Trump's SCOTUS

[clubgop]

The rule change means Gorsuch and all future Supreme Court nominees can be confirmed with a simple majority vote and will no longer face a 60-vote hurdle.

What goes around, comes around...

Who are you saying that too? Can't be Republicans, they have never held a Supreme Court nomination under regular order.

[StCapps]

The rule change means Gorsuch and all future Supreme Court nominees can be confirmed with a simple majority vote and will no longer face a 60-vote hurdle.

What goes around, comes around...

Who are you saying that too? Can't be Republicans, they have never held a Supreme Court nomination under regular order.

Today America became less of a vetocracy, y'all should be proud.

[Speaker to Animals]

The rule change means Gorsuch and all future Supreme Court nominees can be confirmed with a simple majority vote and will no longer face a 60-vote hurdle.

What goes around, comes around...

As if this isn't a war. GOP has to destroy the democratic party at this point. The democrats are going to try to destroy the GOP through mass migration, and will basically wipe out the demographic destiny of our nation in the process.

This is a war. It's been that way for a while. That's why Obama left his agents in the government to sabotage the current administration.

If democrats regain control, you better believe more judges will die in mysterious accidents. They will likely try to change the number of judges on the court the way FDR tried to do as well.

[The Conservative]

The rule change means Gorsuch and all future Supreme Court nominees can be confirmed with a simple majority vote and will no longer face a 60-vote hurdle.

What goes around, comes around...

As if this isn't a war. GOP has to destroy the democratic party at this point. The democrats are going to try to destroy the GOP through mass migration, and will basically wipe out the demographic destiny of our nation in the process.

This is a war. It's been that way for a while. That's why Obama left his agents in the government to sabotage the current administration.

If democrats regain control, you better believe more judges will die in mysterious accidents. They will likely try to change the number of judges on the court the way FDR tried to do as well.

If you believe the reports in some cases I've seen illegal immigration has taken a 30% hit so far... if it's true your hypothesis will take a lot longer to have happen.

[Okeefenokee]

It's not a hypothesis. It's happening.

[StCapps]

It's not a hypothesis. It's happening.

Down 67% apparently.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... der-trump/

Testifying to the committee in a first hearing Tuesday, former Border Patrol Chief David V. Aguilar said the percentage may be even higher than Mr. Trump teases. Compared with 2016, he said, apprehensions on the southwest border were down 67 percent through March.

Sounds like MAGA to me.

[de officiis]

The History and Constitutionality of the Filibuster

Richard Arenberg of Brown University and Josh Chafetz of Cornell University discuss the history of the Senate filibuster and whether or not it should be eliminated.

[clubgop]

I am fine with nominees getting a straight up or down vote. But for legislation the filibuster must be preserved but none of this "hold" bullshit, if you want to filibuster than you have to actually filibuster, hold the floor and no other business can come to the floor. You want to make your mark and get on the news then have at you, but you can't go on forever.

[Speaker to Animals]

Filibuster is an abuse of procedure. Has no place in American government.

It's time to fix all this shit. This is a burning the ships on the beaches moment. If the GOP does not utterly destroy the democrats, it's over. It's truly over if the democrats get power again. Stop fucking around with half measures and attempts at trying to compromise with them. They will always fuck you over. Every time. You have to defeat them.

[de officiis]

The rule change means Gorsuch and all future Supreme Court nominees can be confirmed with a simple majority vote and will no longer face a 60-vote hurdle.

What goes around, comes around...

Who are you saying that too? Can't be Republicans, they have never held a Supreme Court nomination under regular order.

{Many in the Republican Party} are uneasy about abandoning the filibuster. As one Republican member put it, "The Senate is getting ready to do a lot of damage to itself." He added that Harry Reid "broke the rules" when, as Senate majority leader, he led the Democrats' bid to curtail the filibuster in 2013. "Now we are moving to the McConnell era, where we break the rules."

The fallout, apart from a precipitous decline in Senate comity, could be greater polarisation of the Supreme Court. Both Mr Gorsuch and Merrick Garland, Barack Obama's pick for Scalia's seat, whom Republicans testily blocked for 293 days, were "boy-scout" nominees, according to that same Republican member: well-qualified picks deserving bipartisan support. With a new 51-vote threshold, he believes, "It won't be a boy scout next time": whichever party controls the White House will have every reason to tap a significantly more ideological nominee.

http://www.economist.com/news/united-st ... epare-kill

So, as I said.