Senate Judiciary Committee Advances Supreme Court Nominee Neil Gorsuch Along Party Vote…

Despite a ridiculously false narrative of President Trump refusing to discuss Judge Gorsuch with Democrats in advance of his nomination, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 11-9 to advance the nomination to the full Senate.

Throughout the last morning of Judiciary Committee statements, several Senators used the talking point that President Trump never consulted their party.  As you can see from this January 24th tweet below, that assertion is demonstrably false:

President Trump met with Senator Dianne Feinstein and Senator Chuck Schumer on January 24th, 2017, to hear their concerns and opinions prior to nominating Judge Gorsuch a week later on January 31st.

Today the judiciary committee voted along party lines.  All 11 Republicans voting for Gorsuch and all 9 Democrats voting against him.   Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is expected to schedule a vote on Thursday to end a Democratic filibuster of Gorsuch, which would require 60 votes.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Election 2016, media bias, President Trump, Supreme Court, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

184 Responses to Senate Judiciary Committee Advances Supreme Court Nominee Neil Gorsuch Along Party Vote…

  1. Pam says:

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Andrew E. says:

    Let’s hope Schumer is too blinded by partisanship to do the smart thing and not filibuster Gorsuch. Remember, we WANT the Dems to force the nuclear option.

    Liked by 8 people

  3. Abster says:

    Wow, bet that was frosty. Appears Feinstein is speaking. Schumer looks as though he is not having anything to do with this.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Nationalist says:

    Liked by 5 people

  5. fleporeblog says:

    I am not only praying at night for my family, PDJT, his family and his administration but I am also praying for the Democrats to filibuster Neil Gorsuch. This will allow McConnell to use the nuclear option for Gorsuch. A new precedent will be used going forward. When Justice Kennedy retires this summer, our President will be able to nominate Judge Pryor from the 11th circuit. He was on the original list and made the final 3. Judge Pryor who is 49 is Antonin Scalia on steroids.

    That also sets our President up for replacing Old Ruth Ginsberg prior to 2024. If you think she would last that long, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. Our President will once again be able to put another Pryor type into the SC. We will have a 6-3 court and our country will have been saved for generations to come. A true miracle if Breyer where to have to retire or god forbid move on would give us a 7-2 court. Don’t let me wake up to that happening. It isn’t out of the realm on our imagination.

    Liked by 14 people

    • fleporeblog says:

      Just had to write Chuck the Duck again since I reside in NY. This is the only time I can say that I am happy that I do.

      Hi Senator Schumer:

      I wrote you about a week or so ago that I want you and the Democrats in the Senate to filibuster Neil Gorsuch for the SC. This pick was taken from us by Mitch McConnell. Merrick Garland should be sitting on the SC today. The Republicans never allowed him to proceed through the process. I have donated and continue to donate to you and the DNC as much as I can on a very limited budget. If 8 Democrat Senators vote for Neil Gorsuch, I am going to hold you personally responsible. I have shared my feelings with my entire church assembly so that they are aware. Many if not all of them feel the same way. PLEASE save our country from this disaster that calls himself the president.

      Thanks

      Thank You for Your Email
      Thank you for contacting Senator Schumer.

      Liked by 13 people

    • WalksByTheWater says:

      I agree with your position. It is very encouraging. However, I am careful about assuming beyond a Trump presidency regarding the USSC. I would not put it past the enemies of the people of this country to Pelican Brief the USSC to achieve their objectives. Prepare what we can and teach diligence to those that come behind us.

      Liked by 1 person

    • adoubledot says:

      Wait, didn’t Sundance predict that Kennedy would NOT retire if the Senate used the nuclear option here?

      Liked by 1 person

    • Gmandet17 says:

      Never get tired of Winning!

      Liked by 2 people

    • Marc says:

      Please no Pryor. He’s not been a friend to Christian conservatism one bit. Gorsuch is already judicially moderate when it comes to social issues so we need a real Scaliaite put in after Kennedy retires. Scalia was a socially conservative Catholic and I don’t think Gorsuch would’ve had it in him to vote against the gay marriage ruling. We need to let President Trump know that we demand justices that respect religious liberty and right of association above liberal sensibilities.

      Liked by 1 person

    • MaineCoon says:

      TY for explaining why a filibuster would be good as much has been written to the contrary.

      But, in regards to the USSC it is very good.

      Ginsberg should recuse herself in all matters relating to Trump policy. In other words, she might as well resign, but she won’t.

      Therefore, she will be replaced. Buh bye!

      Liked by 2 people

    • Founding Fathers Fan says:

      We are being held hostage by all the ‘conservative voters’ who stay home on primary day.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. Ghostrider says:

    Do I have this right? If it is correct to say that the GOP does not have 60 votes, then why hold the vote? Why wouldn’t McConnell just enforce the nuclear option now?

    Like

    • MfM says:

      Clarence Thomas was voted in with only 52 to 48.

      Liked by 3 people

      • SteveInCO says:

        You’re (possibly) confusing the final confirmation vote with the cloture vote.

        Before that 52-48 vote, there was a prior vote to end debate which would have to have passed by at least 60 votes. That’s the next hurdle for Gorsuch to clear. Dems back then were willing to admit they had lost and allowed debate to end.

        Liked by 4 people

    • benifranlkin says:

      the GOP has to be “forced” into the nuclear option of only needing a majority of the Senate (51 votes) to confirm Gorsuch by failing to stop the filibuster by the Dems because the 60 votes r not there to stop it …is how I see it.

      Like

  7. Chucky is sitting there tuned out.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Pam says:

    Liked by 10 people

  9. Pam says:

    Like

  10. Joe Blow says:

    Just gonna go down with the failboat, huh, Dims?

    Liked by 4 people

    • Niagara Frontier says:

      That’s not how MSNBC is framing the day. This hour they kicked off their MTP daily show: “Chaos and dysfunction at home. Everywhere you turn it’s a mess….President Trump unable to lead.”

      How ironic because I’m feeling quite good about the day’s events.

      FCC and FEC need to investigate. It’s official, MSNBC might need to register officially as a Political Action Committee. It’s not even close.

      Liked by 8 people

  11. streetparade says:

    Apparently it may not be necessary to go nuclear even if the Dems filibuster. The Senate’s “2-speech rule” was used to break the filibuster of the Civil Rights Act in 1964.

    http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/the-judiciary/326737-the-same-rule-used-to-pass-the-civil-rights-act-could-be

    Liked by 2 people

  12. MfM says:

    The Democrat Base has to be kept angry and upset. They are feeling very disrespected that Merrick Garland wasn’t even considered. If the Democrats in DC don’t reject Gorsuch then they have their base to answer to.

    What the angry Democratic base, who has been angry since Hillary didn’t win, won’t understand is that the elections that put the Republicans in power in the House and Senate had consequences. Those consequences meant that Merrick Garland wouldn’t have gotten confirmed and proceeding with his nomination was a waste of everyone’s time and just political theater.

    Liked by 1 person

    • dilonsfo says:

      I disagree because you give too much credit to the Republican Senators. If McConnell would have allowed a vote for Garland, several wishy-washy Republicans would have voted for him. Donald Trump was not President and, true to form, several Republican Senators would have voted for him to show “they are good, reasonable people who want to work with the Democrats.” These Senators would have included Graham and McCain. It would have happened and the Scalia seat would have been lost forever. Our country would have been damaged beyond repair.

      Liked by 9 people

    • Tyler McKinley says:

      Totally agree it would have been a waste of time.

      Like

  13. Lucille says:

    “…President Trump refusing to discuss Judge Gorsuch with Democrats in advance of his nomination…” When confronted with truth, the habitual liar doubles down on his lies.

    And in the case of these lefties/Democrats, they know their base will back them no matter what because truth is not important. All that is of value to them is a life of ruling over the rest of us. If lies get them where they want, then lies it will be.

    Lying liars live to lie.

    Liked by 3 people

  14. Pam says:

    Liked by 1 person

    • dilonsfo says:

      I hope they prepared the two soap boxes for Graham to stand on when he spoke so that photos could be taken of him standing as tall as the rest of the Senators.

      Liked by 1 person

    • jupitercomm says:

      Well, Sen Graham hit the nail on the head but he’s kinda behind isn’t he? Almost like none of it seemed real to him until it meant his routine & normal expectations would be turned upside down

      Liked by 1 person

      • Doug says:

        thats the funny part… its like the repubs didnt realize what was happening to the dems as all the blue dogs were kicked out. it means there is no bipartisan approach… any dems in red states are dead meat next election: mccaskill, tester, manchin, heitkamp and brown are gone and who knows how many else. I just pray that Kasich doesnt run for that senate seat… yuck

        Liked by 1 person

  15. Nationalist says:

    Someone remind me…when does Congress go on recess again?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Nationalist says:

      Found it… April 10-21

      https://www.aace.com/files/advocacy/congression-i-work-schedule.pdf

      It would be REALLY funny if President Trump inserted Pryor as a ‘temporary recess appointment’ while keeping Gorsuch in his pocket for the next opening.

      Liked by 6 people

      • Beryl Bomb says:

        Is that possible?

        Like

        • Nationalist says:

          Yes, he would be able to serve until the end of the current Congressional Session.

          Liked by 5 people

        • Nationalist says:

          A recess appointment is the appointment, by the President of the United States, of a senior federal official while the U.S. Senate is in recess. The United States Constitution requires that the most senior federal officers must be confirmed by the Senate before assuming office, but while the Senate is in recess the President may act alone by making a recess appointment to fill “Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate.” To remain in effect, a recess appointment must be approved by the Senate by the end of the next session of Congress, or the position becomes vacant again; in current practice this means that a recess appointment must be approved by roughly the end of the next calendar year. Recess appointments are authorized by Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, which states:

          The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

          Liked by 3 people

          • dilonsfo says:

            Exactly what good would that do? IMO, it would just delay justice and give the Democrats more talking points while serving no purpose.

            Like

            • Nationalist says:

              The Uniparty actually likes Gorsuch (in spite of the floor show by the dims).

              It would be VERY Trump-like to sieze the opportunity to put the harder-to-confirm guy in there first if he has to use anything other than standard operating procedure. The dims are going to whine no matter what he does…so why not get the guy he REALLY wants in there and start pushing some fun cases through the court..while setting an example for the next time.

              I would giggle for a week as the tears flowed from the left.

              Liked by 1 person

            • elleb77 says:

              Well, some interesting decisions could be made in the next year !!!

              Like

          • safvetblog says:

            The problem is the definition of “Recess” – IIRC, this really refers to the times between “sessions”, e.g. yearly times. E.g. xxxth Congress First Session, etc. Obama tried to pack the FTC with “recess” appointments during regular breaks, e.g. Easter, but they were eventually overturned by federal courts as not being valid “recess” appointments, causing a lot of politically driven decisions to become void.

            Like

            • Kroesus says:

              different situation entirely as the Rs saw Bammy’s upcoming tactic and stayed in “pro forma” session w/o recess…..Bammy’s DoJ tried to argue that the Senate was in actual recess but the judge ruled the SENATE makes the determination as to when they are in recess

              Liked by 4 people

      • filia.aurea says:

        Shhhhh..

        Liked by 1 person

      • SEJMON says:

        I BELIEVE MOST OF US ON THIS SITE WOULD LIKE SEE JUDGE PRYOR IN RECESS-JUST MAKE DEMOCRAPS COMPLITELY CRAZY……

        Like

  16. Even if he didn’t, so what?

    Chuck Schumer doesn’t get to pick the nominee.

    Liked by 2 people

    • R-C says:

      Chuckie THINKS he does. Chuckie thinks HE is the ultimate power in DC. (I think McConnell agrees with him on this…)

      Liked by 1 person

    • maiingankwe says:

      Oh it made me ever so angry every time I would hear the clip of shumer demanding the president and republicans to sit down with them to come up with a SCOTUS pick. As if it’s up to him who gets the position. I know without a doubt this would never have happened with the hag and nor did it happen with the idiot who just left.

      Hey schumer, your party lost, deal with it. It is the president’s choice not yours, and there is nothing written that he has to ask your permission in who he should pick. You sure as heck wouldn’t have, and if anything you would rubbed that in all of our faces.

      Liked by 2 people

  17. aprilyn43 says:

    Democrats, Liberals & other lefty ilk, are such sore losers !!
    Their lame cry baby ways are so transparent & disgusting !
    But … the Rats are at & they wonder why they lost … oh well onto more winning!

    Liked by 1 person

  18. p'odwats says:

    The Democrats are not a party with a vision for the future. It’s all about the present and doing whatever is necessary to keep their political power base intact. Harry Reid put in the nuclear option to enable Obama to stack the federal judiciary and deny the GOP the opportunity to fillibuster all those lefty judges. The Democrats set the precedent and now it’s​ time for McConnell to use it to get Judge Gorsuch on the SC, and any other judge during President Trump’s time in office. I’m tired of the niceties. It’s time to use the “political” sledgehammer on the Democrats. No more games with these people.

    Liked by 12 people

  19. Pam says:

    Liked by 6 people

  20. Pam says:

    Liked by 3 people

  21. ZZZ says:

    Hey! Our majority in the Senate FINALLY paid off.

    YIPEE!

    dorks…

    Liked by 3 people

  22. John Galt says:

    Stop talking. Kick the tires and light the fires.

    Liked by 3 people

  23. markstoval says:

    “Throughout the last morning of Judiciary Committee statements, several Senators used the talking point that President Trump never consulted their party.”

    It is always hard to fathom why politicians such as those Senators would lie in public on a matter that is so easy to prove that they are lying. I suppose they are just tossing out lies that are sweet nothings in the ears of their voters, like a many men sometimes do with a sweetheart.

    Regardless, it is very important that this man be confirmed. And then another one from the original list of 20 that Trump had published during the election fight. And then another. I hold out hope that Trump will survive 8 years and have a large impact on the Supreme Court. God knows we need the Court to be populated with men and women who believe in law rather than political whim when deciding cases before the court,

    Liked by 1 person

    • Howie says:

      We need 3 total. One for kennedy, one for Scalia, and one when Ginsberg kaks.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Doug says:

        well clarence thomas is up there in age too.

        Like

        • benifranlkin says:

          Ginsburg 84, Kennedy 81, Breyer 79, Thomas 68…iow after Gorsuch, DJT will replace 2 if not 3 more (I hope Thomas stays around long enuf just so Donald can replace him in his second term. Henceforth the Supreme Court will be known as the the Trump Court..for maybe 25 years with 5 judges selected by the man.

          Liked by 3 people

  24. Pam says:

    Like

  25. Pam says:

    Like

  26. jupitercomm says:

    The last thing Rush said before going off air was that this will backfire on the Democrats & underlining the irrationality of it from their perspective. That’s Scalia’s seat. So what Gorsuch takes it? Goes back to the way it was. But when a more liberal seat is vacant, they’ll have already played their best hand.

    Liked by 2 people

  27. Qbinky says:

    Given the democrats already dropped the threshold for lower court judges, does anyone really think the next time they have the majority and a SCOTUS pick comes up that they won’t go nuclear? You KNOW they will. Time for us to just do it now and hope we get the opportunity to appoint a few more.

    Liked by 2 people

  28. Pam says:

    Liked by 1 person

  29. Pam says:

    Liked by 3 people

  30. CheshireCat says:

    But, but, but … … I have heard that Chuck SureManure made a totally bi-partisan offer to comprise by appointing Susan Rice instead of Gorsuch.

    Like

  31. CheshireCat says:

    The dims next talking point for voting against Gorsuch will be that his name sounds Russian to them.

    Liked by 3 people

    • BakoCarl says:

      We should not be concerned at all about ditching the filibuster rule to confirm Neil Gorsuch to a position on the Supreme Court. The Dems are pure obstruction to a candidate who is eminently qualified.

      Additionally, PTrump (if he has the opportunity) should replace Justice Kennedy and Justice Ginsburg with the youngest, most well-qualified Constitutionalists he can find. The Dems will scream about “balance on the court”, but Obozo nominated Judge Merrick Garland, a liberal, to replace Justice Scalia.

      Elections have consequences, and one of the best, long-tern acts PTrump could accomplish would be to get three (or more) relatively young constitutionalists on the Supreme Court for the next 30 or so years.

      Liked by 9 people

      • filia.aurea says:

        Agreed. But don’t forget all the ‘”constitutional conservatives” who refused to support President Trump, in spite of the SCOTUS ramifications.

        Like

      • Wend says:

        We need some more hotties to balance out those two pigs, Kagan and Sotomayer. If she’s such a “wise Latina” how does she let herself get so fat

        Like

    • MaineCoon says:

      Pray for Franklin Graham as he stands publicly for God doctrines.

      Like

  32. Pam says:

    Like

  33. Pam says:

    Liked by 1 person

  34. Stinky-Inky says:

    Regarding the photo above with POTUS and VPOTUS sitting with Dem and GOP senate leaders, what is the brown thing in front of Feinstein? It looks like a big pixilated chocolate lab. I’ve enlarged the photo and can’t make it out. Thanks.

    Like

    • Doug says:

      hard to tell at first but on closer inspection it looks to be logs for the fireplace… if you look real close to the corner by pence you can see vp pence’s leg is blocking part of it indicating the object is actually behind him .. since its color and texture looks like wood and its next to the fireplace im going to assume its wood logs sitting on some sort of gold colored fire wood holder

      Liked by 1 person

      • Stinky-Inky says:

        Thank you! Now I can see it. It was one of those weird optical illusions–I just could not figure it out. Ha!

        Like

    • tinkerthinker2 says:

      They don’t carry obama’s water any more..it’s…ah..

      Like

    • jeans2nd says:

      Re: the pic –

      Feinstein is speaking. POTUS, VP, McConnell looking at Feinstein, listening. Guy next to McConnell is looking at his watch.

      Schumer is …doing what, exactly? Looking at someone else in the room? Watching what is going on outside of the window?
      Perhaps Schumer’s dementia has caused Schumer to forget this meeting. Schumer may not even know where Schumer is at this moment.

      Sit up straight, guys, give those lungs some room to work.

      Like

  35. Doug says:

    yes I think its time to just do it… and look any dem votes that join us allow the repubs to still claim bipartisan legislation… trump sees this coming .. if they cant work with them on the judge then they wont work on anything

    Like

  36. Pam says:

    Liked by 6 people

  37. Pam says:

    Liked by 1 person

  38. Martin says:

    Liked by 2 people

  39. nyetneetot says:

    Also of note: Lack of green apples.

    Liked by 1 person

  40. andi lee says:

    Why is the Senate GOP stating this …

    … ?

    Liked by 1 person

  41. The Popcorn Tape says:

    Conservapedia is being autistic about Gorsuch not being hardline pro-life.
    Look, Schlafly, I love you, but in order to end abortion, first you must have a COUNTRY.

    Liked by 6 people

  42. Strea says:

    Ryan struck out, next up McConnell. We’ll see if he can show the Speaker how it’s done. I won’t hold my breath yet I am hopeful.

    Liked by 3 people

    • OmegaManBlue says:

      Yes, guess we will soon find out if all his talk about the nuclear option was just talk like repealing Obamacare.

      Like

  43. OmegaManBlue says:

    The GOP not confirming Gorsuch will be devastating to this country. He is needed so cases can be decided. If he isn’t seated the democrats will destroy this country with even more legal challenges to everything Trump and they do.

    Like

  44. Big Jake says:

    Doesn’t a filibuster require speaking?

    Make these losers get up there and talk until they can’t stand any more.

    Like

    • rasputini says:

      “Doesn’t a filibuster require speaking?”

      Not anymore. Ryan diluted it so much that he actually called it in from the neighbor hood bar.

      Like

  45. zephyrbreeze says:

    Eat the Pain, Dems. Get Podesta in there to give you a consolation talk.

    Like

  46. Beverly says:

    I can’t spit enough to get the taste of these traitors out of my mouth. They’re absolutely mad, as crazy as bughouse rats. Foaming at the mouth, beyond all reason!
    One of these centuries, we’ll fight these junkyard dogs as hard as they fight us. Well, I can dream.

    Like

  47. unconqueredone says:

    What the Democrats saying Trump never consulted their party actually means is that he didn’t acquiesce to their wishes and give them someone they liked.

    Like

  48. jmclever says:

    These old fart dems like Pelosi and Schumer forget that the new media never forgets anything. In the past, they could have made the statement that POTUS never consulted them and it would have been much harder to verify that lie. These days it’s fairly easy.

    Like

  49. I’m worried the GOPe will double cross Trump in another attempt to discredit his administration by not having the votes to go nuclear.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s