Was Mitch McConnell right about keeping Merick Garland off SCOTUS.

Mott the Hoople

Mott the Hoople

Sweet Jane
I think he was. Though the the alternative to Garland, a reactionary ideologue was certainly unpalatable, Gorsuch has proven quite affective at dragging the country back to the 18th century. Garland, on the other hand and as attorney general, has proven to be a weak, ineffective Democrat apparatchik. He has had nearly four years to bring Trump to justice for his crimes committed after he lost the election, more than adequate time and has done absolutely nothing.

So based on Merrick’s ineptitude as AG has he proven McConnell right on keeping him off SCOTUS? I think that the evidence has proven McConnell’s judgement right. Having an ineffective apparatchik on SCOTUS would be worse than a reactionary like Gorsuch.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
I think he was. Though the the alternative to Garland, a reactionary ideologue was certainly unpalatable, Gorsuch has proven quite affective at dragging the country back to the 18th century. Garland, on the other hand and as attorney general, has proven to be a weak, ineffective Democrat apparatchik. He has had nearly four years to bring Trump to justice for his crimes committed after he lost the election, more than adequate time and has done absolutely nothing.

So based on Merrick’s ineptitude as AG has he proven McConnell right on keeping him off SCOTUS? I think that the evidence has proven McConnell’s judgement right. Having an ineffective apparatchik on SCOTUS would be worse than a reactionary like Gorsuch.
Click to expand...
IF there is a Hell, Mitch McConnell should have a special place there assigned to him. The damage he has done to what was once an admired branch of government is so grievous, it amazes me that he can sleep at all.
 
Ross Dolan said:
IF there is a Hell, Mitch McConnell should have a special place there assigned to him. The damage he has done to what was once an admired branch of government is so grievous, it amazes me that he can sleep at all.
Click to expand...
Well I don’t disagree that there is a special place in hell for Mitch but I think that time has proven him right on Garland. Garland was an awful choice for SCOTUS. As feckless and as ineffective as Garland has been as a AG how would he have been an improvement as a Supreme Court justice? He would be a dead weight. Which is even worse than Gorsuch and in no way do I intend to advocate for Gorsuch in this thread. I’m claiming that Garland would have accomplished nothing on SCOTUS to where SCOTUS would essentially be an 8 justice court. Say what you want to about Gorsuch for good or ill he has hardly been ineffective. Personally I think Gorsuch is awful, a reactionary and completely out of touch with the lives of the vast majority of Americans. Yet he’s still more affective than Gatland obviously would have been.
 
Ross Dolan said:
IF there is a Hell, Mitch McConnell should have a special place there assigned to him. The damage he has done to what was once an admired branch of government is so grievous, it amazes me that he can sleep at all.
Click to expand...
That Depends frankie, I find garland to be a twit.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Well I don’t disagree that there is a special place in hell for Mitch but I think that time has proven him right on Garland. Garland was an awful choice for SCOTUS. As feckless and as ineffective as Garland has been as a AG how would he have been an improvement as a Supreme Court justice? He would be a dead weight. Which is even worse than Gorsuch and in no way do I intend to advocate for Gorsuch in this thread. I’m claiming that Garland would have accomplished nothing on SCOTUS to where SCOTUS would essentially be an 8 justice court. Say what you want to about Gorsuch for good or ill he has hardly been ineffective. Personally I think Gorsuch is awful, a reactionary and completely out of touch with the lives of the vast majority of Americans. Yet he’s still more affective than Gatland obviously would have been.
Click to expand...
I disagree, Mott. I think Garland is a stickler for procedure and the rule of law. He sticks to it, even if an alternative method would better suit a left leaning agenda. That, in fact, was why he was proposed originally.

I think he would have made a much better Justice than either Thomas, Alito, or any of the other right wing Justices.
 
Ross Dolan said:
IF there is a Hell, Mitch McConnell should have a special place there assigned to him. The damage he has done to what was once an admired branch of government is so grievous, it amazes me that he can sleep at all.
Click to expand...
He’s Satan’s taint master

He will polish Satan’s taint hourly

It will be his own personal heaven
 
Ross Dolan said:
I disagree, Mott. I think Garland is a stickler for procedure and the rule of law. He sticks to it, even if an alternative method would better suit a left leaning agenda. That, in fact, was why he was proposed originally.

I think he would have made a much better Justice than either Thomas, Alito, or any of the other right wing
Click to expand...

Ross Dolan said:
I disagree, Mott. I think Garland is a stickler for procedure and the rule of law. He sticks to it, even if an alternative method would better suit a left leaning agenda. That, in fact, was why he was proposed originally.

I think he would have made a much better Justice than either Thomas, Alito, or any of the other right wing Justices.
Click to expand...
Sorry but I have to disagre. Trump is an existential threat to democracy and a man of moral courage is needed to make sure this never, ever happens again. Garland is completely lacking in moral courage and thus has no place in the upper echelons of governance. He might as well be a Trump psychophant.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
I think he was. Though the the alternative to Garland, a reactionary ideologue was certainly unpalatable, Gorsuch has proven quite affective at dragging the country back to the 18th century. Garland, on the other hand and as attorney general, has proven to be a weak, ineffective Democrat apparatchik. He has had nearly four years to bring Trump to justice for his crimes committed after he lost the election, more than adequate time and has done absolutely nothing.

So based on Merrick’s ineptitude as AG has he proven McConnell right on keeping him off SCOTUS? I think that the evidence has proven McConnell’s judgement right. Having an ineffective apparatchik on SCOTUS would be worse than a reactionary like Gorsuch.
Click to expand...
Garland is incompetent. Biden should have fired that idiot long ago.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Sorry but I have to disagre. Trump is an existential threat to democracy and a man of moral courage is needed to make sure this never, ever happens again. Garland is completely lacking in moral courage and thus has no place in the upper echelons of governance. He might as well be a Trump psychophant.
Click to expand...
Garland is Trump's best friend, for sure.
 
Ross Dolan said:
And the difference between being a sitting Justice on the SCOTUS and Attorney General is enormous. He may not be the most effective AG, but he could have been a very decent Justice.
Click to expand...
Mott the Hoople said:
I think he was. Though the the alternative to Garland, a reactionary ideologue was certainly unpalatable, Gorsuch has proven quite affective at dragging the country back to the 18th century. Garland, on the other hand and as attorney general, has proven to be a weak, ineffective Democrat apparatchik. He has had nearly four years to bring Trump to justice for his crimes committed after he lost the election, more than adequate time and has done absolutely nothing.

So based on Merrick’s ineptitude as AG has he proven McConnell right on keeping him off SCOTUS? I think that the evidence has proven McConnell’s judgement right. Having an ineffective apparatchik on SCOTUS would be worse than a reactionary like Gorsuch.
Click to expand...
:sadbaby: Garland approved the raid on Mar A Largo and that resulted in an indictment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top