Join Jim and Greg as they react to 51 Senate Republicans announcing they will support the process of confirming a Supreme Court nominee before Election Day. They also hammer Dems from the Obama and Clinton teams for insisting that Democrats adding seats to the high court is the only response to the supposed constitutional crisis spawned by a vacancy near an election. And they crush Joe Biden for refusing to say whether he supports court packing.

Subscribe to Three Martini Lunch in Apple Podcasts (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in Apple Podcasts or by RSS feed.


There are 8 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    One problem – or two problems, I suppose – with the Dems making DC and PR into states, and then Republicans take back Congress and the White House later, it’s not like DC and PR could be made non-states again. That’s a one-way ratchet, as with many things the Dems do.

    • #1
  2. rdowhower Member
    rdowhower
    @

    I agree with Jim that there is not a whole lot of political calculation going on in Mitt Romney’s mind.  But neither is there very much political insight going on in Jim’s mind these days either, apparently.

    • #2
  3. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    Still having organizations waste their money on Biden/Harris ads. It’s wonderful their targeting is so far off. 💰

    • #3
  4. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Arahant (View Comment):

    Still having organizations waste their money on Biden/Harris ads. It’s wonderful their targeting is so far off. 💰

    I just wish those mistakes cost them more than they probably do.

    • #4
  5. Taras Coolidge
    Taras
    @Taras

    kedavis (View Comment):

    One problem – or two problems, I suppose – with the Dems making DC and PR into states, and then Republicans take back Congress and the White House later, it’s not like DC and PR could be made non-states again. That’s a one-way ratchet, as with many things the Dems do.

    North Texas, South Texas, East Texas, West Texas.

    • #5
  6. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Taras (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    One problem – or two problems, I suppose – with the Dems making DC and PR into states, and then Republicans take back Congress and the White House later, it’s not like DC and PR could be made non-states again. That’s a one-way ratchet, as with many things the Dems do.

    North Texas, South Texas, East Texas, West Texas.

    I remember hearing about how one condition of Texas being admitted to the Union was that it reserved the right to split up into multiple states at some point.  But Article IV, Section 3 of the Constitution, under the Admissions Clause, reads: “New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.”

    That wouldn’t seem to be an issue for Puerto Rico or (part of) DC becoming states, but since Texas is already a state, that would seem to require the consent of Congress, which may or may not be forthcoming.

    Unless the admission of Texas, including that proviso, would be seen as negating the need for consent of Congress.

    • #6
  7. DudleyDoright49 Inactive
    DudleyDoright49
    @DudleyDoright49

    Taras (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    One problem – or two problems, I suppose – with the Dems making DC and PR into states, and then Republicans take back Congress and the White House later, it’s not like DC and PR could be made non-states again. That’s a one-way ratchet, as with many things the Dems do.

    North Texas, South Texas, East Texas, West Texas

    Don’t forget about the fifth state, Panhandle Texas, with the Oklahoma panhandle included.

    • #7
  8. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Not a “Bulwark”.

    Jim, I see what you did there. Love it.

     

    • #8
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.