Comments by "" (@charlesvan13) on "Ana Navarro's SELF-OWN About The Supreme Court!" video.

The Democrats couldn't do anything. The Reps had 53 votes. That's 2 votes more than they need. The majority party controls procedures. They couldn't halt the vote because they couldn't control the process.
4
@fat imo So Chucky was going to pull the fire alarm? Or, slash the tires on 3 Rep Senators so they wouldn't have quorum? That is just silly.
3
@sthubbins4038 There's nothing the Dems could do except scream at the sky. But they created this situation by changing the rules in 2013, to eliminate the filibuster in judicial nominations, passed 52-48 with the 52 all Dems. and every Rep voting against it. This isn't misdeeds of Reps. This is the Dems falling into huge a self-own. The Reps are using rules passed by Dems.
2
@georgetziokas9881 The Dems voted 52-48 in 2013 to end the filibuster. They couldn't stop a vote. This is just screaming at the sky. "They could have prevented quorum" LOL There are 53 Rep senators, quorum is just 51, with Pence counting if they're short.
2
@fat imo "Slowing down the process" doesn't stop the nomination. They have 3 months. That's 3 months, for something that only takes a day.
2
@fat imo That's just like the "resistance" opposing Trump after he was elected. Recall, they had a recount (Trump gained votes), then celebrities with no skin in the game urged the electors to go faithless. It was all masturbation.
2
You're missing the relevant law. In Nov. 2013 the Dem controlled Senate voted to end the filibuster for judicial nominations. All Reps voted against the rule change. So the Dems couldn't stop the judicial appointments for Trump and the Rep controlled Senate. It's the Democrats' fault. They created this situation. That was a self-own of huge proportions. But contrary to what most Dems think, the SCOTUS is not supposed to be a star chamber of progressive oligarchs. They're supposed to only judge cases based on the Constitution and common law. Unlike legislators, they can't even act on an issue until a case is before them.
2
@fat imo They actually had 3 votes more than they needed. Because Pence is the president of the Senate, with a tie breaking vote. Part of it is that the Democrats didn't want a bitter opposition right before the election. And they knew they were going to lose. So there would have been no political gain.
1
I also have to remind Jimmy that Wall Street is contributing mainly to Democrats. So if "Judges are being appointed because Wall Street supports them", it's not because Trump is appointing them.
1