Joe Biden Said in 1992 that a President Should Not Name a SCOTUS Nominee “Once the Political Campaign Season is Underway”
EVEN BARACK OBAMA’S VP SAYS THAT OBAMA SHOULD NOT APPOINT A SCOTUS NOMINEE ONCE THE POLITICAL SEASON HAS STARTED …
Check out the VIDEO below where in 1992 Sen. Joe Biden says that a president should not nominate a SCOTUS once the political season is underway. Hmm, just how hypocritical is this White House? Barack Obama has previously filibustered previous SCOTUS nominees, but now talks a different game when the shoe is on the other foot. So did Senate Democrats. So does his VP. Biden literally stated that he not only did not want the Supreme Court Justice vacancy filled, but he also did not want the Judiciary Committee to even hold hearings on a nomination. Well how do you like that? Biden wanted President Bush to decline from making a nomination altogether. Boy aren’t the two hypocrites in the White House singing a different tune these days.
Game, Set and Match … Obama gets no say in who the next SCOTUS will be. According to Biden’s own words, if allowed, “we will be in deep trouble as a an institution.”
But when he was chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee in June 1992, Biden suggested Democrats should “seriously consider” not holding confirmation hearings for a Supreme Court nominee put forward by President George H.W. Bush if a justice were to retire in the final months of the presidential election year.
“The Senate Judiciary Committee should seriously consider not scheduling hearings on the nomination, until after the political campaign season is over,” Biden said in a floor address on June 25, 1992, about reforming the Supreme Court confirmation process.
We all knew that one day Joe Biden would put his foot in his mouth with all of his crazy comments. Who knew that it would be one regarding the appointment of SCOTUS nominees and would knee cap Barack Obama. As Hot Air opines, thanks Joe!
How do you spin this if you’re the White House? I guess by focusing on the calendar. Biden said this in late June, several weeks after Bill Clinton had effectively clinched the Democratic nomination. The claim here will be that when Biden said “once the political season is underway,” he meant the general election, not the primary. But there’s no reason to draw that kind of line. The possibility that the next president will fill Scalia’s vacancy is already affecting votes in the process of choosing that president. All we can do now is let the process play out. Thanks, Joe!
“Historically, this has not been viewed as a question,” Mr. Obama said last week. “There’s no unwritten law that says that it can only be done on off years — that’s not in the constitutional text.”
But in a speech on the Senate floor in June 1992, Mr. Biden, then the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said there should be a different standard for a Supreme Court vacancy “that would occur in the full throes of an election year.” The president should follow the example of “a majority of his predecessors” and delay naming a replacement, Mr. Biden said. If he goes forward before then, the Senate should wait to consider the nomination.
“Some will criticize such a decision and say that it was nothing more than an attempt to save a seat on the court in hopes that a Democrat will be permitted to fill it, but that would not be our intention,” Mr. Biden said at the time. “It would be our pragmatic conclusion that once the political season is underway, and it is, action on a Supreme Court nomination must be put off until after the election campaign is over.
“That is what is fair to the nominee and essential to the process. Otherwise, it seems to me,” he added, “we will be in deep trouble as an institution.”
Mr. Biden’s speech came to light on Monday as the White House said Mr. Obama was poring through a thick binder of potential nominees, with an eye toward deciding on his pick within weeks. It quickly became fodder for Republicans who have suggested that the president should wait to name a successor to Justice Scalia, or that the Senate should delay considering one.
WAKE THE HELL UP SOUTH CAROLINA, NEVADA AND THE REST OF THE GOP BASE …
We all knew, well I hope most us us knew, that Donald Trump was not a true Conservative, he just latched on the the discontent and the frustration with all politicians, especially those in Washington, DC and especially with many in the Republican party who were tired of being lied to. Make no mistake about it, the Republican party has betrayed its base, but not by Conservatives, but instead by the GOP establishment and those in leadership roles. Those like Ted Cruz draw the ire of the Republican sellouts and go along to get along GOP politicians. Much like Ronald Reagan did in the 1980′s.
So a note to Donald Trump, either you haven’t a clue to what you are talking about or you are a wolf in Democrats clothing. As it is hardly the Conservatives who have sold out the base. Because we all know that it was conservatives who have political campaign donations to Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Oh, oops, that was Donald Trump. We don’t need lectures from who sold out the Conservative cause when he was actively making donations to the other side.
CNN Democrat Town Hall Question Proved to be a Fraud, Planted Question to Hillary Clinton … “I can see why they gave you this.”
CNN – DEMOCRAT PARTY TOWN HALL FRAUD …
There is a reason why CNN is called the Clinton News Network and the MSM is called the Democrat-Media complex. One has to look no farther than the recent CNN Town Hall in Iowa where you can plainly see and hear for yourself that Hillary Clinton was asked a planted question. One of Hillary Clinton’s final questions was from a young student named Brett Rosengren where he said prior to actually asking the question, “I can see why they gave you this.” THEY! WHO IS THEY?
Obviously, this was a planted question. Sorry LIBS, as much as you want to try and defend the obvious, you were busted!!! So it makes you wonder how many of the other questions were the same and did the candidates know them in advance to prepare their answers. Kind of defeats the purpose of a Town Hall.
Americans Completely Distrust Their Government … 19% Say They Trust the Government Always or Most of the Time
DOES ANYONE WONDER WHY ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT CANDIDATES ARE DOING SO WELL?
According to a recent Pew Center poll, just 19% say they can trust the government always or most of the time, among the lowest levels in the past half-century. I would actually question who those 19% are that think they can trust the government that much in this day and age. What is sad and has become a commonplace view by many Americans is that most Americans fell that elected officials put their own ambitions and power ahead of the country. Currently, Republicans are nearly three times as likely as Democrats (12%) to say they are angry with the government. Of course that is the case because Democrats follow Obama in lockstep and the Republican voters are upset that they have a bunch of gutless elected House and Senate members who made promises to get elected and once in power have done nothing but make excuses.
A year ahead of the presidential election, the American public is deeply cynical about government, politics and the nation’s elected leaders in a way that has become quite familiar.
Currently, just 19% say they can trust the government always or most of the time, among the lowest levels in the past half-century. Only 20% would describe government programs as being well-run. And elected officials are held in such low regard that 55% of the public says “ordinary Americans” would do a better job of solving national problems.
Currently, 22% say they are “angry” at the federal government; 57% are “frustrated,” and 18% say they are “basically content.” These sentiments have changed little over the past year, but two years ago – during the partial government shutdown – a record 30% expressed anger at government.
The share of Republicans and Republican leaners saying they are angry with the government is not as high as in October 2013 (32% now, 38% then). Nonetheless, Republicans are nearly three times as likely as Democrats (12%) to say they are angry with the government. And among politically engaged Republicans and Democrats – those who vote frequently and follow politics on a regular basis – the gap is nearly four-to-one (42% to 11%).
Among both Democrats and Republicans, large majorities say they can seldom, if ever, trust the federal government (89% of Republicans, 72% of Democrats). While trust in government among Republicans has varied widely depending on whether a Republican or Democrat is in the White House, Democrats’ views have shown far less change.
Remember America, this is your government and you elected them. Vote them out if you are so dissatisfied. Obviously, a Democrat or Republican is not going to vote for the other parties candidate, but you can toss the establishment candidates of both parties out on their collective ears in the primaries.
University of Virginia Phi Kappa Psi Fraternity Files $25 Million Lawsuit Against Rolling Stone for Faux “A Rape on Campus” Article
YOU KNEW IT WAS ONLY A MATTER OF TIME AND GOOD FOR THE UVA FRAT …
The Phi Kappa Psi fraternity at the University of Virginia has filed a $25 million lawsuit against Rolling Stone magazine for their false and libelous article they published in 2014 where they alleged that a female freshman was gang raped at the frat house during a party. It was later proved that the story was nothing but a bunch of bunk and poorly sourced and checked by Rolling Stone. The lawsuit stems from the 2014 article, “A Rape on Campus” that was supposed to depict a rape that took place upon a freshman named Jackie at the Phi Psi house on Sept. 28, 2012. The article went into great detail of how how Jackie was raped by seven men while two others watched in a second floor bedroom while a fraternity party raged downstairs. There was just one problem, it was all made up and false. Scared Monkeys had stated back in May 2015 after the UVA Dean had sued Rolling Stone, that it was only a matter of time before the fraternity did as well. Rolling Stone and the author of the article was forced to make a full apology back in April 2015. However, the wheels were already set in motion and we all knew this day was coming.
The Phi Kappa Psi fraternity chapter at the University of Virginia filed a $25 million lawsuit Monday against Rolling Stone magazine, which published an article in 2014 that alleged a freshman was gang raped at the house during a party.
The lawsuit focuses on a Rolling Stone article titled “A Rape on Campus,” which detailed a harrowing attack on a freshman named Jackie at the Phi Psi house on Sept. 28, 2012. The article, written by Sabrina Rubin Erdely, described how Jackie was raped by seven men while two others watched in a second floor bedroom while a fraternity party raged downstairs. The article alleged that the attack was part of a hazing ritual at the long-time U-Va. fraternity.
The Washington Post found significant discrepancies in the Rolling Stone account, including that the fraternity did not host a party that night in 2012 and that a student identified by Jackie as her main attacker was never a member of the fraternity and did not attend U-Va.
Two investigations — by the Columbia University journalism school and the Charlottesville Police Department — later confirmed that there was no gang rape at the fraternity.
Much more at Legal Insurrection and I second their motion that this lawsuit against Rolling Stone is going to be fun to watch.
More of Phi Psi’s statement from WaPo:
“The fraternity chapter and its student and alumni members suffered extreme damage to their reputations in the aftermath of the article’s publication and continue to suffer despite the ultimate unraveling of the story,” the Phi Psi chapter said in a statement Monday. “The article also subjected the student members and their families to danger and immense stress while jeopardizing the future existence of the chapter.”