17 Mar 2016 4:39 pm
One of the senior Republicans hypocrites on the Senate Judiciary Committee Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch signaled on Wednesday that he was open to moving Garland’s nomination in a lame duck session after the election in November, presumably only if a Democrat wins the White House.
On Friday March 11th Sen. Orrin Hatch (R.-Utah) told Newsmax that Obama could easily name Merrick Garland, who is a fine man, but he probably won’t do that because this appointment is about the election.
http://www.newsmax.com/t/newsmax/article/718871
So Merrick Garland was a 'fine man' on March 11th, but on March 16th, not so much.
So all that **** about allowing the next president to choose the nominee goes right out the window if Hillary wins the election. LOLGOP’s SCOTUS strategy misfire: Orrin Hatch is blowing apart the Republicans’ obstructionist argument.
If your position is that the American people should have a say in who selects the next Supreme Court justice, then obviously it doesn’t make any sense to vote to confirm Obama’s nominee at any point during the remainder of his presidency.
But doing so during the lame-duck session would be the most flagrant violation of that so-called principle imaginable.
Not only would you be considering the nominee of a president whose successor had been chosen, you’d also potentially have several senators who’d been voted out of office voting to confirm or deny that nominee.
Hatch and his colleagues say they want the American people to have their say, but they’re also open to defying the people once they’ve spoken.
On Friday March 11th Sen. Orrin Hatch (R.-Utah) told Newsmax that Obama could easily name Merrick Garland, who is a fine man, but he probably won’t do that because this appointment is about the election.
http://www.newsmax.com/t/newsmax/article/718871
So Merrick Garland was a 'fine man' on March 11th, but on March 16th, not so much.