Donald Trump’s election victory in 2016 rattled the Democrats to the core so much that many of them suggested changes to the Constitution. Democrats took a brief hiatus from that to wrap themselves in the Constitution during impeachment proceedings against Trump, but now they’re back to looking for ways to skirt the Constitution. Today’s example is former Attorney General Eric Holder:
18 years is enough for an unelected official – Supreme Court justice – wielding such power. Each president gets two picks which will decrease the political pressure in confirmation. Can be done by statute. Ask each candidate their position – including Trump. Reform is necessary https://t.co/SKapGfgliB
— Eric Holder (@EricHolder) February 19, 2020
If you can’t beat ’em, try and change the rules!
They would not be pushing for any of this if Hillary had won & the institutions they so revere were working to their partisan liking. https://t.co/rTf6HVmer8
— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) February 20, 2020
Without a doubt.
I see Obama’s wing man had no such idea when Obama was filling open seats in the courts.
This is par for the course for liberal progressives, when they have power, steam roll on! but when others have the power then it is time to change stuff.
Just hypocrites, the lot of them! https://t.co/JgZQ274lzX
— Political Sailor (@MachoSlavich) February 20, 2020
Filed under: Things never said if a democrat were in the oval office. https://t.co/4HaDphs4N2
— Erik (@winefishdawg) February 20, 2020
"18 years is enough for an unelected [sic] official" since the Democrats lost control of SCOTUS.
Democrats always seek to change the rules when they lose power. https://t.co/zJclkNTiVH
— David Morgan (@StarCoreOne02) February 20, 2020
Funny how they suddenly HATE the rules when the OTHER side has the POWER…………..😂😂😂😂😂
— 🙏🏼 PrayersForRush 🙏🏼 (@trumps_all) February 20, 2020
If you can't win an election you change the rules! https://t.co/wiqMMznjId
— Chris C. (@CHRISC27586372) February 20, 2020
Yep, just ask Stacey Abrams!
But it might not be as easy as Holder would like to think:
Congress can’t change the length of tenure by statute.
— Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) February 20, 2020
I was just remarking to myself how strange it was that a former Attorney General would be unfamiliar with the Constitution in this way. Then I remembered the Attorney General in question and it all made sense.
— Michael Mitchell (@BluesPastor) February 20, 2020
That tweet is incorrect as a constitutional amendment is necessary to impose term limits on judges
— Big F (@MrFFW) February 19, 2020
Former AG apparently believes the Constitution can be changed “by statute” 😀
Also, where were these reform ideas when EHolder was running things? Maybe what Eric’s really saying is that if his regime can’t be in power, then we need to change the entire system https://t.co/Ljz5gPEkCt
— TommyEdward (@TED44E) February 20, 2020
Basically it sounds like Holder’s doing some Resistance daydreaming.