Justice (Ruth B. Ginsburg) Replacement Nominee Expected Next Week, Mitch Mcconnell Promises Senate Vote

this was 9 months before the election 4 years ago that McConnell argued it was improper for a different sitting president to even get a vote on a nomination.

now, less than 2 months from the election, the hypocrisy is obvious & shameful.

RBG's dying wish was to not be replaced until after the election.


https://www.newsandguts.com/ginsbur...-replaced-until-a-new-president-is-installed/

View attachment 221204

Ginsburg was selfish in not stepping down when she was infirm and unfit to be a justice. Now that she's gone she should have no say whatsoever as to when her replacement is appointed. RBG was a staunch radical Leftist and she presumed Biden/Harris would take the White House and therein another strong radical Democrat would be appointed by Biden. God forbid!

Given she dared to presume to speak to what should happen after her death as pertains to the USSC, both she and Mitch are going to be surprised when that new president is sworn in for a second term.
Trump has already said he is looking to a woman justice to replace RBG. Prayerfully this will also be a Republican.
Ever more prayerfully after the selection that I hope precedes the election, in order to save America from the evils currently at work in D.C. , a Republican majority in the Congress would be a blessing to accompany the re-election of Trump/Pence.
I'd hope every Christian prays for that.

We've seen what the Democrats in power, empowered, think of America and her people. Enabling domestic terrorism and cloaking that under the mantel of allowance, free speech. The soft coupe against our president is unmistakable. The criminality behind his impeachment glaring.

If America is to survive, especially Christians here, Democrats can't have majority authority. Anywhere.

clear, incontrovertible hypocrisy.

i just want you all to keep in mind because of your worldly gang affiliations, you're supporting and celebrating lies & double standards.
think about it while you go to sleep at night and remember it when you wake up. reconcile it with your Christianity.

We could go back and forth all the livelong day about what a shocker it is that politicians change their tune depending upon the circumstance. Does that make politicians "liars" ... or "hypocritical" ... when they assess a situation and make a decision that appears to contradict something they have said or done in the past?


Biden in 1992: Delay SCOTUS nominee until after election
BY LYDIA WHEELER - 02/22/16 02:10 PM EST

“It is my view that if a Supreme Court Justice resigns tomorrow or within the next several weeks or resigns at the end of the summer, President Bush should consider following the practice of a majority of his predecessors and not, and not name a nominee until after the November election is completed,” Biden said at the time.

https://thehill.com/regulation/cour...-scotus-nominee-should-be-delayed-until-after




Biden in 2016: President Has 'Constitutional Duty' to Nominate Supreme Court Justice, Even Months Before Election
BY BENJAMIN FEARNOW ON 9/19/20 AT 2:58 PM EDT

Former Vice President Joe Biden declared in 2016 that if he were chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee he would push ahead with the nomination of a Supreme Court justice "even a few months before a presidential election."

Biden penned a New York Times op-ed in March 2016—just weeks after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia—which accused Senate Republicans that year of neglecting their "Constitutional duty" by stonewalling President Barack Obama's Supreme Court nominee until after the November general election. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell cited a so-called "Biden rule" as justification for delaying Merrick Garland's nomination, pointing to a 1992 Biden speech that demanded President Bush wait until after that year's election to appoint a Supreme Court replacement.

"I know there is an argument that no nominee should be voted on in the last year of a presidency. But there is nothing in the Constitution — or our history — to support this view," Biden wrote in March 2016, demanding Senate Republicans review Garland's nomination.

...

Obama echoed Biden's same point in 2016: "When there is a vacancy on the SCOTUS, the President is to nominate someone, the Senate is to consider that nomination ... There's no unwritten law that says that it can only be done on off-years. That's not in the Constitution text."

https://www.newsweek.com/biden-2016...ate-supreme-court-justice-even-months-1533106

Good research!

The most important 9 Judicial seats in the USA, as democrats support looting, rioting, and defunding the police, chaos?

Do Republican's want to give this Judicial nomination and power to the democrats, when they can fill the vacancy now with a conservative?

That's A No Brainer

• 2016: Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas):
  • “It has been 80 years since a Supreme Court vacancy was nominated and confirmed in an election year. There is a long tradition that you don’t do this in an election year.”
• 2018: Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.):
  • “If an opening comes in the last year of President Trump’s term, and the primary process has started, we’ll wait to the next election.”
• 2016: Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.):
  • “I don’t think we should be moving on a nominee in the last year of this president’s term - I would say that if it was a Republican president.”
• 2016: Sen. David Perdue (R-Ga.):
  • “The very balance of our nation’s highest court is in serious jeopardy. As a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I will do everything in my power to encourage the president and Senate leadership not to start this process until we hear from the American people.”
• 2016: Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa):
  • “A lifetime appointment that could dramatically impact individual freedoms and change the direction of the court for at least a generation is too important to get bogged down in politics. The American people shouldn’t be denied a voice.”
• 2016: Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.):
  • “The campaign is already under way. It is essential to the institution of the Senate and to the very health of our republic to not launch our nation into a partisan, divisive confirmation battle during the very same time the American people are casting their ballots to elect our next president.”
• 2016: Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.):
  • “In this election year, the American people will have an opportunity to have their say in the future direction of our country. For this reason, I believe the vacancy left open by Justice Antonin Scalia should not be filled until there is a new president.”
• 2016: Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.):
  • “The Senate should not confirm a new Supreme Court justice until we have a new president.”
• 2016: Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Col.):
  • “I think we’re too close to the election. The president who is elected in November should be the one who makes this decision.”
• 2016: Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio):
  • “I believe the best thing for the country is to trust the American people to weigh in on who should make a lifetime appointment that could reshape the Supreme Court for generations. This wouldn’t be unusual. It is common practice for the Senate to stop acting on lifetime appointments during the last year of a presidential term, and it’s been nearly 80 years since any president was permitted to immediately fill a vacancy that arose in a presidential election year.”
• 2016: Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.):
  • “I strongly agree that the American people should decide the future direction of the Supreme Court by their votes for president and the majority party in the U.S. Senate.”

We don't nee another right wing conservative justice. We don't need another left wing liberal justice. We need nine justices who will look at the cases in front of them, and make a decision based on the Constitution, not whim or will of political extremes of the people.