Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has reportedly encouraged President Donald Trump to nominate Merrick Garland to lead the FBI. Would Merrick Garland be a good choice for FBI director?
Hey fellow conservatives and libertarians. This is an excellent idea. Democrats would go f***ing nuts. He knows how to enforce the law even though he's a lib. It would gain us a new ally, and show that we can be bipartisan. Not only that, but it would free up a D.C. Court spot to get another constitutionalist on the courts. Mike lee proposed this first and he has a 97% conservative score. All in all, garland would be a good, experienced choice, and be a win for us.
I love this for no other reason than watching whackjob conservatives eat their own 😃
The ones that think impeachment is the solution for everything --except lying about blow jobs in the oval office.
The ones that believe more unskilled labor will somehow raise wages.
The ones that believe a higher minimum wage creates jobs.
The ones that believe that you can tax your way to prosperity.
The ones that believe in no borders, no genders, no grades, no free speech, safe spaces, unsafe, mentally abusive and triggering statues, monuments, team names, colors, books, music, dialect or clothing.
The ones that believe Al Sharpton is a reverend, Rachel Dolezal is black, Elizabeth Warren is an Indian, Obamacare lowers cost, you didn't build that, enforcing a red line, you can keep your Dr, shovel ready projects. The ones that belive unfettered access to abortion is a right, is all about healthcare and PP is righteous, the Iran deal was a good deal, the parents of the deserter Berghdal's deserved the Rose Garden ceremony and Hillary is honest.
I also love that you couldn't resist a camped reply, all too typical rather than even attempt to admit and work on your own bullshit which is way worse 😁👍
No one is saying Trump is perfect or couth.
However, the ideas he and the party stand for are in stark contrast to the infantile SJW - a grievance for everyone attitude and high taxation, redistributive economic platform of the Democrats.
nacho you are apparently having a discussion/argument with a liberals. If so, please spare yourself agonizing experience of arguing with a member of a populous with such a mental condition as liberalism. It's like arguing with a teenager.
He'd be a great choice for the Supreme Court. Oh. Wait.......
I agree that David Clarke would be an EXCELLENT choice. And the left couldn't have any qualms with it unless, of course, they are racists.
Isn't he that idiot from Milwaukee? W/ the Stetson?
Why didn't they just make him Supreme Court justice?
Ed Norris would be great as FBI director
No. He has no background in law enforcement. Nominate someone who started their career as a street cop.
No, make it David Clarke. He is more than qualified for the job.
It should be someone we've never heard of and we should never hear of them after that. Intelligence agency directors should be as quiet as possible, and not get involved in anything that isn't intelligence, especially politics.
My man Gowdy would be a fantastic choice.
No, Trump's chance to be bipartisan passed when he nominated Gorsuck instead of Garland for the Supreme Court. That's nice of Bitch McConnell to rub salt in Garland's wounds after he ruined his career.
This user is currently being ignored
When he could've been a Supreme Court Justice, yeah, that's a ruined career. Robert Bork rose pretty high himself, but he's not remembered for doing so. It's all relative. Many people call Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney failures.
No. It should be a law and enforcement person. Someone that understand investigative procedures. Not a person that is judicial!
Considering the position that Mr. Trump is in it would be an excellent choice and would appease some of his detractors and put him in better standing....but he's not that smart and I'm not so sure he would take the position anyway.
No. that would leave an open spot in the DC appellate court so Trump can put a right wing judge in his place. We need all the sanity we can get in the courts.
That's exactly what I was going to say.
Good for the FBI, bad for SCOTUS? Why?
I get that. But Obama wanted to put Garland on SCOTUS, and conservatives lost their shit.
Probably, but he was a better pick for the Supreme Court, and he's better placed already in his current role as a judge. I can't think of a good reason to demote him from that role, or any reason why he would even be interested in trading being a federal judge for being a federal cop.
Why not? Garland is a centrist and a good man who knows the law.
It will be interesting to see what the Democrats have to say about it.
If the Democrats like it, just don't expect any of their cooperation on any thing else because of it.
Mitch McConnel is a RINO weasel, trying to kiss the DemLibs rears, by nominating a retread SCJ, Merrick Garland for FBI Director, David Clark is the man qualified, who deserves the job !
David Clark is the man for the job
Lol, this is like asking someone if they would like to step up to the chopping block. Sounds like a really crude joke.
I don't know if he's qualified, but it would be interesting politically.
Yes! Let's see Democrats vote against him for that and then Trump can nominate a much more conservative judge for the DC Circuit! Win-win all around!
I don't understand s at all. What makes him qualified. Are they trying to get him out of the way for the next SCOTUS appointment circus. Are they trying to silence the Dems. Has McConnell gotten soft. I'm at a loss.
No. Merrick Garland would be off the 9th Circuit, so Trump and his cronies can make it more radically conservative. Besides, Garland is a judge, not an intelligence agent or representative.
No no no no no. Pawn for the left.
He is a very honest judge and would be seen by most as an excellent choice.
This is a savvy political move by Mitch. Merrick holds a high position....this would allow Trump to replace him with a party stooge. Then....Garland could be fired for (insert bogus reason here). I like the man...I think he is a good legal mind and very centrist. But don't think that the GOP suddenly pivoted to the middle.
A gun grabbing Democrat? The RINOs are unhinged.
i shouldn't even start but...please cite which case he specifically "grabbed guns" from people and removed their ability to any longer own guns, thus nullifying the second amendment. specifically
citing an op-ed piece and taking conclusions hastily from court proceedings doesn't show me WHEN HE HAS IN FACT removed firearms from people. this is a smear op-ed obviously...there are court decisions highlighted and that go to reference other opinions of the cases. sorry - nope
i'll rephrase that - only one link referenced another opinion piece.
the decisions made to did not imperil or change any existing owners any rights. he upheld decisions in most of the cases.
You're welcome for the education! ✌🏻
The fact that 0bama tried to put him on the Supreme Court tells you all you need to know about him. And, incidentally, all you need to know about so-called conservatives who think he should be anywhere near the government.
Garland would be fine, but I'm really hoping he chooses to nominate Kelly Ayotte instead.
Yea. The D.C. Circuit court is extremely Democrat biased, we can get a conservative in there.
The FBI is not supposed to be political. End of discussion.
Trump could let the Dems make the pick, and then they'd B****h about it.
I'm sure Garland's appointment would quiet down the desire to have a special prosecutor, quid pro quo.
Agree. So transparent right?
I've already heard complaints about the Garland suggestion, because Trump could pick his replacement on the lower court, (that was the reason given ).
Pek, interesting point you make. Additionally if Senator Mitch McConnell is in favor of the Garland nomination then I'm highly suspicious.
That would be epic trolling, haha.
As a Trump voter, NO NO NO!!!!!
Good God no. The Donald Trump Administration is where great men and women's reputations go to die.
Hillary Clinton didn't need to go there for her reputation to die, OH wait she never had one.
Since when was Clinton mentioned?
Feeling insecure? Trump making you and your unwavering support of him look bad? Bring up Clinton!
And the appeasement begins..... screw the liberals. THEY LOST! Mitch (The Gobbler) needs to retire.
This isn't an effort to appease then "liberals." McConnell wants Garland out of the D.C. Circuit.
No way. Let's face it; regardless of who Trump nominates, what he does, what policies he enacts or successes he has, the left will remain in overdrive trying to destroy him - deserved or not. Why offer the olive branch? It will get him nowhere, and won't excite his base. Pick somebody like Trey Gowdy, sit back, and watch the liberal chaos ensue.
Garland wouldn't want to become part of this circus.
It's a trap! Look at Mitch slowly slip the noose over DJT's head. Republicans eat their own.
Strategically, he'd be a great choice that lets Trump appoint an ultra conservative replacement to the federal bench.
Garland also would bring unquestioned independence and unimpeachable integrity...which makes it likely Trump would fire him within a year.
So, while it is a great choice to nominate him, it would be a terrible choice for Garland to accept.
I mean he'd be better as a justice but sure