President Obama gave a spectacularly boring recap today of the ASEAN summit in California and then took questions from the press, which quite expectedly steered the conversation to the president’s intentions on replacing the late Justice Antonin Scalia.
BREAKING: President Obama says he will nominate a Supreme Court candidate who is indisputably qualified for the seat.
— The Associated Press (@AP) February 16, 2016
"I intend to do my job between now and January 20th of 2017. I expect them to do their job as well." —@POTUS to Senate Republicans #SCOTUS
— The White House (@WhiteHouse) February 16, 2016
Pres Obama says Constitution is clear: he is to nominate a successor to Scalia and Senate is to ratify or reject the nominee.
— Mark Knoller (@markknoller) February 16, 2016
The president obviously expects that the GOP-dominated Senate will unite to block his nominees and spoke as if they already had.
Credit to Jeff Mason of Reuters for asking Obama about the double-standard in his position on SCOTUS nomination partisanship.
— Stephen Hayes (@stephenfhayes) February 16, 2016
Obama, asked about his past support for filibustering Alito, pivots to saying people do things bc ppl are worried abt primaries.
— Philip Klein (@philipaklein) February 16, 2016
Classic Obama response when challenged by his filibuster of Alito – I understand people play politics, like I did, but ultimately….
— Charlie Spiering (@charliespiering) February 16, 2016
POTUS says some people who "don't like the President" will "grind" the system to a halt so no nominees get through
— Shannon Bream (@ShannonBream) February 16, 2016
@ShannonBream did he say why it was ok for him to vote no on Alito and Roberts?
— Dan Wigton (@DanWigton) February 16, 2016
POTUS just refused to answer direct question about his past participation in blockade of judicial nominees and filibusters.
— Hugh Hewitt (@hughhewitt) February 16, 2016
Obama: Don't filibuster my nominee the way I tried to do with Alito which is totally different because shut up tea-bagging terrorist.
— Razor (@hale_razor) February 16, 2016
"Look, when I filibustered the Alito nomination, that was totally different, because it was me."
— jimgeraghty (@jimgeraghty) February 16, 2016
Obama: 'Democrats didn't like Justice Kennedy, but they approved him'…after spending a year rejecting Bork and Ginsburg.
— Andrew Klavan (@andrewklavan) February 16, 2016
Obama says the "venom and rancor in Washington has prevented us from getting basic work done" pic.twitter.com/EhXlVrStZZ
— BuzzFeed News (@BuzzFeedNews) February 16, 2016
Obama: "The constitution is pretty clear" about what's supposed to happen. Said there's no law nomination can only be done "on off years."
— NYT Politics (@nytpolitics) February 16, 2016
Crystal clear. @POTUS will fulfill his constitutional responsibility. The Senate should fulfill theirs. https://t.co/cmIzvr34pJ
— Cecile Richards (@CecileRichards) February 16, 2016
With so much venom and rancor in Washington, is there a chance that the president will be the bigger man and nominate a moderate justice acceptable to both parties?
Jeff Mason, to Obama: "Based on your comments, I assume you're choosing a moderate nominee." Obama: "NO…don't know where you got that"
— Josh Kraushaar (@HotlineJosh) February 16, 2016
Reporter: should we interpret your comments that you are likely to nominate a moderate nominee?
Pres. Obama: No.— STEW (@StewSays) February 16, 2016
Jeff Mason of @Reuters asks if answer to 1st question means Obama will nominate a moderate candidate. "NO" Obama fires back. #SCOTUS
— TVNewser (@tvnewser) February 16, 2016
Obama on if he intends to nominate a moderate to SCOTUS: NO!
— Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) February 16, 2016
Pres says the system for filling a SCOTUS vacancy should work the way the Founding Fathers intended. pic.twitter.com/1w5rfM4QYG
— Mark Knoller (@markknoller) February 16, 2016
"Are we still able to make this democracy work the way it's supposed to? The way the founders intended?" – Obama
— Steven Dennis (@StevenTDennis) February 16, 2016
@StevenTDennis "Elections have consequences… And I won" -Obama now he suffers the consequence of losing elections
— Walter Szy (@walter85395) February 16, 2016
If Obama really believed in original intent, we wouldn't need to have this argument in the first place.
— Philip Klein (@philipaklein) February 16, 2016
Obama: If you believe in the original intent interpretation of the Constitution then you need to let my nominee destroy the Constitution.
— el Sooper ن (@SooperMexican) February 16, 2016
.@POTUS: "We've almost gotten accustomed to how obstructionist the Senate has become when it comes to nominations." pic.twitter.com/kYeTZ3hfd8
— Fox News (@FoxNews) February 16, 2016
Shameless Obama won’t admit to his & Democrats’ role in poisoning confirmation process ie: Bork, Schumer, and Obama on Alito #Scalia #SCOTUS
— Joel Pollak (@joelpollak) February 16, 2016
Somewhere Miguel Estrada is laughing hysterically at Obama right now. #SCOTUS
— Derek Hunter (@derekahunter) February 16, 2016
The Constitution is evolving right in front of our eyes.
— David Harsanyi (@davidharsanyi) February 16, 2016
Obama says Constitution is very important to him. Since when? Scalia died+Senate won't bow to you!
— Crystal Wright (@GOPBlackChick) February 16, 2016
This might actually be the one time the Senate doesn’t bow down to the president.
Pretty clear Obama has decided he wants this fight, despite Senate GOP's insistence that his SCOTUS nominee won't get a vote
— HowardKurtz (@HowardKurtz) February 16, 2016
