Mitch McConnell’s unheralded triumph on Merrick Garland

[Valin]

Hot Air:

Fred Barnes

 

His decision was lambasted by Democrats and the mainstream media as rash and a political mistake. He was accused of disobeying his constitutional duty to hold Senate hearings and then a vote on whomever President Obama nominated to fill the vacancy. By refusing, McConnell was told he would hurt Republican prospects in the 2016 election. There would be a public backlash. And so on.

 

The next week, McConnell took his case to his Senate GOP colleagues at their weekly lunch. By then, he and his staff had boned up on the history of nominees in the final year of a president’s term. “The precedents were on our side,” McConnell says. Even Democrats—Joe Biden, Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer—had dismissed lame-duck nominations as unacceptable.

 

“I’m not a dictator,” McConnell says. “I had to convince my colleagues.” At the lunch, only two Republican senators said they favor hearings. Today, those two are still the only dissenters.

 

Read the Article

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Comment section

Mike Adams

This is what the whining mob that loves to shout silly insults like "Cuck" and "GOPeee", just doesn't understand. When you don't have the Presidency or the press, you have to pick your fights.

 

Well, McConnell picked this one, and he won it, masterfully. But now thanks to the self-same whining mob, it's only a victory if we go ahead and elect an orange oaf as President.

 

Swell