Diane Feinstein needs to resign.

[trenchfoot]

I get the notion that Feinstein, like Ginsburg felt that the older they got, the more urgent the need was to prove that they were still able to contribute to society, that they still had value, that they were afraid of being put out to pasture and relegated into obscurity, that once that day occurred they would surely die a quick death soon afterward so best to hang in there until the very end because by then they had no other purpose in life than to serve.

Like some fighters who don't know when to quit, who keep chasing after glory that in reality passed them by from wear and tear and.......aging.

 

[MrSquished]

You pick awfully long-winded ways to state what could be said in two sentences, IMO.

"Treat others as you wish to be treated"
"Be the change that you wish to see in the world"

The rest is just egotistical pontification and bloviating, as though you are the love-child of Ghandi and Freud.

Now spin the same old tired bullshit about me not being able to see the "truth" because I do not want to awaken.

He basically is just trying not to admit his own hatred of Newsom is making him blame the governor over Diane Feinstein for her own bad decisions these last few years.

 

[Moonbeam]

Well they can't rule it unconstitutional but they can sure say.. rapists aren't criminals but just angels sent by god to procreate and freedom of religion guarantees them to do god's will!

Look, if you are going to freak out about Feinstein it is only fair that I get to freak out about the Supreme Court ruling the constitution unconstitutional.

That's a long way for you to say you hate Newsom so much that you let your hatred of him blame him for Feinstein's own actions.

How can a person who is expecting to be blamed or wanting to blame someone for something distinguish between blame and a simple statement of cause and effect. The moment Newsom came out with descriptors of who the characteristics required for him to nominate a Feinstein replacement, he created a political situation. I said why he did it and I don't like his reasonse. Now try to be calm. I don't blame him for doing it; I just hope he gets hit by a bus before he can do it. No cause, no effect, right?

 

[Moonbeam]

You pick awfully long-winded ways to state what could be said in two sentences, IMO.

"Treat others as you wish to be treated"
"Be the change that you wish to see in the world"

The rest is just egotistical pontification and bloviating, as though you are the love-child of Ghandi and Freud.

Now spin the same old tired bullshit about me not being able to see the "truth" because I do not want to awaken.

I could get by with less than two, I am sure, if I limited myself to telling you something you would understand.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


OK,OK, so I can't do that even in one.











You know I'm kidding. You are worth the extra effort.

 

[manly]

People get the democracy they deserve.

People from California are FUCKING STUPID for not choosing kevin de leon in 2018

No thanks.

The rise and fall of careerist Kevin de León

Kevin de León, an extraordinarily ambitious politician, faces demands that he end his career after a political meeting with racist overtones.

calmatters.org

 

[JEDI]

That makes no sense.
it didnt require a filibuster proof majority to install her as committee chair but requires one to replace her?

explanation:

GOP revolts against plan to replace Feinstein on key panel in push to block Biden judicial picks | CNN Politics

lite.cnn.com

Typically, in the beginning of a new Congress, naming members to committees isn’t controversial. An agreement passes with unanimous consent, meaning there is no formal vote.

But if any single member objects – as could be the case here – the resolution would require 60 votes.

If any Republican objects to Schumer’s request, Democrats would need nine Republicans and every single Democrat (and independents who caucus with Democrats) to vote “yes” to approve it.


not allowing it means less Dem judges.
so not seeing repubs saying yes to this.

 

[Pens1566]

explanation:

GOP revolts against plan to replace Feinstein on key panel in push to block Biden judicial picks | CNN Politics

lite.cnn.com

Typically, in the beginning of a new Congress, naming members to committees isn’t controversial. An agreement passes with unanimous consent, meaning there is no formal vote.

But if any single member objects – as could be the case here – the resolution would require 60 votes.

If any Republican objects to Schumer’s request, Democrats would need nine Republicans and every single Democrat (and independents who caucus with Democrats) to vote “yes” to approve it.


not allowing it means less Dem judges.
so not seeing repubs saying yes to this.

edit: nvm, my math was off by 1.

 

[MrSquished]

Somehow this is governor Newsom's fault

 

[kage69]

I'm sure you're all just as shocked as I am.



“I, for one, am not going to help President Biden’s most unqualified nominees to get confirmed. I don’t think you’ll see us help in that effort,” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), a senior member of the panel and a key ally of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).

At least five Republicans on the Judiciary Committee — Sens. Tom Cotton (Ark.), Thom Tillis (N.C.), Marsha Blackburn (Tenn.), John Kennedy (La.) and Cornyn — all said they would oppose the effort to replace the longtime California Democrat or saw no reason to remove her. "

 

[vi edit]

Grand old obstruction party just gonna fucking obstruct. I expect no less. Governing was never the plan. Just be a pestilence on this country. Consume every resource, drain every dollar and not give a single shit about the people.

 

[cytg111]

Is Ana right here?

Dems not pushing Feinstein to resign cause her replacement would be a progressive?

 

[Pohemi]

Is Ana right here?

Dems not pushing Feinstein to resign cause her replacement would be a progressive?

They might be forgetting about the committee assignments fuckery that would lose them the party majority in the committee for nominating judges. I assumed THAT is currently the biggest reason they aren't pushing her harder to resign.

I'd like to see her gone too. But right now it's the timing they're dragging heels on. They need to start nominations like yesterday now that the old husk is back in D.C.

How much longer until she doesn't even realize what she's voting for, and/or votes the "wrong way" (the reverse of what she'd do under normal mental capacities).

Seems like a tinderbox waiting to burn. I can't see her lasting much longer.

 

[Puffnstuff]

She should be removed from office and replaced ASAP.

 

[Moonbeam]

What a bunch of Namby-Pamby liberals. Feinstein in her dotery is better than anything the Republicans have to offer. She may lapse in and out of reality, but they are permanent residents of an altered one.

 

[fskimospy]

She should be removed from office and replaced ASAP.

Until someone can explain to me how they are going to fill her seat on the judiciary committee that’s a hard no from me.

 

[Indus]

lol

 

[IronWing]

lol

I hate to say it but the NYP isn't wrong this time.

 

[NWRMidnight]

Until someone can explain to me how they are going to fill her seat on the judiciary committee that’s a hard no from me.

I understand your point, but this is going to end up like Judge Ginsburg, who refused to step down, then died at one of the worst times. Wouldn't it be better to try to remove her and replace her now, rather than wait?

 

[fskimospy]

I understand your point, but this is going to end up like Judge Ginsburg, who refused to step down, then died at one of the worst times. Wouldn't it be better to try to remove her and replace her now, rather than wait?

This is the opposite of Ginsburg.

Had Ginsburg resigned she would have been replaced with someone else who could do the job. That would have been good!

The entire point here is if you replace Feinstein Republicans will filibuster her replacement on the judiciary committee and so there will be no replacement. They will block ALL judges going forward.

If you were mad about Feinstein being gone if she resigns it will be the equivalent of her being gone permanently.

 

[sactoking]

I was under the impression that when the calls for her to resign started it was specifically because if she resigned her replacement on Judiciary couldn't be blocked but a temporary replacement while she was in hospital could (and was, Republicans said they'd block a temp assignment).

 

[fskimospy]

I was under the impression that when the calls for her to resign started it was specifically because if she resigned her replacement on Judiciary couldn't be blocked but a temporary replacement while she was in hospital could (and was, Republicans said they'd block a temp assignment).

I’m no expert on senate parliamentary procedure so I could totally be wrong but from my understanding her replacement would require a new organizing resolution of some sort that could be filibustered.

 

[Jaskalas]

This is the opposite of Ginsburg.

Had Ginsburg resigned she would have been replaced with someone else who could do the job. That would have been good!

The entire point here is if you replace Feinstein Republicans will filibuster her replacement on the judiciary committee and so there will be no replacement. They will block ALL judges going forward.

If you were mad about Feinstein being gone if she resigns it will be the equivalent of her being gone permanently.

How the !@#$ isn't this !@#$ party based?
Republicans should have no say on who Democrats place on committees.
That they control it as a minority is absolute lunacy.

 

[NWRMidnight]

This is the opposite of Ginsburg.

Had Ginsburg resigned she would have been replaced with someone else who could do the job. That would have been good!

The entire point here is if you replace Feinstein Republicans will filibuster her replacement on the judiciary committee and so there will be no replacement. They will block ALL judges going forward.

If you were mad about Feinstein being gone if she resigns it will be the equivalent of her being gone permanently.

The GOP can't filibuster committee chairs. Each party assigns , thru a resolutions it's committee members. This includes the judicial committee. If she is removed, they would just have to assign someone else to fill the vacant seat from the party.

 

[manly]

I’m no expert on senate parliamentary procedure so I could totally be wrong but from my understanding her replacement would require a new organizing resolution of some sort that could be filibustered.

I don't know but seems like you're mostly right about this one:

In Defense of Dianne Feinstein Not Quitting (No, Really)

Liberals calling for the ailing Dianne Feinstein to quit haven't considered what that would mean for one possible, albeit unlikely, scenario: a vacancy on the Supreme Court

time.com

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/17/politics/dianne-feinstein-mitch-mcconnell/index.html

According to the CNN report, a few GOP Senators suggest they would be more open-minded if she retires but not sure why I would ever believe them. So yeah a filibuster would seem to be more likely.

CNN:

Even if Feinstein retired, the process would be the same to replace her on the Judiciary Committee.

 

[K1052]

As long as the GOP obstruct a replacement for the committee she's stuck till her term ends. Running in the first place in 18 instead of retiring was the mistake and it can't be undone now.