Nothing to do with his qualifications. They are opposed to donald trump pointing anyone to the Supreme Court. Kneneil gorsuch a good man. Its the democrats who are breaking the rules, what theyre doing is changing the 200 year status quo. The ironny is that you could have said the exact same things, regarding judge garland. That, of course, was president s garlands dom knee to fill the same vacancy who republicans refused to hold a single confirmation hearing, much less a vote. It was an unprecedented feet of obstruction. Which Mitch Mcconnell on the Campaign Trail later, one of my proudest moments. The Garland Affairs seem to have taught democrats a lesson about the up sides of obstructionism and now with engaged based marching the streets and turning up the town hall showing to posed any kind of cooperation whatsoever with this president ,
theres new in washington. Just four Democratic Senators came out against a gorsuch fill buster, facing tough reelection battles. Theyve vowed to c
let me ask you this: when this started i felt like the folks i talked to on the hill. on the background chats, thought that this would go through. they didn t think the democrats would get enough votes to fill buster. trace for me the trajectory here among you and your colleagues in terms of how you guys at this point. i certainly waited until after the hearings. part of the whole process of the hearings, four days of it, was first to try to find out what his judicial philosophy was, of course, that makes the difference. judicial philosophy that s because our justice has come with life experiences and various perspectives. he would not give us an inkling as to how he would view laws. he just kept saying, he would follow precedent. he s going to the one court that sets precedent. it was not reassuring at all a. we looked at his record and his decisions. hobby lobby, where all of a sudden, very expanded rights for
or provision so that minority person is harmed. let me ask you this: when this started i felt like the folks i talked to on the hill. on the background chats, thought that this would go through. they didn t think the democrats would get enough votes to fill buster. trace for me the trajectory here among you and your colleagues in terms of how you guys at this point. i certainly waited until after the hearings. part of the whole process of the hearings, four days of it, was first to try to find out what his judicial philosophy was, of course, that makes the difference. judicial fi lphilosophy that because our justice has come with life experiences and various perspectives. he would not give us an inkling as to how he would view laws. he just kept saying, he would follow precedent. he s going to the one court that sets precedent.