Biden Won't Answer Court-Packing Question

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
There is no bigger issue in the 2020 campaign than whether, if they take the White House and the Senate, Democrats would eliminate the filibuster. Expanding and packing the Supreme Court would be a direct result of this, and a radical one. But it is only one of a plethora of radical steps that would follow — expanding and packing the lower federal courts, statehood for the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, single-payer healthcare, elements of the Green New Deal, a massive bailout for mismanaged blue states, breaking up and regulating into submission private businesses, hamstringing the nation’s police forces, gutting the Second Amendment, sweeping immigration amnesty, and so on.

Yet when asked Monday about whether he supported calls by many Democrats to repeal the filibuster and expand, then pack, the Supreme Court, Biden refused to answer the question.

Biden’s rationale for not answering the court-packing question was ludicrous. He acknowledged the question was legitimate (gee, thanks), but then babbled that he’d remain mum because President Trump “always tries to shift the focus” and “never wants to talk about the issue at hand. He always tries to change the subject.” Biden added that if he answered the question, then the “whole debate” — presumably, he meant his nationally-televised debate with Trump a week from today — is going to be about “what Biden said or didn’t say.”

Of course, this is not a matter of changing the subject. This is the subject.

Tellingly, the woman who asked the question did not allude to the president. The premise of the question was: Assume Trump has lost and Biden is now president; would he support adding seats to the Supreme Court? Obviously that would require eliminating the filibuster and enacting legislation, after which Biden and Senate Democrats would conveyor-belt confirm a slew of nominees.

Furthermore, note that Biden’s demurral was not a matter of his getting flustered or feebly deflecting a question because he forgot what he wanted to say. This was the implementation of a considered plan.

The Washington Post, which is as well wired into the Biden campaign as any media organ, reports that the campaign expressed “particular annoyance” at Democratic Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts for raising court packing. Markey had publicly stated that, if Republicans fill the current vacancy with a Trump nominee, then Democrats “must abolish the filibuster and expand the Supreme Court” if they retake the Senate. Biden and his minions were said to be fuming because they are trying to stress “less polarizing issues.” As one anonymous adviser put it, “People in your own party shouldn’t cause you problems 44 days out.”

In other words: If we tell the saps what we’re planning to do, they won’t let us do it.

This explains why, though Democrats talk nonstop about the list of potential Supreme Court nominees President Trump has, with justifiable pride, made public, Biden will not make any Democratic list public. He won’t even tell us whom he’d appoint to the seat Democrats are desperate to prevent Trump from filling.

This is not a matter of some Democratic fear that Biden is not up to the task of parrying tough questions. It is the intimate Democratic understanding that Biden’s answers to the tough questions would be deeply disturbing to voters. The answers, moreover, will demonstrate that Biden’s campaign labeling – Good Ol’ Joe, the moderate who can keep the socialist revolutionaries at bay — is false advertising.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020...river&utm_content=most-popular&utm_term=first
 

annabenedetti

like marbles on glass
I hope he does! Payback is... something something.

McConnell holding up the SC confirmation for the better part of a year four years ago and then doing the exact opposite now... Lindsay Graham saying four years ago "I want you to use my words against me. If there’s a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said let’s let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination" and then turning tail and doing the exact opposite now...
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
I hope he does! Payback is... something something.

You know nothing about the checks and balances built into the government and how that will make the Supreme Court a joke.

McConnell holding up the SC confirmation for the better part of a year four years ago and then doing the exact opposite now... Lindsay Graham saying four years ago "I want you to use my words against me. If there’s a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said let’s let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination" and then turning tail and doing the exact opposite now...

There is a good chance that this years Presidental election ends up in the Supreme Court due to the reckless actions of the Democrats. And it wouldn't be wise to have a Supreme Court with only eight members where there is a chance of a 4-4 decision. So the only choice President Trump has is to add another justice to the Supreme Court.

Those who want to destroy America and start over would love a 4-4 decision.

I bet that you were one of those who want to tear down the statues of George Washington.
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
You mean all the checks and balances Trump and the feckless GOP have blown through?

They did nothing of the sort!

McConnell holding up the SC confirmation for the better part of a year four years ago and then doing the exact opposite now... Lindsay Graham saying four years ago "I want you to use my words against me. If there’s a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said let’s let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination" and then turning tail and doing the exact opposite now...

There is a good chance that this years Presidental election ends up in the Supreme Court due to the reckless actions of the Democrats. And it wouldn't be wise to have a Supreme Court with only eight members where there is a chance of a 4-4 decision. So the only choice President Trump has is to add another justice to the Supreme Court.

Those who want to destroy America and start over would love a 4-4 decision.

I bet that you were one of those who want to tear down the statues of George Washington.
 

annabenedetti

like marbles on glass
They did nothing of the sort!

Oh, but they did.

There is a good chance that this years Presidental election ends up in the Supreme Court due to the reckless actions of the Democrats. And it wouldn't be wise to have a Supreme Court with only eight members where there is a chance of a 4-4 decision. So the only choice President Trump has is to add another justice to the Supreme Court.

Only choice? No. The GOP doesn't plan to play fair, or according to the norms or rule of law. This is just part of their ongoing power grab.

Those who want to destroy America and start over would love a 4-4 decision.
Those who want an authoritarian theocracy want to destroy America and start over.

I bet that you were one of those who want to tear down the statues of George Washington.

Just as goofy the second time you said it. :chuckle:
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
Oh, but they did.

Where is the proof?

Only choice? No. The GOP doesn't plan to play fair, or according to the norms or rule of law. This is just part of their ongoing power grab.

So President Trump isn't playing by the rules despite the fact that Obama nominated a justice during an election year?

What's good for the gander is good for the goose!


Those who want an authoritarian theocracy want to destroy America and start over.

Just as goofy the second time you said it. :chuckle:

I didn't see you criticizing those who wanted to tear down the statutes of Washington because he was a slave owner. And both them and you support the same racist party.
 
Top