Obama: Constitution 'pretty clear' I get to name Scalia replacement

[WestVirginiaRebel]

Washington Examiner:

President Obama on Tuesday reiterated his vow to name a replacement for the-late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, and tweaked Republicans who have generally argued for a strict reading of the Constitution for reaching for arguments about why Obama should delay his nomination.

 

"The Constitution is pretty clear about what is supposed to happen now," Obama told reporters in California. "When there is a vacancy on the Supreme Court, the President of the United States is to nominate someone; the Senate is to consider that someone and either they disapprove of that someone, or that someone is elevate to the Supreme Court," Obama said from Rancho Mirage, Calif., where he was spent two days meeting with leaders of Southeast Asian nations.

 

"This is the Supreme Court—the highest court in our land," he said. "It is the one court where we would expect elected officials to rise above day-to-day politics, and this would be the opportunity for senators to do their job."

 

Obama also dismissed his prior opposition to Justice Samuel Alito, and said that despite his position, Alito is now on the bench, and said Republicans should keep that in mind before deciding to prevent any nomination from moving forward this year.

________

 

Scalia literally isn't even in the ground yet...

[righteousmomma]

Sorry but he makes me so mad with his arrogant condescending self centered bullsh&t that I cannot respond right now. I have been nice all day posting on fb about this but my cup of human kindness is empty right now.

The best thing I can tell you is go to the Heritage website and read their interpretation of SCOTUS nominees and appointments,

Of all the unmitigated gall, bless our prez' little heart.

[kevindavis]

He can name the replacement, but it doesn't mean the person is automatically a justice.

[Valin]

He can name the replacement, but it doesn't mean the person is automatically a justice.

 

 

Thank you. Someone should tell him that.

[kevindavis]

 

He can name the replacement, but it doesn't mean the person is automatically a justice.

 

 

Thank you. Someone should tell him that.

 

 

He won't listen..

[Draggingtree]

 

 

He can name the replacement, but it doesn't mean the person is automatically a justice.

 

 

Thank you. Someone should tell him that.

 

 

He won't listen..

 

[Draggingtree]

The Left Will Unleash Hell to Win the Court

Andrew Klavan / February 16, 2016 / 3 COMMENTS

 

Yeah, this is gonna leave a mark, no question. If you’re wondering how it came to pass that one man — Antonin Scalia — was all that was left standing between the Constitution and the trash can, listen here:

https://ricochet.com/left-will-unleash-hell-win-court/

[Draggingtree]

Daily Digest

February 17, 2016

THE FOUNDATION

"He [the president] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint ... Judges of the supreme Court." —Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution

TOP RIGHT HOOKS

Man Who Tramples Constitution Now Pleads Its Case

 

 

By playing political games with the pick for the next Supreme Court justice to replace the lateAntonin Scalia, Democrat leaders are demonstrating their blatant hypocrisy. In response to the advice from Republican senators to let the next president make the pick, Barack Obama insisted he would still nominate a candidate. He's merely trolling with fake concern over the Constitution. "There's no unwritten law that says it can only be done on off years," Obama said Tuesday. "That's not in the constitutional text. I'm amused when I hear people who claim to be strict interpreters of the Constitution suddenly reading into it a whole series of provisions that are not there." The Constitution is also pretty clear about the president's enumerated powers in other areas too, and that hasn't stopped Obama from trampling it. Yes, Obama has an enumerated power to nominate Supreme Court judges, and Republican senators aren't saying he doesn't — they're saying he should wait. But Obama is setting up a straw-man argument. He's misrepresenting the senators, saying they are forbidding him from even nominating a candidate

http://patriotpost.us/posts/40733

[Valin]

Obama’s shinola
Scott Johnson
Feb. 17 2016

Jeff Mason covers the White House for Reuters. At Obama’s press conference in Rancho Mirage, California yesterday, Mason asked Obama an obvious question (video below). The White House has posted the transcript of the press conference here and here.

 

In the video excerpt below, Mason asks Obama how he squares his recent lecture on the Senate’s constitutional duty yada yada regarding the replacement of Justice Scalia with his own support for the filibuster of Justice Alito in 2006. Obama hemmed and hawed and filibustered in the style to which we have grown accustomed when he has no good answer to a straightforward question.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4RaBOL4_Yk

 

Here is Obama’s answer in its entirety:

 

(Snip)

 

Suffice it to say that this act has gotten awfully old.