The senate shouldn’t hold hearings for this nominee period. 45* has intentionally put forth a judge with the opinion that a sitting POTUS should be held above the law. That’s dangerous, considering what we know about 45*, and there could be more that we don’t know yet.
-
-
-
Agreed, Andrew. There shouldn’t be hearings on Kavanaugh. Period. Aside from anything we learned yesterday, we know that Don Jr, Manafort, and Kushner conspired with Russians from Jr’s emails.
-
Absolutely. There is more to this, and Kavanaugh on the SCOTUS bench is the ultimate mulligan for a career conman. It cannot be allowed to come to fruition.
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Ditto!! Why is this even going forward at all???
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Kavanaugh is there to set trump free.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
A "president" under a criminal investigation should not nominate anyone for a lifetime appointment. This needs to wait until Mueller finishes. Right now, there are questions about Trump's legitimacy. This must be delayed!
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
As long as Rosenstein
@TheJusticeDept won't allow an indictment of a sitting POTUS by some made up rule which is NOT in the constitution, you're stuck with another illegitimate POTUS appointment to SCOTUS.pic.twitter.com/6LUAEmQ2JY
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
The senate shouldn't hold hearings until Donald Trump is able to fully refute the serious and credible charges that his razor-thin electoral votes were obtained illegally. This is true for SCOTUS and any nominations. This is a constitutional crisis. No more nominees!!!
-
Tweet unavailable
-
Except California exists
Really, "sterling guns", just because Fox News makes up their own reality, doesn't mean you can too.
sorry not sorry
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The senate shouldn’t hold hearings on him period. Criminals don’t get to make lifetime appointments to SCOTUS. Do more.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Here's a better idea, how about he doesn't get a vote at all, period?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I dont understand how a President who has been named as an unindicted co-conspirator can name a justice to the court who may judge him. Your fellow Democrats have asked for a delay but you blew them off. Maybe some day you will need their support and they will remember this day.
-
True that but more! I don't understand how a President who has been named as an unindicted co-conspirator can name a justice to the court who may judge him AND JUDGE HIM IN HIS FAVOR AND WHY HE'S CHOOSING THIS MAN BECUZ OF THE WAY HE INTERPRETS CONSTITUTION!!
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Honestly I think the unindicted co-conspirator should be brought to justice before any SCOTUS hearings.
-
I'll second that.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.