Democrats are twisting themselves into 3-D pretzels figuring out ways to oppose Neil Gorsuch’s nomination to the Supreme Court. That dunderhead from California, Kamala Harris, thinks Gorsuch is supposed to be a Ralph Naderite, ignoring the law to “look out of the little guy.”
“I am still angry about the treatment of [President Barack Obama’s nominee] Merrick Garland. My Republican colleagues have said if the shoe were on the other foot, we would have done the same. It would have been as wrong if we had [refused to give Garland a hearing] as it was when they did.
“But my vote is not about Merrick Garland. It is about Neil Gorsuch, and it is about the constitutional crisis that may well be looming as a potential threat to our democracy.”
Blumenthal reminded us FBI Director James Comey has testified that the agency is investigating ties between Trump’s associates and the Russian meddling in 2016 election.
“The independence of our judicial branch has never been more threatened or more important. The possibility of a Supreme Court needing to enforce a subpoena against the President of the United States is far from idle speculation. It has happened before in United States vs. Nixon.”
So because the FBI might find evidence of Trump or his associates colluding with the Russians during the campaign, it might lead to impeachment hearings, and therefore Neil Gorsuch might refuse to enforce a subpoena against President Trump during those impeachment proceedings.
Just when you think these people can’t be more ridiculous.