Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
43 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
NO MORE JUDGES on ANY level from this criminal "president" (Original Post) EveHammond13 Oct 2019 OP
no way to do it, Moscow Mitch has complete control of the process nt Celerity Oct 2019 #1
Yep. America's judiciary was rat-fucked by Republicans while everyone was watching Trump's tweets :/ NCLefty Oct 2019 #2
if Rump somehow cheats & steals his way to reelection and the R'thugs retain the Senate, the damage Celerity Oct 2019 #3
After the CW Falcata Oct 2019 #12
Perhaps impeach the judges? BBG Oct 2019 #5
Next D pres appoint 2 judges for every illegitimate Trump judge sharedvalues Oct 2019 #7
Can they do this with federal judges? Polybius Oct 2019 #11
Its fantasy on all levels and will not happen. former9thward Oct 2019 #14
Where do we get 67 Senators to agree to that? Polybius Oct 2019 #10
FALSE. Dems could halt Senate sharedvalues Oct 2019 #6
Senate Democrats can introduce delay, but not stop Senate action. tritsofme Oct 2019 #17
That takes days sharedvalues Oct 2019 #18
McConnell has nothing better to do, he already changed the rules to shorten post-cloture debate tritsofme Oct 2019 #21
Means fewer bad judges confirmed sharedvalues Oct 2019 #22
No, it would likely be counterproductive. Resulting in a rules change that confirms more judges. tritsofme Oct 2019 #23
You're bordering on Republican talking points now sharedvalues Oct 2019 #24
Bullshit. What exactly do you think will happen? tritsofme Oct 2019 #25
See above - take action. No despair. nm sharedvalues Oct 2019 #26
Empty words from people determined to be mad at Democratic leadership. tritsofme Oct 2019 #29
Real words from Adam Jentleson, Ex-Sen Majority Leader staffer sharedvalues Oct 2019 #30
Senate aide to Harry Reid outlines how this works sharedvalues Oct 2019 #28
Senate Democrats are currently already taking most of those steps. tritsofme Oct 2019 #31
I'm mad as hell, but I truely believe Senate Dems are doing what they can mountain grammy Oct 2019 #32
it will not work, as has already been shown to you Celerity Oct 2019 #41
Great idea! Sherman A1 Oct 2019 #4
Dem Senators bring Senate to halt sharedvalues Oct 2019 #8
What he is talking about is Unanimous Consent Agreements. AncientGeezer Oct 2019 #9
But it slows down confirmations DRAMATICALLY sharedvalues Oct 2019 #19
By a couple days tops....meaningless. AncientGeezer Oct 2019 #34
False. Slows down confirmations to a crawl. Please read Jentleson article sharedvalues Oct 2019 #36
I read it....I pointed out to YOU it was about Unanimous Consent Agreements.. AncientGeezer Oct 2019 #39
Make him do it, then. Make him nuke the UCAs sharedvalues Oct 2019 #40
Democrats routinely deny unanimous consent for Trump nominees and force tritsofme Oct 2019 #43
Not how it works ismnotwasm Oct 2019 #13
How would we do that? MineralMan Oct 2019 #15
See above. Slow Senate down. Obstruct. sharedvalues Oct 2019 #20
Pull fire alarms? roll eyes Alhena Oct 2019 #35
It is after all, the last 16 months of his presidency. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Oct 2019 #16
And we do that how? GulfCoast66 Oct 2019 #27
not practical stopdiggin Oct 2019 #33
Adam Jentleson was top aide for Harry Reid and he says to do it. sharedvalues Oct 2019 #37
funny. respected Reid a lot. stopdiggin Oct 2019 #38
It is frightening how tRump is changing the courts from top to bottom. Joe941 Oct 2019 #42

NCLefty

(3,678 posts)
2. Yep. America's judiciary was rat-fucked by Republicans while everyone was watching Trump's tweets :/
Sat Oct 5, 2019, 02:24 AM
Oct 2019

Celerity

(43,097 posts)
3. if Rump somehow cheats & steals his way to reelection and the R'thugs retain the Senate, the damage
Sat Oct 5, 2019, 02:55 AM
Oct 2019

done to the Federal Courts alone will last (it will already, but not as bad yet as it can get) for decades and be so pronounced the rollback in civil rights will be breathtaking. If Rump takes the SCOTUS to 7-2 or even 8-1 (Sotomayor's very bad diabetes) HARD RW plus gets Thomas to spin off and they replace him with a new, younger goon, I think that it will be laying the foundations for a nearly complete take-down of most all of the advancements post Brown v Board in 1954, and they will go for Brown eventually too.

The Red Sates will be like a pipeline of religious fascism, churning out test case after test case until they hit the paydirt of hate. I think that scenario will lay the groundwork for a Blue state rebellion, up to and possibly including a real and genuine succession movement starting in the early 2030's, especially if they try and go the full national outlaw approach on abortion, LGBTQ rights, etc. etc.

There is zero chance the bluest of the Blue states like mine (CA) will countenance that. If the Red States succeed in that harsh an approach and try to enforce it via the feds at gunpoint and withholding billions/trillions in mandated Federal expenditure disbursements to the Blue States, there will be insane internal pressure to get the fuck out of what, at that point, is a theocratic tyranny by the minority via an antiquated, finally broken, 250 year old (at that point) Constitutional system that has been scuppered by one side.

BBG

(2,525 posts)
5. Perhaps impeach the judges?
Sat Oct 5, 2019, 06:40 AM
Oct 2019

Or at least the egregious examples? Is that even possible as a step in reconciling these ill-gotten spoils of a spoiled election?

sharedvalues

(6,916 posts)
7. Next D pres appoint 2 judges for every illegitimate Trump judge
Sat Oct 5, 2019, 07:56 AM
Oct 2019

That’s the equivalent of impeachment.

Polybius

(15,334 posts)
11. Can they do this with federal judges?
Sat Oct 5, 2019, 12:42 PM
Oct 2019

I know they could expand the SC, but not sure if they can expand the rest.

Polybius

(15,334 posts)
10. Where do we get 67 Senators to agree to that?
Sat Oct 5, 2019, 12:41 PM
Oct 2019

Even if we had 67 Senators, not every one would impeach for being "egregious." None of these judges have committed high crimes yet, except maybe Kavanaugh.

sharedvalues

(6,916 posts)
6. FALSE. Dems could halt Senate
Sat Oct 5, 2019, 07:56 AM
Oct 2019

Dems could bring the Senate to a halt.

They could object to EVERYTHING. Force votes on EVERYTHING.

Heck, they could lay down on the floor of the Senate in sequence and get arrested. If they REALLY wanted to stop judge votes.

Slow Senate business to a halt. No votes. No judges.

tritsofme

(17,370 posts)
17. Senate Democrats can introduce delay, but not stop Senate action.
Sat Oct 5, 2019, 03:18 PM
Oct 2019

McConnell can file for cloture, end debate and move on to his judges.

sharedvalues

(6,916 posts)
18. That takes days
Sat Oct 5, 2019, 07:27 PM
Oct 2019

Due to senate rules.

Dems have tons of power to slow Senate to a near halt. They just haven’t used it.

tritsofme

(17,370 posts)
21. McConnell has nothing better to do, he already changed the rules to shorten post-cloture debate
Sat Oct 5, 2019, 09:36 PM
Oct 2019

If Democrats start using the rules the way you suggest, they will be changed rather quickly as well.

sharedvalues

(6,916 posts)
24. You're bordering on Republican talking points now
Sat Oct 5, 2019, 10:20 PM
Oct 2019

Please read what the co-founder of Indivisible, a former Congressional staffer, said above.

tritsofme

(17,370 posts)
25. Bullshit. What exactly do you think will happen?
Sat Oct 5, 2019, 10:26 PM
Oct 2019

McConnell will just take his lumps and say oh gee, I guess they got us?

If Democrats “shut down” the Senate as you suggest, the rules will be changed, and McConnell will confirm even more judges.

There is a reason Democratic leadership hasn’t adopted this stupid strategy.

sharedvalues

(6,916 posts)
28. Senate aide to Harry Reid outlines how this works
Sat Oct 5, 2019, 10:45 PM
Oct 2019
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/01/27/democrats-in-congress-can-block-trumps-agenda-if-they-want-to-heres-how/



Senate Democrats have the power to stop Trump. All they have to do is use it.

y Adam Jentleson
Adam Jentleson is the former deputy chief of staff to former Senate majority leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).
Jan. 27, 2017 at 1:43 p.m. EST
As a Democratic Senate aide for the past seven years, I had a front-row seat to an impressive show of obstruction. Republicans, under then-Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, decided they would oppose President Barack Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid at every turn to limit their power. And it worked

Senate Democrats have a powerful tool at their disposal, if they choose to use it, for resisting a president who has no mandate and cannot claim to embody the popular will. That tool lies in the simple but fitting act of withholding consent. An organized effort to do so on the Senate floor can bring the body to its knees and block or severely slow down the agenda of a president who does not represent the majority of Americans.

tritsofme

(17,370 posts)
31. Senate Democrats are currently already taking most of those steps.
Sat Oct 5, 2019, 10:52 PM
Oct 2019

That article was written in January 2017. Controversial items or nominees don’t get unanimous consent, Democrats run out the clock as much as possible. Earlier this year, we were successful enough in delaying Trump judges that they changed the rules to shorten post cloture debate time. Further escalation like you suggest will result in a stronger procedural response, it’s not that complicated.

I’m not saying not do anything, I’m saying Senate Democrats are being as effective as they can in the minority.

mountain grammy

(26,598 posts)
32. I'm mad as hell, but I truely believe Senate Dems are doing what they can
Sat Oct 5, 2019, 11:18 PM
Oct 2019

Democrats just wouldn't change the rules on a dime like Moscow Mitch has which is why they were better at obstruction. I hope we've learned the lesson of naked power. Moscow Mitch has taught us well, from obstructing Merrick Garland to rushing through confirmations with barely a majority.

If we ever get power back, and that's a big if, I hope we've learned.

 

AncientGeezer

(2,146 posts)
9. What he is talking about is Unanimous Consent Agreements.
Sat Oct 5, 2019, 12:28 PM
Oct 2019

To confirm Judges wouldn't require a UCA...Turtle will just go regular Order.....they come out of committee, get floor debate, and then the R's ram them through by simple majority.


https://www.senate.gov/reference/glossary_term/unanimous_consent.htm

 

AncientGeezer

(2,146 posts)
39. I read it....I pointed out to YOU it was about Unanimous Consent Agreements..
Mon Oct 7, 2019, 09:42 AM
Oct 2019

Turtle will just work around UCA's.....the Senate makes their own rules.
Reid went nuke on POTUS staff appointments and lower court judges and Turtle pulled the same crap for SCOTUS.
You think UCA's is going to stand in the way? Not going to happen no matter how many times you refer back to a twitter thread or Jentleson. It was pointed out to you Saturday it's a pipe dream re: effectiveness.

Your OWN article from Jentleson says and I quote..."McConnell, now majority leader, will be forced to resort to time-consuming procedural steps through the cloture process, which takes four days to confirm nominees."
4 days total......not weeks...not months..FOUR days.
They aren't doing anything else anyways..4 days is squat. The Judges will be confirmed in FOUR DAYS instead of 1 or 2..and Sen. Democratic Leadership knows that....then they do it to us when we get the Senate back....if Turtle hasn't changed the rules again by then.

tritsofme

(17,370 posts)
43. Democrats routinely deny unanimous consent for Trump nominees and force
Mon Oct 7, 2019, 10:10 PM
Oct 2019

McConnell to invoke cloture. You are conflating Jentleson’s mostly reasonable advice that Senate Democrats have largely taken to heart, with some nonsense about Democratic senators laying on the floor in the chamber.

MineralMan

(146,254 posts)
15. How would we do that?
Sat Oct 5, 2019, 02:38 PM
Oct 2019

The Senate is in charge of confirmations. It's also in the hands of Republicans. So, vote in a majority of Democrats in 2020. Things are what they are, and there are consequences of every election. By rights, Trump should have lost in 2016. But for fewer than 90,000 votes, he would have. That's an important thing to think about as we head for 2020.

GulfCoast66

(11,949 posts)
27. And we do that how?
Sat Oct 5, 2019, 10:43 PM
Oct 2019

Reminds me of a story about mice tying a bell around the cats neck.

Good idea. But not possible.

stopdiggin

(11,242 posts)
33. not practical
Sun Oct 6, 2019, 12:38 AM
Oct 2019

Losing strategy -- and the arguments advanced toward implementing are not rational. Leave the political process to the people that understand the process. And stop demonizing every Dem politician that isn't following your agenda to the letter.

stopdiggin

(11,242 posts)
38. funny. respected Reid a lot.
Sun Oct 6, 2019, 10:42 PM
Oct 2019

Never pictured him puling fire alarms or laying down in the aisles (or advocating such). But, to each their own.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»NO MORE JUDGES on ANY lev...