This Is How Dems Are Screwing Up ACB’s Confirmation

So, I mentioned yesterday that I would get to Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation hearing, and here we go. She’s two days into the process with no real surprises, except all the crying that Democrats are doing.

So far, I’ve heard it’s all Trump’s fault, I’ve heard a billion references to Obamacare getting gutted entirely, and a million references to Coney Barrett recusing herself from any election issue that may come before the Court this year, or even recusing herself from any Obamacare decision.

And the Democrats aren’t doing themselves any favors with this approach.

First of all, as Ruth Bader Ginsburg popularized when she went through her confirmation hearing, no Supreme Court nominee is going to detail anything about any case that may come before the high court. That would be a certain path to recusal. Coney Barrett is living up to RBG’s example in that case. Second, when the Democrats “questioned” her yesterday, as Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Patrick Leahy (D-VT) did, they really didn’t do much in the way of questioning. They basically lectured. It was the same with Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) on Monday, talking about Obamacare. These people do realize that Amy Coney Barrett is much too intelligent and has had an awful lot of practice not to get hauled into some circular logic argument. And ACB has done a fine job with that.

The problem moving forward for Democrats is the exact same problem that they had with impeachment. The outcome is already known. Back at the beginning of the year, we all knew that Donald Trump would be impeached by the House, and the the Senate would exonerate him of all “charges”. And as we have learned since then, even the charges he was accused of were made up and phony, and all of the “concrete undeniable evidence” that Adam Schiff talked about was nothing more than a lie. Well, the same thing is true with Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation hearing.

It’s a foregone conclusion that she’s going to be confirmed. The vote will be at least 51-49, with Susan Collins (who is losing her re-election bid big time), and Lisa Murkowski (who WILL lose her re-election bid big time when she faces it) voting no. Mitt Romney has said he would vote yes, and there has been nothing said by anyone that would change that decision.

Once again, the Democrats are looking at trying to make something out of thin air. They are on another fishing expedition in the middle of the desert. At the end of the day, all of their blather, all of their bluster will lead to a vote on the Senate floor that confirms Amy Coney Barrett as Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s replacement on the high court.

The only real question that hasn’t been decided yet is, will it now be a 5-4 Supreme Court with John Roberts staying aligned with the leftist snowflakes, or will Roberts, who always admired RBG, go back to being a conservative now that Bader Ginsburg is gone? If he does that, which I kind of think he will, it will be a 6-3 court. And, if Trump survives the election, and if Stephen Breyer, who is 82, decides to either retire or pass away, it could very easily become a 7-2 court. And that would drive the Democrats crazy! Especially if Trump keeps nominating conservatives for the lower federal courts at the same rate he has in his first four years. Talk about a legacy!

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

12 thoughts on “This Is How Dems Are Screwing Up ACB’s Confirmation

  1. Did you see the bit where Crazy Mazie Hirono asked if ACB had undergone sexual discrimination (graphically asking about possibilities that could have been on a form instead of an open forum in front of her kids)? Is this an effort to only get perverts to apply to office?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Yeah. She was roundly panned for her line of questioning, as was Patrick Leahy. I actually texted Leahy and asked him why there wasn’t a retirement age for the Senate, and why he was still there. But Hirono is just certifiably nuts.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. Let me of course change “had undergone sexual discrimination” to “essentially had raped someone” (while I knew that Crazy Mazie had said what she had, it seems that my editing brain had changed what I put out).

      Liked by 1 person

  2. During ACB’s closing statement she needs to ask, “To the Democrat congress committee members; if I were to disclose that will not overturn the Affordable Care Act and Roe v Wade by voting NO, will you vote YES on my confirmation?”

    But we already know the answer to that question!

    Liked by 1 person

    1. You know, I was thinking about something like that, but not to say she wouldn’t vote to overturn because that sets up a recusal situation. But to ask them “If I were to recuse myself on ACA and Roe v. Wade, are you willing to promise me that you’d vote for my confirmation?” might work! And of course, they’d lie!


  3. Yes, but she doesn’t have to actually say which way she will vote but simply ask only IF she were to disclose her decision. She still didn’t say how she would vote but only asked if it would change anybody’s mind.

    I’m just sick and tired of those self-righteous, holyer-than-thou Democrats always demeaning everybody else, but totally ignoring their own dirty laundry.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. We were thinking along the same lines, regardless. And of course, Democrats would SAY they would vote for her, but would come up with some excuse as to why they wouldn’t. And besides…she doesn’t need them. They are nothing more than carbon.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s