On good authority – Supreme Court nominee should not be subjected to 60 vote margin and of course a certain president’s nominee should not even see the light of day — Chuck Schumer Senate Democrat minority leader and Judiciary Committee member
- Chuck Schumer truly is a POS (referenced article accurately predicts our outbursts)
- And don’t forget the Biden rule, another POS
As the Gorsuch nomination comes up for a vote next week the insufferable weasely Chuck Schumer is all over the place insisting that 60 votes are necessary to confirm a Supreme Court nominee in the Senate and the insufferable weasely dominant liberal media POS’s offer no challenge to Schumer’s consistency on the matter. This article at Patriot Post by Thomas Gallatin , set forth in its entirety with permission, exposes Schumer:
Democrats seem to be currently afflicted with what may be best described as a case of politically convenient amnesia. This sad condition has been most clearly evident through the confirmation process of Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, and symptoms include acute displays of remarkable levels of hypocrisy. Observe these past statements by leading Democrat leaders contrasted by these same Democrats’ most recent statements.
Beware, witnessing the total reversal of opinion on attempting to block a nominee’s confirmation by these Democrats might tempt one to scream out a slew of frustration-induced profanities.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer in 2013: “We much prefer the risk of up or down votes and majority rule [on judicial nominees], than the risk of continued total obstruction. That’s the bottom line no matter who’s in power.”
Schumer now: “The irresistible, immutable logic is, if the nominee doesn’t get 60 [votes], you change the nominee, not the rules.”
Senator Tim Kaine in October 2016: “If [Republicans] think they’re going to stonewall the filling of [the SCOTUS] vacancy or other vacancies, then a Democratic Senate majority will say, ‘We’re not going to let you thwart the law.’ And so we will change the Senate rules to uphold the law.”
Kaine now: “The way I look at it is the Supreme Court is the only position that requires you to get to a 60-vote threshold, which means it mandates that there be some bipartisanship and that is appropriate. Life tenure. Highest court in the land. Should have to get to 60 votes.” And, “I will oppose his nomination.”
Senator Elizabeth Warren in November 2013: “If Republicans continue to filibuster these highly qualified nominees for no reason than to nullify the president’s constitutional authority, then senators not only have the right to change the filibuster, senators have a duty to change the filibuster rules.” And she also said, “We need to call out these filibusters for what they are — naked attempts to nullify the results of the last presidential election.”
Warren now: “I believe Judge Gorsuch’s nomination should be blocked.”
To be sure, the filibuster is a Senate rule subject to the desires of any Senate majority. Both parties use those rules to political advantage. What’s striking is Democrat sanctimony.
Editor note – Patriot Post also offers a then and now video montage of the duplicitous Democrats, courtesy of Washington Free Beacon
And when they whine that their opposition to Gorsuch is because poor eminently qualified Merrick Garland was denied “even a hearing” remind them of the Biden Rule:
And don’t forget Chuckie Cheese Schumer insistence that some presidents nominees just do not deserve a vote:
“With respect to the Supreme Court at least, I will recommend to my colleagues that we should not confirm any Bush nominee to the Supreme Court except in extraordinary circumstances.”
“I will do everything in my power to prevent one more ideological ally from joining (John) Roberts and (Samuel) Alito on the court,” Schumer later added.
And the whole insistence that “60 votes are required has no historical basis anyway as Dan McLaughlin explains in this National Review post: