https://www.washingtonpost.com...m_term=.acc46dcfdecf

Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.),
Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.),
Christopher A. Coons (D-Del.) and
Mark R. Warner (D-Va.)
indicated they would vote “no” to end debate on the Senate floor and would oppose Gorsuch in a final vote.

Sen. Michael F. Bennet (D-Colo.), became the fourth Senate Democrat to oppose the filibuster, though he did not clarify whether he supports or opposes Gorsuch as a Supreme Court justice. Bennet is the only Senate Democrat not up for reelection in 2018 to oppose the filibuster.

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:

quote:

“It makes me very sad,” Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said last week.

Prozac John, take lots of Prozac.

Another procedural question for those in the know. Since Dem's have already tipped their hat that they will filibuster, why doesn't McConnell simply go ahead and change the senate rules now, and vote on confirmation today? Why wait and allow the Dem's to drive the narrative on this for the next four days?

My guess is that very few people outside of the Senate Parliamentarian's office could reliably answer that question.

The Senate is filled with arcane procedural rules regarding scheduling votes, timeframes required, committees that must be consulted, etc.

McConnell is well versed on the rules and I'm sure the leadership is huddling as we speak to map out the strategy going forward.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:

Schumer is now proposing a new nominee who is jointly selected by REPs and DEMs. (hard to take Schumer seriously)

I seriously want to punch that dude in the face.

Very bad move. The fecal explosion could get all over you.



.

Mitch McConnell has vowed to push the nomination through regardless. It remains to be seen if that happens. Mitch McConnell is a shallow and flimsy vessel into which to empty your hopes and dreams. The also GOP senator with appreciable qualms over breaking the filibuster is Susan Collins and she now seems resigned to doing so:



http://www.redstate.com/streif...n-headed-filibuster/

Phase 1 of Kabuki Theater complete. Nomination clears committee and is going to the floor for a vote.

The dems coming out for or against are playing the game. It's all theatre unless and until there are actually enough dems defecting to hit 60 votes. Anything short of 60 means Chuckie Schumer can allow a handful of his most vulnerable members to cross over with no consequences. 53,54,55,56,57,58,and 59 don't matter. Only 60 matters and if 60 was happening there would be a lot of arm twisting and threats behind closed doors. The vote for cloture and the vote for confirmation will be different. The defectors on cloture likely return to the fold for the nomination. It will be interesting to see the gymnastics employed to explain voting yes then voting no.

Why would Chuck U. Schumer want to dare McConnell into getting rid of the filibuster at this time?

It seems clear that if Trump gets another nomination, it will have to be done then, so it's probably only a matter of time.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
Why would Chuck U. Schumer want to dare McConnell into getting rid of the filibuster at this time?

It seems clear that if Trump gets another nomination, it will have to be done then, so it's probably only a matter of time.

This isn't rocket science.

There's no principled reason to not confirm him so it's pure politics to keep Trump from having shared success with their cooperation but it's also a calculated risk with the Dems.

By forcing McConnell to go nuclear, they're banking on Ginsburg, Bryer and Stevens eating a lot of kale and doing yoga for at least 4 more years and they believe they can create an environment where they can keep Trump from doing anything except by EO and that will likely translate into both he and Pence being single term.

The feeling by Chuckie and Gang is that if Obama was bashed for not reaching across the isle and doing everything by EO, they'll create a similar environment for Trump.

They have no choice since they need to fund raise for 2018 and beyond and what's the point of fund raising if they're just going to cooperate.

I think this is inevitable with these Democrats who are not acting rationally any longer.

Clinton had twice as much $ as President Trump.

But Donald Trump got a popular message and set of promises to American voters.

It doesn't seem like there are any reasonable DEMs any more. Not a single one. (that goes for DEM politicians and voters)

We now have the "zombie Democrats"

"Zombie Democrat": unthinking, following blindly, incapable of independent thought or action, marching in unison with the Democrat zombie horde led by Schumer, Warren and Franken.

Buzzfeed and Politico pull a last minute charge of plagiarism against Gorsuch.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/chris...=.ggqq5vyb#.gy4N3q2o

But the people they claim were plagiarized, all deny it.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...rsuch-of-plagiarism/

One person Gorsuch is accused of plagiarizing, Abigail Lawlis Kuzma, flatly refuted the attack. “I have reviewed both passages and do not see an issue here, even though the language is similar,” she began. “Given that these passages both describe the basic facts of the case, it would have been awkward and difficult for Judge Gorsuch to have used different language.”

Emeritus Professor Jon Finnis of Oxford University: “None of the allegations has any substance or justification.”

Professor Robert George of Princeton University: “I can only say that [these allegations’] timing and substance (or, more to the point, lack of substance) makes it difficult to avoid the conclusion that this is a politically motivated effort to smear him in the hope of derailing his confirmation,”

“Not only is there no fire, there isn’t even any smoke.”

The only thing the dims understand is raw political power. We need to wield it without remorse and with extreme prejudice. Teach them a lesson that will hurt for a long time.

quote:

Originally posted by BamaJeepster:

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:

quote:

“It makes me very sad,” Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said last week.

Prozac John, take lots of Prozac.

Another procedural question for those in the know. Since Dem's have already tipped their hat that they will filibuster, why doesn't McConnell simply go ahead and change the senate rules now, and vote on confirmation today? Why wait and allow the Dem's to drive the narrative on this for the next four days?

My guess is that very few people outside of the Senate Parliamentarian's office could reliably answer that question.

The Senate is filled with arcane procedural rules regarding scheduling votes, timeframes required, committees that must be consulted, etc.

McConnell is well versed on the rules and I'm sure the leadership is huddling as we speak to map out the strategy going forward.

McLame does not need prozac. He is simply senile. A huge example for term limits.

Arkansas Senator Torches Democrats' Hypocrisy On Gorsuch Filibuster

Article with video

Agreed.

I love it when that huge hypocrite effing Chuck Scummer tries to dictate marching orders to the Republican majority in the Senate like hes in charge.

Smack them down so hard their grandchildren will remember the sting of the blow.

quote:

Originally posted by entropy:
The only thing the dims understand is raw political power. We need to wield it without remorse and with extreme prejudice. Teach them a lesson that will hurt for a long time.

quote:

Another procedural question for those in the know. Since Dem's have already tipped their hat that they will filibuster, why doesn't McConnell simply go ahead and change the senate rules now, and vote on confirmation today? Why wait and allow the Dem's to drive the narrative on this for the next four days?

Perhaps there's hope that after all the postering, some sort of deal will be worked out. Maybe a promise that the next vacancy will have someone with a more centralist position. The threat could well be, "If you don't like Gorsuch, you'll really hate the next one Trump nominates."

There had been some reports earlier that perhaps Schumer was hoping a few REP senators would refuse to vote for the nuclear option. Names like McCain, Graham, Collins, and Murkowski were thrown around (the usual suspects)

But it sounds like McConnell now has his ducks all firmly lined up.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...owski-will-vote-yes/

Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) announced on the Senate floor Wednesday that they will not allow a filibuster of Neil Gorsuch, and will instead vote for the constitutional option to restore a simple-majority vote to confirm Supreme Court nominations, making that outcome now almost certain.

Earlier during the day Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) claimed that he had the 50 votes he needs—plus Vice President Mike Pence as a tie-breaker, if needed—to invoke the constitutional option and confirm President Donald Trump’s first Supreme Court nominee.

McCain:

“The unprecedented nature of the Democrats’ filibuster of a Supreme Court nominee has left me in a difficult position,”

“I’m left with no choice,”

“I will vote to change the rules to allow Judge Gorsuch to be confirmed by a simple majority.”

“Elections have consequences,”

Murkowski:

“I will not acquiesce to an effort to deny Judge Gorsuch a seat on the Supreme Court.”

“I am left with the undeniable impression that Neil Gorsuch has been nominated to a position that he prepared his whole life to assume,”

“He is not merely a good choice in my book, he’s the best choice… perhaps a justice of historic proportions.”

Confirming justices is turning into mere political exercises over raw vote counting. The Dems nuked the filibuster on lower court appointments because they could, and because the Republicans were being obstreperous. The Republicans could block Garland, so they did. The Dems will try to block Gorsuch, but the Rs have the votes to jam him through, so they will.

It is too bad, because the Senate isn't really supposed to confirm or reject justices based on their politics. Fienstein was right when she said years ago that the Senate should screen judges only to make sure there isn't some gross flaw in their history, but that merely not liking the choice wasn't enough. (She's changed her mind now, but she was right then.)

I know the super-majorities the Senate requires in some cases are meant to preserve the character of the Senate as a more contemplative and less politicized body. But it hasn't been that for 20 years. So, if it is going to be purely political, then make it majority rule. I have no problem with nuking the filibuster rule if the minority (whoever it is) is merely going to use the rule to stand in the way on purely political grounds.

I think the Dems have made a poor choice on a place for this last stand.

And I will enjoy seeing Schumer eat crow.

quote:

Originally posted by Icabod:

quote:

Another procedural question for those in the know. Since Dem's have already tipped their hat that they will filibuster, why doesn't McConnell simply go ahead and change the senate rules now, and vote on confirmation today? Why wait and allow the Dem's to drive the narrative on this for the next four days?

Perhaps there's hope that after all the postering, some sort of deal will be worked out. Maybe a promise that the next vacancy will have someone with a more centralist position. The threat could well be, "If you don't like Gorsuch, you'll really hate the next one Trump nominates."

Did you see, or hear the proposal that this could go away, Gorsuch confirmed near unanimously, if the President promised the next appointment to Merrick Garland?

The commitment from McCain and Murkowski cited above is crucial.

Why ? Susan Collins

http://thehill.com/homenews/se...lear-option-collapse

Collins said she will ask colleagues to sign a letter to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Senate Democratic Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) pledging opposition to eliminating the power to filibuster legislation.

McConnell has said he will not remove the filibuster for "legislation"


A group of Republicans and Democrats led by Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Christopher Coons (D-Del.) negotiated intensely in recent days in hopes of reaching a deal to avoid the nuclear option, a tactic GOP leaders plan to use Thursday to change the filibuster rule.

The participants revealed their last-minute scramble to reporters Wednesday after it became clear they would not reach an agreement.

“The negotiations with which I was heavily involved have failed to come up with a compromise, which saddens me. There’s so little trust between the two parties that it was very difficult to put together an agreement that would avert changing the rules,” Collins told reporters.
“I worked very hard over the weekend, as did several Democrats and several Republicans, but we were not able to reach an agreement,” Collins added, estimating that about 10 lawmakers were involved.