Susan Collins: "it would be harmful to the country to have a repeat of what we saw with the last tw0

[riversedge]

hypocrite to too good of a word for this woman!!


Susan Collins says when the Senate considers Biden's nominee to SCOTUS, “it would be harmful to the country to have a repeat of what we saw with the last two nominees being so narrowly confirmed.” https://thehill.com/opinion/judici

Link to tweet

?s=20&t=OW00YKA2wh-3BFiItwEHWw

Link to tweet

?s=20&t=OW00YKA2wh-3BFiItwEHWw



Susan Collins puts the 'Hypocrite' into 'Republican' again.

Link to tweet

?s=20&t=OW00YKA2wh-3BFiItwEHWw





McConnell's unconstitutional blockade of Garland poisoned subsequent proceedings


https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/594574-mcconnells-unconstitutional-blockade-of-garland-poisoned-subsequent
By Lawrence Friedman, opinion contributor — 02/16/22 02:55 PM EST

by

McConnell's unconstitutional blockade of Garland poisoned subsequent proceedings
© Anna Rose Layden

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) recently suggested that, when it comes time for the Senate to consider whomever President Biden nominates to succeed departing Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, “it would be harmful to the country to have a repeat of what we saw with the last two nominees being so narrowly confirmed.” Likely she was referring to Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, and the lack of bipartisan approval of these justices, who were respectively confirmed by Senate votes of 50-48 and 52-48 — in contrast, say, to the 87-9 vote for Breyer himself back in 1994.

As Collins knows, the tenor of the Kavanaugh and Barrett hearings and lack of Democratic support for the nominees — as well as Neil Gorsuch before them (54-45) — may be traced in no small part to the Senate’s 2016 refusal to consider Merrick Garland, former President Obama’s nominee to replace Justice Antonin Scalia on the high court. Following the direction of then-Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Senate Republicans declined to hold any hearings on Garland or, indeed, to substantively act on his nomination in any way.

Even if a move like McConnell’s had been contemplated by Senators in the past, it had never been tried. Aside from the lack of historical precedent, the blockade was arguably unconstitutional. It undermined both the letter and spirit of Article II, which states that the president “shall have the power” to “nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint … judges of the Supreme Court.”....................................

[mzmolly]

1. So is she suggesting a recall of the 'last two' ???

[lagomorph777]

2. Yes, I think so. Let's start impeachment proceedings for Justice Beerbong.

Pretty clear deception involved in his confirmation process. May be trickier for Gorsuck.

[Baitball Blogger]

6. Let's start the rumor: Susan Collins calling for a recall of that last two justices!

Last edited Thu Feb 17, 2022, 02:58 PM - Edit history (1)

Maybe it's time to look at what she said about her Kavanaugh vote, just to show in detail the extent of her hypocrisy.

[calimary]

23. I like it! Play hardball.

Manipulate the discourse. Cue the talking points (that are, preferably, catchy and shrewd and short, which makes them more easily memorable).

Fight back and be devious. Besides, the other side isn’t expecting that because of our long track record of giving in and never fighting back HARD. It’s an easy win when your competitor doesn’t do that much to compete.

Get the win first by any means necessary. Apologize sometime later.

[PJMcK]

3. How can Collins look at herself in the mirror?

She’s such a putz.

[FoxNewsSucks]

5. She doesn't.

She casts no reflection so there's no point.

[edhopper]

15. The gold framed mirror?

with a smile and a wink

[uponit7771]

22. outside money? it allows her to flood message zones and mediums

[Tommymac]

24. What she sees back...

[Baitball Blogger]

4. It would be even more harmful to allow an injustice to stand, when it left our Court politically

unbalanced.

[FoxNewsSucks]

7. What never gets mentioned in articles like this

particularly rightwing or right-leaning sources, is that not only did Moscow Mitch steal the seat for Gorsuck, but MF45's appointments were totally unqualified.

What reason would there be for any democrats to have voted for Aunt Amy or Beerbong Brett? They are unfit and unqualified, and that rarely gets mentioned.

[CrispyQ]

8. Hypocrites, liars, & cheats of the highest order & they have absolutely no shame about it. -nt

[lagomorph777]

9. Shut up, asshole.

Happy to hear you admit you rammed through two activist unqualified SCROTUS nominees after stealing a seat.

But you made the rules, now live with them.

[DFW]

10. DFW: "It would be harmful to the country to take anything Susan Collins says seriously."

So there. Should be just about as newsworthy, and somewhat more factual.

[marmar]

11. Collins is more useless than cash at an Apple store.

[NCjack]

12. Concerned Susan is saying that Pres. Biden should pick from a list provided

by Mitch, thereby avoided a repeat of the last two nominations.

Susan, that is not going to happen.

[dixiechiken1]

13. Eat dicks, Susan.

[Solly Mack]

14. Stephen King probably thinks of Collins when he writes about the indifference of neighbors

to the evil they witness. The town pharmacist who turns his back on the young kid being attacked by bullies, pretending not to see. Things like that. People who are just as bad in their own way but see themselves as "good" people.

[maxrandb]

16. Sigh...

[link:https://m.

|

[onecaliberal]

17. IDGAF what these evil pricks say or think. Call the vote in committee, and then send to the floor.

I don't care about blue slips or anyone with concerns. When the senator who is out returns, call the fucking vote!

[Ray Bruns]

18. Does anyone even give a damn what the mealy mouth Susan Collins says or does?

[hay rick]

19. Collins' hypocrisy is matched only by her cowardice. nt

[NNadir]

20. Susan Collins is just another thug with hatred for the American Constitution.

Period. There's nothing to discuss or consider where she's concerned since she lacks serious core beliefs.

[wryter2000]

21. She's irrelevant

We don't need her vote.

However, I guess you could read her statement that Republicans should vote for Biden's nominee. And btw, we didn't vote against the other two out of spite. We did it because neither of them belong on the Court.