A rare outbreak of journalism from Fox News Channel on Sunday may have proven to be the undoing of Mitch McConnell. He all but admitted that he has been lying about upholding precedent by not even considering anyone President Obama nominated to replace Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court. In so doing, he may have single-handledly assured that the Senate will go Democratic in November.
When McConnell dropped by “Fox News Sunday,” he may have thought he would get an easy time of it. But Chris Wallace had a surprise for him. McConnell trotted out his usual talking point about how he was simply upholding precedent of the Senate not considering any judicial nominees at this point in the last year of a president’s term. But Wallace reminded him that a decade earlier, then-Majority Whip McConnell was one of those clamoring for an “up or down vote” on George W. Bush’s judicial nominees.
McConnell tried to talk his way out of this sticky wicket, but Wallace was having none of it.
WALLACE: Senator, if an up or down vote for a judicial nominee was simple, fair, and a principle that has served us for 229 years — I guess now it’s over 230 years now — if that’s true then, it is still true?
MCCONNELL: Yes. We’re talking apples and oranges. That comment was not in connection with the Supreme Court vacancy.
What we’re talking about here here’s a factual situation —
WALLACE: But it’s still a judicial nominee, sir.
I would add something else. At least Robert Bork got a hearing, even though it was clear he was manifestly unfit to be on the Court. But McConnell isn’t even willing to give Merrick Garland that courtesy.
Then came the moment that may go down as the moment the Republicans lost the Senate. McConnell admitted that his refusal to even hold a hearing for Garland has nothing to do with the Constitution at all. Watch here.
Wallace asked McConnell if he would allow a confirmation hearing for Garland if Hillary Clinton won the presidential election–an option that has been floated by more than a few members of his own caucus. McConnell’s reply has to be reproduced in full to be believed.
“I can’t imagine that a Republican majority in the United States Senate would want to confirm in a lame duck session a nominee opposed by the National Rifle Association, the National Federation of Independent Business–that represents small businesses that have never taken a position on the Supreme Court appointment before. They’re opposed to this guy. I can’t imagine that a Republican majority Senate, even if it were assumed to be a minority, would want to confirm a judge that would most court dramatically to the left. That’s not going to happen.”
Really, Addison Mitchell? What happened to the “strict constructionism” your party loves so much? Last I checked, the Constitution states that the president appoints judges “with the Advice and Consent of the Senate.” Period, full stop.
It’s very telling that McConnell is willing to effectively give the NRA a veto on judicial nominees. For those who don’t know, the NRA is the trade association for the gun industry. Most gun manufacturers are private companies–and are thus not obligated to disclose their financial statements. So when Wayne LaPierre and Ted Nugent are moving their lips, they are really speaking for a group of faceless men who are not accountable to anyone.
But wait a minute. For the better part of three decades, the GOP has been ranting and raving about unelected judges subverting the will of the people. And yet, McConnell admitted on national television that he is more concerned about doing the bidding of a small cabal of companies in which the people have no say, and whose spokesman thinks federal agents are “jackbooted thugs.” At the same time, he has the gall to claim that he wants the people to have a say in who takes that seat? Sounds like McConnell has a funny definition of “people.”
I realize that McConnell has been put on notice that keeping Obama from filling that seat is more important than holding on to the Senate. But if this interview is any indication, McConnell isn’t even trying any more. At the very least, if I were Mark Kirk, Kelly Ayotte, Ron Johnson, and Pat Toomey, I’d get your resumes ready. McConnell has just left you–and maybe several others–on an island.
