Eh, I'm responding to Allah's hypo, which responded to Hugh's hypo. In fact, a huge amount of the anti-Mitch argument (including yours!) has been hypos instead of addressing what actually happened. I'm content to address what actually *has* happened.https://twitter.com/RadioFreeTom/status/1404489073541124104 …
-
-
Meanwhile, in the world of things people actually laid the political groundwork to do at the time: https://www.politico.com/story/2007/07/schumer-to-fight-new-bush-high-court-picks-005146 …pic.twitter.com/WYexE7SqJ6
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Weak sauce
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
In that case a compromise was hammed in which democrats promised to use the filibuster only in 'exception circumstances'. Republicans got almost all of the nominees they wanted. Naturally when the roles were reversed they filibustered everything and refused any compromise.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
The bottom line: Bush got to fill the seat. Whatever the rhetoric was.... Bush's nominees got hearings and he got a confirmation to fill the seat. You can't what-about this, Dan. What McConnell did with Scalia's seat was unprecented.
-
No he didn't. They nomination of Miguel Estrada did not go through.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content
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.