McConnell Refused Mueller Protection Bill for 2nd Time

samcraig

macrumors P6
Original poster
Jun 22, 2009
16,610
35,012
USA
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/28/senate-judiciary-nominee-flake-mueller-1025918

The Senate Judiciary Committee cancelled a Thursday hearing on judicial nominees as Jeff Flake’s stand for a bill to protect special counsel Robert Mueller continues to wreak havoc in the lame duck session.

The panel was scheduled to advance six Circuit Court nominees, 15 District Court nominees and several bipartisan bills on Thursday to prepare them for possible floor action over the next month. But Flake, who is retiring at the end of this year, is holding firm to his vow to vote against judicial nominees on the floor and in committee unless Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) schedules a vote on the bipartisan special counsel legislation.

Flake’s blockade is annoying senior Republicans by slowing down confirmation of conservative judges in the narrowly divided Senate. But Flake’s tactics have been effective because Republicans have a one-seat majority on the Judiciary Committee and control just 51 votes in the Senate, so he could have tagged some nominees with an “unfavorable” recommendation if Democrats unanimously opposed them.

GOP leaders are assessing GOP support for the special counsel bill to evaluate its level of support in hopes of appeasing Flake, but he said in an interview on Tuesday that only a binding floor vote would satisfy him.


See also
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/congress/grassley-cancels-vote-on-judges-in-face-of-flake-opposition

https://secondnexus.com/news/robert-mueller-senate-investigation-protection-fails/

https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/2018/11/28/sen-mike-lee-blocks/
 

mac_in_tosh

macrumors 6502
Nov 6, 2016
351
4,553
Earth
Trump's unhinged demonizing of Mueller, his appointment of a stooge interim Attorney General, his overt hints of pardons to his co-conspirators and his already known obstruction of justice are bad enough. But the GOP's failure to in any way carry out their constitutional checks and balances against this loose cannon of a president is equally reprehensible. What happened to the law and order party?
 

raqball

macrumors 68000
Sep 11, 2016
1,948
8,890
What does Mueller need protection from? Liberals have been beating this drum since his appointment yet he is still there and apparently wrapping up....

More hysteria created by the left.... And it's gobbled up hook line and sinker!
 

samcraig

macrumors P6
Original poster
Jun 22, 2009
16,610
35,012
USA
What does Mueller need protection from? Liberals have been beating this drum since his appointment yet he is still there and apparently wrapping up....

More hysteria created by the left.... And it's gobbled up hook line and sinker!
If it's not a big deal, as you assert, then what difference does it make to Conservatives? Why not protect Mueller?
 

GermanSuplex

macrumors 6502a
Aug 26, 2009
963
9,910
The stupidity is astounding. "Trump won't fire him, he shouldn't fire him, and the investigation should continue."

They've probably spent more time debating and turning the vote down than if they had simply drafted the legislation and voted. Ridiculous. Any conservative not leaving office is deathly afraid of Trump ruining their careers and tarnishing their name. You cross Trump once, that 35-40 percent of Americans who support Trump will label you a RINO.
 

raqball

macrumors 68000
Sep 11, 2016
1,948
8,890
That doesn't answer my question.
And your responses do not answer mine....

I said several months ago in one of the other 1000 'Trump is going to fire Muller' threads / posts that I believe Mueller should be allowed to continue and wrap up his findings. I also said if Trump fired him it would be the beginning to the end of his presidency....

So again, what does Mueller need protection from since there has been no indication that Trump will fire him other than liberal drum beating hysteria..
 

GermanSuplex

macrumors 6502a
Aug 26, 2009
963
9,910
And your responses do not answer mine....

I said several months ago in one of the other 1000 'Trump is going to fire Muller' threads / posts that I believe Mueller should be allowed to continue and wrap up his findings. I also said if Trump fired him it would be the beginning of the end of his presidency....

So again, what does Mueller need protection from since there has been no indication that Trump will fire him other than liberal drum beating hysteria..
There's no proof that Trump firing Mueller would end his presidency. Quite the contrary, I wouldn't be surprised to see the senate hang their heads silently and keep pushing on, and I'm not sure democrats trying to impeach Trump would get anywhere.

It's like saying "I don't need car insurance because I'm never going to be in an accident".
 

ouimetnick

macrumors 68020
Aug 28, 2008
2,497
562
Beverly, Massachusetts
There's no proof that Trump firing Mueller would end his presidency. Quite the contrary, I wouldn't be surprised to see the senate hang their heads silently and keep pushing on, and I'm not sure democrats trying to impeach Trump would get anywhere.

It's like saying "I don't need car insurance because I'm never going to be in an accident".
And if I’m ever in a car accident I’ll be dead so I don’t need insurance.
 

samcraig

macrumors P6
Original poster
Jun 22, 2009
16,610
35,012
USA
And your responses do not answer mine....

I said several months ago in one of the other 1000 'Trump is going to fire Muller' threads / posts that I believe Mueller should be allowed to continue and wrap up his findings. I also said if Trump fired him it would be the beginning to the end of his presidency....

So again, what does Mueller need protection from since there has been no indication that Trump will fire him other than liberal drum beating hysteria..
Because the answer to your question is obvious. Trump is a wildcard - as is his new acting AG

Why doesn't McConnell want to bring the bill forward? What's to gain by not doing it? What's to lose by bringing it to a vote?
 

GermanSuplex

macrumors 6502a
Aug 26, 2009
963
9,910
Because the answer to your question is obvious. Trump is a wildcard - as is his new acting AG

Why doesn't McConnell want to bring the bill forward? What's to gain by not doing it? What's to lose by bringing it to a vote?
I'm convinced its purely because he's scared of Trump. The GOP base has not been kind to those who are perceived to have spoken out or acted against the president in any way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: samcraig

raqball

macrumors 68000
Sep 11, 2016
1,948
8,890
Because the answer to your question is obvious. Trump is a wildcard - as is his new acting AG

Why doesn't McConnell want to bring the bill forward? What's to gain by not doing it? What's to lose by bringing it to a vote?
Because you can't bring garbage like this before the Senate and give it legitimacy every time the left goes mid-evil hysterical over something that there is no proof or evidence of it being real...
 
  • Like
Reactions: jkcerda

GermanSuplex

macrumors 6502a
Aug 26, 2009
963
9,910
I don't see what evidence has to do with voting to make sure Mueller can continue to finish the probe without the president interfering. There needs to be no proof that will happen for there to be a vote of such sort. There won't be proof until its too late anyways.
 
  • Like
Reactions: samcraig

samcraig

macrumors P6
Original poster
Jun 22, 2009
16,610
35,012
USA
I don't see what evidence has to do with voting to make sure Mueller can continue to finish the probe without the president interfering. There needs to be no proof that will happen for there to be a vote of such sort. There won't be proof until its too late anyways.
I would say Sessions departure and Whitaker's appointment was something that provided exposure to why this is a valid concern
 

raqball

macrumors 68000
Sep 11, 2016
1,948
8,890
I don't see what evidence has to do with voting to make sure Mueller can continue to finish the probe without the president interfering. There needs to be no proof that will happen for there to be a vote of such sort. There won't be proof until its too late anyways.
So then the Senate needs to vote on anything and everything that might happen or could happen based on whatever party wants to beat a hysterical drum over?
 
  • Like
Reactions: jkcerda

GermanSuplex

macrumors 6502a
Aug 26, 2009
963
9,910
So then the Senate needs to vote on anything and everything that might happen or could happen based on whatever party wants to beat a hysterical drum over?
No. But "Trump wouldn't do this" is just as much speculation as saying he'd fire Mueller. You pass legislation that insures Mueller can wrap up his probe without interference from Trump and then there is no need to speculate either way.
 

ericgtr12

macrumors 65816
Mar 19, 2015
1,237
7,291
it was a bi-partisan request
Even some Republicans are scratching their heads at this one. If Mitch is so certain this is "unnecessary" then what is there to lose by at least allowing the vote? Those in is own party are going to hold back votes on other issues as a result and he STILL won't budge, eliminating all doubt that his only goal is to allow Trump to fire Mueller.
 

BoxerGT2.5

macrumors 68000
Jun 4, 2008
1,929
11,121
Even some Republicans are scratching their heads at this one. If Mitch is so certain this is "unnecessary" then what is there to lose by at least allowing the vote? Those in is own party are going to hold back votes on other issues as a result and he STILL won't budge, eliminating all doubt that his only goal is to allow Trump to fire Mueller.
Even if Trump fired Mueller, someone WILL pick up the ball and run with it. He isn't going to fire the entire justice department, all US attorneys and he can't fire States Attorneys. The Nixon watergate scandal taught us that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ericgtr12

ericgtr12

macrumors 65816
Mar 19, 2015
1,237
7,291
We've been hearing that Trump is going to dismiss Mueller since the investigation started.
This is true, and obviously he hasn't. That being said, if Republicans are that confident then why not simply allow a vote on the floor? It'll likely never get signed anyway but at least the gesture is there and it wouldn't appear as though they're just out to cover Trump no matter what.