Featured

Chuck Todd confronts Rubio: ‘Do presidential terms end after 3 years?’

According to GOP presidential hopeful Marco Rubio, the senate should block Barack Obama from replacing the recently departed Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia because he is a second term president with only a “few months” left.

Rubio, who appeared on several Sunday morning shows, believes that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell should stall the nomination until a new president is elected.

“Within the last year of the last few months of the president’s term, we should not be appointing Supreme Court justices,” Rubio told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos. “In the last year of a president’s term, in his second term especially, there should not be Supreme Court nominees put into lifetime positions for a president that you’re not going to hold accountable at the ballot box.”

Rubio repeated his same position on Meet the Press with host Chuck Todd, insisting there should be no nominations from a “president nearing the last few months of his administration.”

“Do presidential terms end after three years?” Todd asked.

“There comes a point in the last year of the president, especially in their second term, where you stop nominating,” Rubio said. “You basically say, at this point, with a few months left in your term, no accountability from the ballot box on the appointment you’re going to make — on a lifetime appointment.”

“Eleven months!” Todd interrupted.

The longest it has taken to confirm a Supreme Court nominee is 125 days.

Watch here via Rawstory.

Facebook Comment
19 Comments

19 Comments

  1. Perry

    February 14, 2016 at 1:58 pm

    Is it my imagination or is McConnell and other politicians exhibiting Republican-style “political correctness?”

  2. Martin Pollard

    February 14, 2016 at 2:48 pm

    No, they’re desperately trying to prove (as they have since he was first elected) that BHO is 3/5ths of a president.

  3. Liz

    February 14, 2016 at 3:39 pm

    Boobio sounds just like he did when Christie burned him. Repeat, rinse, repeat.

  4. sarah allendale

    February 14, 2016 at 5:51 pm

    Have Republicans totally lost their MINDS?! Somebody tell Robotboy there that the President of the United States, Barack Obama, is the duly-elected leader of the USA’s Executive Branch and the Senate SHOULD vote on HIS nominee to the Supreme Court. PERIOD!

  5. kidderjeffrey

    February 15, 2016 at 2:45 pm

    They have never recognized him as president, and never will. Remember, they’re not here to represent the people, they’re here to represent their party……you don’t count.

  6. kidderjeffrey

    February 15, 2016 at 2:57 pm

    Standard practice for 80 years? Then explain Justice Kennedy, dumba**…….

  7. Kevin Wires

    February 15, 2016 at 3:38 pm

    Actually using Rubio’s formula the day after your second term election you should not appoint anyone because you will not face another election. Love the way they make up data for their rational. Has not happened in 8o years except the for the last time it did.

  8. Academicjock

    February 15, 2016 at 5:02 pm

    I wonder what these republican jackasses (Rubio, et al) in the Senate would do if Obama nominated a conservative justice?

  9. Academicjock

    February 15, 2016 at 5:50 pm

    Unfortunately, your question demonstrates the common ignorance about chemical weapons and the ignoring of history. In my explanation, it will be important to remember that al-Majid used those weapons in the 1980’s and early 1990’s on the Kurds who “lived in Iraq” only because when the English divided the Ottoman Empire back 100 years ago, the Northeaster part of the Empire where the Kurds live was included within the boundary of Iraq. The Kurds HATED being part of Iraq and subject to Saddam Hussein (I can’t blame them) and the Kurds were planning on military action to secede from Iraq. Hussein and al-Majid used the chemical weapons to quell a Kurdish uprising — and, sadly, it worked well.

    Prior to Bush’s lie based invasion, due to UN weapons inspections, it had become public knowledge that there were no chemical WMD.

    Now, let me explain the FACTS surrounding those inspections. You will have to ‘google’ some of the terms as I’m not going to teach high school physics and chemistry on a message board.

    Do you know what a gas chromatograph or the process of gas chromatography (GC) is? It is VERY likely you don’t. So … off to google for ya! Now, the machine and results are, while using a calibrated machine, absolutely 100% accurate.

    Prior to the war, two sets of weapons inspectors used GC to test HUNDREDS of sites including the sites that Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld identified as being storage areas. The inspectors did not just open a door, look around and say, “NOPE, no WMD here.” and close the door. They took THOUSANDS of samples for the WMDs, the precursor substances as well as the HALF-LIVES (off to google if you don’t EXACTLY understand that term). Using GC, the inspectors could determine PRECISELY what had existed in those locations for over 20 years. Once there, the substances and the chemical foot print or evidence for them cannot be destroyed.

    The UN inspectors found NO EVIDENCE for WMD since ’91 – 1992 … NOTHING … NADDA. Do you understand that? NOTHING! There were no WMD’s produced after 1991 or ’92. There was nothing to hide or, as you implied, move to Syria or anywhere else.

    I KNEW THIS by reading the PUBLI

  10. Ben Bass

    February 15, 2016 at 5:53 pm

    That egg on Rubio’s face suits him quite well. He should pull more stunts like that.

  11. Tim Meredith

    February 15, 2016 at 7:05 pm

    I guess a second term President should no longer propose budgets, sign treaties or anything else Presidents do because he’s no longer accountable to the voters.
    Au contraire. The voters ELECTED him to do such things. To REPRESENT them in such things. And in this case, they did it twice.

  12. SgtStorm

    February 15, 2016 at 9:33 pm

    Says the guy running for president … He doesn’t want to do his job in Congress, and it sounds like he doesn’t want to do the job he’s running for …

  13. jimsylvester

    February 15, 2016 at 10:17 pm

    Who cares whether the Senate Republican caucus moves forward. We’ll have a justice and a Democratic president nest January. Come on, listen to this Rubio child. H sounds like a passionate 10th grader. This guy will never be predident, and neither will any of the others.

  14. midnighter13

    February 16, 2016 at 3:13 am

    Bush was arguing that Saddam had nuclear WMDs (when he didn’t and the CIA told Bush he didn’t). Saddam did have chemical weapons, but they were destroyed following the first Gulf War. This was confirmed by inspectors on the ground who were monitoring the destruction. Syria had both a chemical and nuclear program all the way back in the 1970’s. Their nuclear program was destroyed by the Israelis, but the chemical program was completed decades ago. As for Iraqi chemical weapons being transferred to Syria, that may have been possible, but only after Saddam fell. Saddam would never give Assad more chemical weapons after the Syrians joined the US in attacking Iraq in the Gulf War.

  15. Ben Bass

    February 16, 2016 at 7:30 am

    We all know that seriously tailored statements, like the one here made by Rubio, are meant purely for the Republican base, as they are the only ones daft enough to swallow such made-up-on-the-spot, full-fledged fiction.

  16. preston

    February 17, 2016 at 6:53 am

    Stupid squared.Robotic script reader.He couldn’t get elected to lead a troop of boy scouts!

  17. Monica Rose Kiesel

    February 17, 2016 at 8:22 am

    These guys expected Obama to … I’m not sure, step down? Disappear? After the Republicans swept the midterms, and seemed affronted when he continued to be president. Why would we expect them to make sense now?

  18. Rick Papineau

    February 18, 2016 at 10:13 am

    And because of that, he’s only allowed 3/5ths of a term too, it seems.

  19. Lee Hernly

    February 22, 2016 at 1:45 pm

    “The longest it has taken to confirm a Supreme Court nominee is 125 days.”

    FALSE. Democrats shot down Robert Bork and Justice Ginsberg in a nomination process that lasted WELL OVER 7 months.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

To Top