

When Biden mentioned the Biden Rule in the senate, it was in late June-four months later in the year than Scalia's death in the middle of February.  Biden also did not say the vote for a supreme court justice should wait until after the new president took office.  Biden's recommendation was to put the supreme courtnominee to a vote in the senate the day after the general election in early November.  

So it is ridiculous to bring up the Biden Rule if one is so inclinded to use it as a defense in not voting for Garland.  

What goes around will come around.

.  

[GRG a/k/a goldenrulegirl]

Jan 30, 2017 9:28:58 GMT -5 oped said:

It will be telling. If it's Hardiman or Pryor. 

Hardiman and I grew up together in the same neighborhood. I'm sorry to see he is aligned with Trump. There was certainly nothing in his liberal New England upbringing to cause that. ;-)

[Deleted]

I'm actually ok with Hardiman. At least there is nothing on his background to be wildly concerning and he'd replace Scalia with just a little vibration probably. He would be a reasonable pick, not moderate like Os would have been, but probably tolerable as long as there are no other vacancies.

Pryor on the other hand ... that would signal all out crazy town war....

[OldCoyote]

Don't worry, it will be the worse choice ever!!

[Tennesseer]

Jan 31, 2017 0:07:57 GMT -5 OldCoyote said:

Don't worry, it will be the worse choice ever!!

They all are.

[djAdvocate]

Jan 30, 2017 20:31:14 GMT -5 Gardening Grandma said:

Jan 30, 2017 19:04:50 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Not stolen. Scalia died.
He was a conservative Judge who interpreted the Constitution as it was intended to be.
Democrats wanted Garland to get the seat.
Republicans said no, he will not.
You and others may not like it, but the truth is, if Garland had been interviewed and considered, then voted down, the Democrats would still be pissed.

Elections have consequences. Get used to it. 

It was stolen. The Republicans COULD have held hearings and voted (and they probably had enough votes to block him), but refusing to do their damn job was a way to say "FU" to the black guy.
If Garland had been considered andvoted down, Democrats could not say the seat was stolen.
They didn't so we can and it was.

not only FU to Obama, but to our entire way of doing things.  Democrats won't forget that.  nor should they.

[busymom]

If it's broadcast on television tonight, with Trump making the announcement, I have no plans to watch. That's exactly what our new POTUS likes: being the center of attention. I've got better things to do, like deal with dirty laundry.   I'll check in with you guys later to find out who got the nod.

[tallguy]

Jan 30, 2017 19:04:50 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Jan 30, 2017 9:25:43 GMT -5 Gardening Grandma said:

For  a seat that was stolen.

Not stolen. Scalia died.
He was a conservative Judge who interpreted the Constitution as it was intended to be.
Democrats wanted Garland to get the seat.
Republicans said no, he will not.
You and others may not like it, but the truth is, if Garland had been interviewed and considered, then voted down, the Democrats would still be pissed.

Elections have consequences. Get used to it. 

Scalia was no stranger to "making stuff up."  

[Virgil Showlion]

Woe! The man will destroy you by nominating the most unspeakably evil soul of all:



Say goodbye to marmot rights forever.

[tallguy]

Jan 31, 2017 14:19:51 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

I can't believe the publicity w***e is actually going to announce this on television. Are Ryan and McConnell going to be standing behind him sticking their tongues out at the viewers?

The Decision 2.0   

I expect this to get the same kind of blowback and negative publicity that LeBron got for his, but at least that had some money going to charity as a result.  Still made him look ridiculous.  But then Trump needs no help in that respect.  And we know there will never be any real money going to charity.  

[Wisconsin Beth]

I still think it'll be tweeted prior to 8pm. Although I admit, I expected to hear about a tweet this morning.

[Tennesseer]

Jan 31, 2017 14:19:51 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

I can't believe the publicity w***e is actually going to announce this on television. Are Ryan and McConnell going to be standing behind him sticking their tongues out at the viewers?

Any bets there will be a TV commercial for Trump Resorts before or after the prime time announcement? Will we then be subjected to a Barbara Walters sit-down fluff piece with trump after the announcement?

[steff]

There's a #BlackoutTrump moment happening tonight to NOT watch this "president"  turn our Supreme Court into a reality show.