Connect with us

Supreme Court

POLL: Majority Want U.S. Senate to Move Ahead to Fill Empty Supreme Court Seat

Published

on

A new poll finds that a majority of respondents want the U.S. Senate to go ahead and begin the process to fill the U.S. Supreme Court seat left vacant by the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

According to a Marquette University Law School poll, 67 percent of respondents want the Senate to get moving now on a replacement for Ginsburg. Only 32 percent said the Senate should waiting until after the election.

Most interestingly, the poll also found that both Democrats and Republicans were both about the same in their desire to see the Senate move on the process.

The poll found that 68 percent of Republicans want the Senate to move now on the vacancy. Meanwhile a close 63 percent of Democrats agreed, and also said they think the Senate should go ahead and fill the seat.

Trending: CDC Quietly Admits That Less than 10,000 Really Died from COVID-19

This is in stark contrast to Democrat leaders in both the House and the Senate who are losing their tiny hive mind over the Senate moving to fill the vacancy before the November elections.

If this poll is accurate, then the Democrats’ own constituency does not agree with their desire to stymie the process.

In any case, the Senate’s Republican Majority Leader, Kentuckian Mitch McConnell, said he intends to forge ahead on the confirmation process immediately.

The precedent on these sort of things shows that when a president’s party does not enjoy a majority in the Senate, he usually does not get his Supreme Court pick confirmed this close to the end of his term. However, the precedent also shows that when a president’s party does control the Senate, he always gets his nomination considered. And right now, Trump’s Republican Party controls the U.S. Senate.

So, for President Trump to have his nomination considered and confirmed only months before an election is not at all unusual.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Facebook at: facebook.com/Warner.Todd.Huston.

Don't forget to Like The Washington Sentinel on Facebook and Twitter, and visit our friends at The Republican Legion.

Become an insider!

Sign up for the free Washington Sentinel email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Advertisement

Supreme Court

Democrats’ Newest Lie About Republicans Packing the Courts

The hive-minded Democrats have jumped to social media with a new lie about how it is really the Republicans who are “packing the court.”

Published

on

Since Friday, the hive-minded Democrats have jumped to social media with a new lie about how it is really the Republicans who are “packing the court.”

To recap, leftist activists have been pushing the Democrat Party to pledge to “pack” the U.S. Supreme Court with a whole new addition filled with liberals if they win the U.S. Senate and the White House next month.

The nation’s highest court has consisted of nine justices for well over 100 years. There were fewer than nine justices before 1837 when it was raised to nine, and except for a short period of about five years (when the number fluctuated between ten and seven) it has been nine since then. The Constitution does not specify the number of judges. But precedent has it placed firmly at nine.

The only time the question arose to become a major political campaign is in 1937 when Franklin Delano Roosevelt got mad that the Supreme Court kept overturning his communist New Deal policies and he tried to add to the court six new justices all beholden to his left-wing politics. It was one of the few times that nearly everyone in the country rose up to slap saint FDR down because everyone knew damn well that his plan was about his personal power, not about justice and the law.

That brings us to the left’s newest attempt to do the exact same thing FDR wanted to do: pack the court with new, left-wing judges that will be beholden to politics and not the law.

But now, to hide their perfidy, Democrats have come up with a new lie. It is the Republicans who have already packed the court, they say. So, if they do it, it only brings “balance.”

Over the last few days the left has been throwing this lie around hoping to confuse voters who are not very savvy about politics, history, and the law.

Failed “newsman” Dan Rather, who was fired for lying, laid this nonsense out in a tweet on Saturday:

Rather was not alone. Dozens of good little communists echoed the lie on social media over the next two days. Even senile old Joe Biden pushed the lie.

To explain how they are twisting the truth, what they mean is that Trump and the Republican-led U.S. Senate has been scrambling to fill as many judgeships with conservative leaning judges as possible.

Trump really has done an amazing job of putting better judges on the bench, granted. And with a compliant Senate, the job has been a lot easier. But this is not “court packing.”

Court packing only means the act of ADDING new judges were there were none in the past. It does not mean filling actual, legitimate, empty seats with judges that might hold to the president’s ideology.

Indeed, if we are using that definition, the Democrats have been “packing” the courts with hard-core leftists for decades. Trump is the one actually bringing “balance” to American jurisprudence.

So, once again, liberal liars warp and re-define words to fit their anti-American agenda.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Facebook at: facebook.com/Warner.Todd.Huston.

Continue Reading

Supreme Court

Jake Tapper Scolds Dems for Lie that Adding Amy Coney Barrett to Supreme Court is Unconstitutional

Jake Tapper scolded Joe Biden’s surrogate for the lie that Trump’s adding Amy Coney Barrett to the U.S. Supreme Court is somehow “unconstitutional.”

Published

on

Sunday marked the first time in a long time that CNN’s Jake Tapper actually did the job of a journalist when he scolded Joe Biden’s surrogate for the lie that Trump’s adding Amy Coney Barrett to the U.S. Supreme Court is somehow “unconstitutional.”

Because… you know… it ISN’T unconstitutional.

Biden Campaign Manager Kate Bedingfield appeared on Jake’s show, Sunday, and tried to float the lie that Donald Trump was violating the U.S. Constitution by appointed Amy Coney Barrett to the U.S. Supreme Court just prior to an election.

But Jake would not allow her to push the lie, and he kept correcting her bald-faced assertion that Trump was somehow violating the Constitution.

Tapper first tried to pin Bedingfield down on the matter.

“He said what [the GOP] is doing is not Constitutional. How is it not constitutional what they’re doing?” Tapper asked the Biden spokeslair.

“His point is that the people have the opportunity to weigh in on this constitutional process through their vote,” Bedingfield explained. “And we are now in the midst of the election. Millions of people have already cast their votes. And you see that the vast majority of people say they want the person who wins the election on November 3rd to nominate the justice.”

But Jake wasn’t allowing that mischaracterization to go unchallenged.

“That’s a poll. That’s not the Constitution,” Tapper properly pointed out.

“By trying – that is their constitutional – there is a process of constitutional advise and consent. The American people get to have their say by voting for president, by voting for senators,” Bedingfield attempted to explain. “We are now 23 days from the election.”

“Right, but it’s not unconstitutional,” Tapper again noted.

Bedingfield tried to press on with the lie that is this week’s talking point, saying, “Again, millions of votes – they’re being, voters are being denied their constitutional right to have a say in this process…”

Again, Tapper was on point when he interjected, “They elected the Senate.”

But Bedingfield would not let the lie du jour be disproven, and added, “They’re trying to ram through a nominee who, by the way, is going to change the makeup of the court. And we see, time and time again, poll after poll shows that most Americans vehemently disagree with it.”

Tapper did a final beat down of the lie, saying, “Again, Kate, that’s a poll. That is not what the word ‘constitutional’ means. Constitutional doesn’t mean I like it or I don’t like it. It means it’s according to the U.S. Constitution. There’s nothing unconstitutional about what the U.S. Senate is doing”

I am sure that Bedingfield was shocked that her lie was exposed to glaringly. Democrats go on CNN for the dissemination of left-wing propaganda, not to be subjected to facts and actual discussions.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Facebook at: facebook.com/Warner.Todd.Huston.

Continue Reading

Supreme Court

Palin Issues A Warning To Murkowski Over SCOTUS Vote (Video)

Published

on

By

Palin Issues A Warning To Lisa Murkowski Over SCOTUS Vote

Sarah Palin threatened to run a primary challenge against GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski for refusing to back a nominee to the Supreme Court before the 2020 election.

She posted a video to her Instagram account addressed to Lisa Murkowski. In it, Palin is standing in front of her home in Alaska and says that she can “see 2022” from her house, a reference to when the GOP senator is up next for reelection.

“Lisa Murkowski, this is my house,” Palin begins. “I’m willing to give it up … for the greater good of this country and this great state.”

Palin tells Murkowski to “walk back” her position that the winner of the presidential election should nominate a Supreme Court justice to replace the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died last week from cancer.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

Dear Lisa. Murkowski.

A post shared by Sarah Palin (@sarahpalin97) on

Murkowski said on Sunday, “For weeks, I have stated that I would not support taking up a potential Supreme Court vacancy this close to the election. Sadly, what was then a hypothetical is now our reality, but my position has not changed.”

Palin hinted that Murkowski may face repercussions for not voting to confirm President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, expected to be announced on Saturday.

“If you can’t find it within yourself to do the right thing this time, and at least give a fair shake to the Supreme Court nominee that your president will be bringing before you, if you can’t find it within yourself to do the right thing, … and [do] what the majority of Americans want you to do, to do what you were sent to Washington, D.C., to do,” Sarah Palin says.

“Walk back what you have already committed yourself to. You better backtrack. You know, you have already put yourself in this box saying no matter who it is, you’re not going to support the person, not until you have a chance to appoint a judicial nominee under another president instead of this one,” Palin continues. “You’re hoping, what, that this president doesn’t win? Otherwise, you’d be cooperating with the president. Really, what it is is cooperating with the majority of Americans who know that it’s now or never for America.”

“So much hinges on the Supreme Court. You know the reason, you know why it’s so important, and that’s why you’re thinking you’re going to go rogue. You know, there’s a time and a place to go rogue. This isn’t the time, this isn’t the place. We sure hope you have it within you to do the right thing this time. So you should walk back,” Palin says, adding in a reference to her 2009 book “Going Rogue.”

Continue Reading

Supreme Court

Biden Lies that Replacing Ruth Bader Ginsburg is a ‘Violation of Constitution’

Joe Biden lied when he said if Trump picks a new Supreme Court justice it will be a “fundamental violation of constitutional Principles.”

Published

on

In a recent radio interview, Joe Biden lied when he said if Trump picks a new Supreme Court justice it will be a “fundamental violation of constitutional Principles.” This is an outright lie.

Either Biden is too stupid to understand what he is rambling about, or he is a lying demagogue.

According to a transcript of the interview posted by Grabien.com, Biden revealed a complete lack of knowledge about the topic.

“This is the one chance on the Constitution where the American people have an opportunity. And to rush this is just close to — it’s just a fundamental violation of constitutional principles,” Biden said.

This is a false characterization. First of all, there have been two dozen other instances were a Supreme Court nominee was put forward by our presidents during the last year of their term. One of those was Biden’s former boss, Barack Obama.

No one ever in history called any of these efforts “unconstitutional.”

Steve Harvey, the radio host interviewing Biden, next asked, “Yeah. Can he legally do that? Can President Trump legally appoint somebody before this election?”

Biden went on with more lies.

“Oh, he can legally name somebody,” Biden replied, “it’s right technically, but it’s violation of constitutional under — the underlying rationale, he can name somebody he wants to be the nominee, but all those Republicans, including the Majority Leader McConnell from Kentucky said that he shouldn’t appoint — you know, you shouldn’t anybody in an election year. Remember they stopped Merrick Garland from being appointed or confirmed or even having a hearing because that’s who President Obama picked nine — ten months before the election. But he can do that.”

This is also a lie. During the waning year of Barack Obama’s final term, leader McConnell absolutely did not say a president should not appoint someone in an election year.

What McConnell said was that he controlled the Senate and as a Republican, he saw no reason why he should take up Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland. After all, if he waited a few months and a Republican won the 2016 election, he could hand his new Republican president the gift of nominating a new justice.

It had nothing to do with election year nominations. It was a move of pure power politics. And per the Constitution, McConnell had every right to go down that path!

The Constitution does not say that a president cannot nominate a judge in his last year in office, or in the months before a general election. But it also does not say that the U.S. Senate has an obligation to consider a judicial nomination if the leaders of the Senate decide to refuse to vote on seating that nominee.

In other words, what McConnell did in 2016 and what he is doing today are both 100 percent constitutional.

Biden is a liar saying that it somehow violates the constitution or even the spirit of the document. It doesn’t. Not even a little bit.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Facebook at: facebook.com/Warner.Todd.Huston.

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Become an insider


Best of the Month

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!
 
Send this to a friend