^^Exactly. They don't even have to say no they can just never take up a vote at all on it - if he really cares about appointing a nominee to the Court he should have nominated a Scalia or took their advice which was don't bother in an election year as has been the tradition since the 60's.

Just because someone has been "nominated" its not like there is a queue for the Senate to do something with it - if they don't take up Garland and say the next President nominates someone else the Senate can take up a vote if they like that nominee and no one will ever have heard of Garland by them.

It's funny to hear the spin as if there is some sort of ultimatum to do something with Garland even if a new President made another nominee - he should just go back to whining about DC v Heller and get on with his life

__________________
2018 Ram 2500 6.7L Cummins 68RFE
19k miles -Bright White/Black - Big Horn Sport - Crew Cab Short Bed
2013 X5 35D (CEO's) - Born on 5/17/2013 -
82k miles - Alpine White/Cinnamon Brown/Premium Pkg, Sport Activity/Premium Pkg and Sound/20" Style 214/Running Boards