Last year, Senate Republicans played a dangerous game with the Supreme Court. This year, it seems to have paid off in more ways than one. They’re getting the pick they wanted — and they’re aggravating their liberal colleagues in the process.
When Antonin Scalia unexpectedly passed last year, the bench faced a predicament it had avoided for decades. For the first time in several administrations, the White House had the opportunity to upend the ideological balance of the nation’s highest court.
Or, they thought they did, anyway.
Republicans refused to hold hearings for Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland. Instead, they argued that the next president — whoever that may be — should be the one to fill the vacancy. The GOP leadership were betting that the polls were wrong and that Donald Trump would stage an incredible come-from-behind victory.
When he did, all eyes turned to Trump — whose conservative credentials were questioned by many mainstream Republicans for the duration of the campaign.
But if you need proof that Trump nominated a capable constitutionalist to the court, watch him take down California Senator Dianne Feinstein on the next page:
The dems were desperate for him to say something or tip his hand….which any HONEST judge would/will never do….showing bias is a no no…yet Ginsberg has been babbling all kinds of biased opinions as of late, she should retire if she can not control her blatant leftist favoritism….
feinstein knows nothing is a know FACT.
She should be in jail.
Good deal !! NAIL that disgusting FINE SWINE$#%&!@*!!
For some reason? Obama picked him. That is a pretty good reason not to want him.
Not inherently. How many decisions out of many? And either way, it doesn’t mean his decisions were wrong. it could be they were wrong to reverse them. Being in the supreme court doesn’t make your rulings correct, it just means you get the “last” say. Last doesn’t have to be right.
.
LOL, One of his decisions was that public schools are not
required to teach mentally or physically disabled children.
Not really a legal “genius” in my opinion 😉
Yep
It’s bad enough to be an imbecile , but then she opens her mouth and proves it.
Except that the corporate “entity” is generally owned my an American in many cases. And where in the constitution does it say being “average” gives your side precedent?