"Will you recuse yourself" must be asked of her - repeatedly if necessary

[themaguffin]

Democrats can't let her dance around the issue that trump said he wanted a ninth Justice for an election case.

He said it. He also appointed her. That's an inherent conflict of interest.


She must recuse herself. She must state that unequivocally.

No, cutesy, coy or disdainful responses should stand.

She should be asked on the merits of the need for her to recuse herself, but also that must be the takeaway from the hearing.

Honestly, the religion stuff is baked in and noise. It won't breakthrough. This though, is different, immediate and urgent.

(No, I am not dismissing the scary shit that she believes or would do)

[Girard442]

1. She'll lie.

[themaguffin]

4. That doesn't mean she shouldn't be put on the record. That doesn't mean that Democrats shouldn't

use the hearings to further expose this...

[Crunchy Frog]

12. Then she will have committed perjury. That needs to be on record.

[redstatebluegirl]

2. Our Senators must not make the mistake we made with Kavanaugh.

We have to stick to her record, or lack thereof. If we make this personal, we will pay on November 3rd, that is what they are counting on. For instance, ask her how she feels about overturning Supreme Court precedence not Roe V Wade, ask her how she feels about court interfering in elections. Ask her if she took a loyalty oath to protect the President. I think even a Scalia trained justice would have a problem perjuring herself.

[Crunchy Frog]

13. Ask her about statements she's made on the legitimacy of the 14th and 15th Amendments.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/9/26/1980903/-Why-Trump-s-expected-Supreme-Court-nominee-believes-all-Civil-Rights-legislation-is-illegitimate

[bluestarone]

3. Lots of deals have been made between her and RUMP (i'm sure)

She will say i cannot discuss what president and i discussed.

[Squinch]

5. No. Accept that she won't recuse herself, because she won't. Instead, question her about her

beliefs and past statements. Point out over and over and over again how these statements are bat shit crazy and are in direct opposition to both the law and the wishes of the American people. Point out over and over again how her experience makes her woefully unqualified for the position. Pound that shit like a drum.

Our only hope is that a few Republicans will find their own souls where they buried them and vote against her.

"Will you recuse yourself" is moot. She won't. And the fanatics don't want her to.

[themaguffin]

7. He statement on the record is important

I didn't say ignore her past statements and record.

I'm not suggesting a couple days one question...

[Squinch]

10. Why? Because it will prove she's a hypocrite? We already have that proof.

[themaguffin]

11. It helps highlight that trump wants to fill the seat for an election case

[Crunchy Frog]

14. It will prove she committed perjury. n/t

[Squinch]

15. You mean by saying she'll recuse and then she doesn't recuse? I don't believe that's perjury.

[misanthrope]

19. I don't see how that can be classified as perjury either

It's not a statement of fact. It hasn't happened yet.

[beachbumbob]

6. the question must be framed in relationship to her flipflop (I call it a lie)

on SC nomination in election year. The democrats should have a field day with constantly raising HER HONESTY as well as that of the GOP senators who flippedflopped.

Always attack the veracity of today based on past lies made,

[enough]

8. There is no "must" about SC Justices recusing themselves. Remember Scalia.

They are not obligated to recuse for any reason.

[themaguffin]

9. I said must be asked about it.

[onenote]

16. And she will explain that there is no conflict

Ruling on a case in which the president that nominated a justice is a party has never been considered a conflict of interest requiring the justice to recuse himself/herself.

[malaise]

17. Haven't you seen her comments from 2016?

Why would you trust this woman?

&feature=emb_title

[themaguffin]

18. No, I didn't see it and you miss my point. I want footage of her now in 2020

saying it.

She can say whatever she wants, but have it on the record.

Near the election.