Quote:
Originally Posted by donassaid
But Democrats were incensed and threw a fit for years about Merrick Garland, insisting that a sitting President had that right. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, suddenky it would be wrong and immoral. Such hypocrisy.
|
If McConnell had given in to their demands, this wouldn't even be a thing. She would've retired during Obama's presidency, knowing that one available seat had already been filled by a reasonable justice.
Since he refused to even consider Garland, and claimed (at the time) that it was because it was too close to election (Garland was nominated 9 MONTHS before election day), the hypocrisy is on him, should he insist that RBG's replacement be pushed through less than 50 days before THIS election.
The election needs to be supported by the people. At the present time, the people do not support the president. The president is the one who nominates people for the SCOTUS seat.