Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (1263377)	9/22/2020 2:11:40 PM
From: Wharf Rat	2 Recommendations Recommended By pocotrader rdkflorida2 Respond to of 1583466

"When it comes to Supreme Court nominations, it has always been the Democrats who set new lows of dirty politics." Always is a very long time. I checked your standards company, and this was in the catalog. Then and now: What McConnell, others said about Merrick Garland in 2016 vs. after Ginsburg's death Katie Wadington USA TODAY When Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia died in February 2016, Senate Republicans came out of the gate insisting that his seat not be filled due to the presidential election about nine months away. The Democrats vehemently disagreed. But ultimately, President Barack Obama's last Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland — a judge who mainly agreed with now Chief Justice John Roberts, a conservative, when they served together on the appeals court — never received a hearing. With the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Sept. 18, the debate over Supreme Court nominations during an election year is renewed. At least one Republican — Sen. Lindsey Graham — had said a Supreme Court vacancy should not be filled until after the 2020 election. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, however, is saying the opposite of what he did in 2016. Obama, in a statement out Friday, said: A basic principle of the law — and of everyday fairness — is that we apply rules with consistency, and not based on what’s convenient or advantageous in the moment. The rule of law, the legitimacy of our courts, the fundamental workings of our democracy all depend on that basic principle. As votes are already being cast in this election, Republican Senators are now called to apply that standard. Here's how the fight over filling high court vacancies has played out among Senate leaders in the last nearly five years, and what they're saying now: McConnell when Obama was presidentFeb. 16, 2016: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, write an opinion piece in the Washington Post, saying the nation has a "unique opportunity" to make an impact on the court by filling it along with the timeline of voting for a new president, "as they decide who they trust to both lead the country and nominate the next Supreme Court justice." "(Democrats would) rather the Senate simply push through yet another lifetime appointment by a president on his way out the door," they write. "Given that we are in the midst of the presidential election process, we believe that the American people should seize the opportunity to weigh in on whom they trust to nominate the next person for a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court," they conclude. "It is today the American people, rather than a lame-duck president whose priorities and policies they just rejected in the most-recent national election, who should be afforded the opportunity to replace Justice Scalia." usatoday.com