Who has the better argument, Chuck Grassley or Hillary Clinton, re: Supreme Court?

[geek tragedy]

There's a post up in DU where Chuck Grassley responds to Hillary Clinton regarding the GOP's blockade of President Obama's Supreme Court nominee, as captured at this link:
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/chuck-grassley-hillary-clinton-221295#ixzz44EEM6QG5

ESTHERVILLE, Iowa — Sen. Chuck Grassley preemptively swung back at Hillary Clinton ahead of her expected Monday speech in which she's expected to hammer the Judiciary Committee chairman for his role in blocking the confirmation of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court.

“With all the troubles she’s getting on e-mail, and the FBI’s going to question her, I would imagine she’d want to change the tone of her campaign,” Grassley (R-Iowa) told POLITICO in an interview here. He was apparently referring to a Los Angeles Times story Monday that indicated an FBI investigation of the private email server she used as secretary of state is entering a final phase that will include interviews with her advisers.

Curiously, there's a split in the reaction to this.

Maybe I'm out of touch in my thinking about how people at Democratic Underground should react.

Who has the better argument? Which is more persuasive.

3 votes, 1 pass | Time left: Unlimited
	I sympathize with Clinton's call for Garland to get Senate hearings
	3 (100%)
	I sympathize with Grassley telling Clinton to STFU because of the FBI investigation
	0 (0%)
	1 DU member did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[NWCorona]

1. I could care less what his position is on the matter

[Jackie Wilson Said]

2. Translation, there are people on DU who hate Hillary so much, they will side

with Grassley?

I believe that.

Oh, my bad, I see what you are doing, you are trying to trick them into admitting it.

[geek tragedy]

3. 11 at last count. nt

[Jackie Wilson Said]

4. Can you link me?

[geek tragedy]

5. will PM you.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

6. I found it

[DemocratSinceBirth]

11. PM me too, please.

Thank you in advance.

[geek tragedy]

15. done! nt

[NWCorona]

7. Kinda like Hillary supporters siding with Joe Arpaio over Jane Sanders.

[loyalsister]

8. Obviously Grassley is wrong and holding up judicial confirmations is a dereliction of duty

But, it's not HRC's fight and she is exploiting it to invoke the typical sexism, Benghazzi!, VRC, that brings out her defenders who will justify even the most ridiculous lapses in judgement. Being a member of the senate, Bernie has standing to weigh in on what his colleagues do. HRC is a private citizen and has no standing to wade into this controversy. The only reason to do so is to turn attention to herself.

[geek tragedy]

9. Only Senators have standing to criticize Chuck Grassley? nt

[loyalsister]

13. She knows she can't hope to have influence

I said her only reason to do so is to make it about her. I think it is a faulty strategy to try to hijack a serious controversy and make it about her.

[geek tragedy]

14. the point is to put more pressure and attention on Chuck Grassley

who just happens to be up for re-election this year and is suffering politically because he is leading the Senate blockade.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. I am a private citizen. Can I criticize Chuck Grassley?

HRC is a private citizen and has no standing to wade into this controversy

I am a private citizen. Can I criticize Chuck Grassley?

May I have your permission please.


Thank you in advance.

[TeeYiYi]

16. His words...

...are those of a condescending, misogynist ass! Thankfully, I give zero fucks about his opinion.

TYY