• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Warren barred from speaking on Senate floor for rest of Sessions debate

Ikari said:
Not sure I'm OK with the muzzling of dissent in this manner.
Click to expand...

If we want to be at least a little honest, this was not about muzzling dissent. We all know Warren's views. There has been plenty of discussion in the hearings on this specific issue. We also know that is about delay so a government can't be put in place. Probably helped democrats and hurt the administration today at the hearing in Washington State. The person representing the government did a lousy job. Perhaps having a head of the department would have helped make a better choice.

So McConnell has finally put an end to the BS and we can get a vote.

Democrats are cleatly showing that party over country certainly prevails in the Senate.
 
Oh yea, our state's newest senator called for this. Apparently he got chunk of change from Amway and the DeVos family for his senatorial run last go around.
 
The Mark said:
Depending on how he responds, it could be.I mean, she was opposed to his nomination as a judge 30 years ago, because of concerns about his prior decisions and what they might mean for future ones.I'm concerned too. I don't want a bigot as attorney general.
Click to expand...
Nor do I. I don't think he is one.
 
digsbe said:
Warren was out of line, and I'm sure she'll play the victim.
Click to expand...
Well, sure. When it was all over, she fell into her typical twitter rage before called into the Rachel Maddow show to snivel.
 
washunut said:
Democrats are cleatly showing that party over country certainly prevails in the Senate.
Click to expand...

bwaaahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

If y'all ain't figured out that this isn't standard Republocrat strategy by now, that on both sides of the isle it's been party over country, then we know why we're losing the Republic as we speak.
 
nota bene said:
From Fox News:

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., was prohibited Tuesday night from speaking on the Senate floor for the rest of the debate over Sen. Jeff Sessions' nomination to be attorney general.

...The drama began when Warren, quoting a 30-year-old letter by civil rights leader Coretta Scott King, referred to the Alabama Republican as a "disgrace."

...Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont. then advised Warren that she was out of order under Rule 19 of the Senate, which states that "no Senator in debate shall, directly or indirectly, by any form of words impute to another Senator or to other Senators any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming a Senator." Warren barred from speaking on Senate floor for rest of Sessions debate | Fox News

Mitch McConnell then called for a vote to affirm that Warren was out of order. That vote was 49-43, and then the Dems tried to restore Warren's speaking privilege. That vote failed. The Senate's Minority Leader Chuck Schumer isn't happy about what he calls "selective enforcement" of Rule 19.

But what can Schumer do about it?
Click to expand...

I think that she should resign in protest...
 
Risky Thicket said:
I suppose everyone should just throw Session roses and then vote. :roll:

One of the long standing and valid concerns regarding Sessions is his racist past. Considering President Trump-Bannon's increasingly authoritarian admistration and lean toward white nationalism I support Warren's actions, as I understand them.
Click to expand...

The faux racist past that democrats tried to smear him with. Warren's a turd.
 
Either Warren should have known better or knew what she was doing.
 
nota bene said:
From Fox News:

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., was prohibited Tuesday night from speaking on the Senate floor for the rest of the debate over Sen. Jeff Sessions' nomination to be attorney general.

...The drama began when Warren, quoting a 30-year-old letter by civil rights leader Coretta Scott King, referred to the Alabama Republican as a "disgrace."

...Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont. then advised Warren that she was out of order under Rule 19 of the Senate, which states that "no Senator in debate shall, directly or indirectly, by any form of words impute to another Senator or to other Senators any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming a Senator." Warren barred from speaking on Senate floor for rest of Sessions debate | Fox News

Mitch McConnell then called for a vote to affirm that Warren was out of order. That vote was 49-43, and then the Dems tried to restore Warren's speaking privilege. That vote failed. The Senate's Minority Leader Chuck Schumer isn't happy about what he calls "selective enforcement" of Rule 19.

But what can Schumer do about it?
Click to expand...

He can apologize or continue the endless tantrum. She was warned and continued to violate rule 19. It's called "politics". Good for McConnell. He just came up a notch in my book. Warren couldn't get any lower. She was already at the bottom.
 
Last edited:
TurtleDude said:
The faux racist past that democrats tried to smear him with. Warren's a turd.
Click to expand...

Oh please. Sessions was turned down to be a district judge in Alabama because of doubts surrounding his views on race and civil rights. Even Republicans voted against him; that is when the GOP still had some integrity and hadn't been infiltrated by the alt-right.
 
Aristaeus said:
Oh please. Sessions was turned down to be a district judge in Alabama because of doubts surrounding his views on race and civil rights. Even Republicans voted against him. Of course that is when the GOP still had some integrity and hadn't been infiltrated by the alt-right.
Click to expand...

Democrats were pissed and smeared him. RINOS worried about irrational voters did the same thing. The politics of personal destruction that the dems are so good at
 
Aristaeus said:
Oh please. Sessions was turned down to be a district judge in Alabama because of doubts surrounding his views on race and civil rights. Even Republicans voted against him; that is when the GOP still had some integrity and hadn't been infiltrated by the alt-right.
Click to expand...

If only Sessions had done something since then to atone for his past:

Sessions-bridge-2-1024x683.jpg

Politics is a dirty game, one day they are holding your hand, the next day they are running you down.
 
Thank the lord! To hear that one screech on endlessly is a form of torture.

Her poor husband... bad enough she didn't take his name instead opting to keep her ex-husband's...but to have to listen to that self proclaimed "nasty woman" every day...damn...
 
The text of the letter:

THE MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. CENTER

The Honorable Strom Thurmond, Chairman
Committee on the Judiciary

Re: Nomination of Jefferson B. Sessions
U.S. Judge, southern/District of
Alabama Hearing, March 13, 1986

Dear Senator Thurmond:

I write to express my sincere opposition to the
confirmation of Jefferson B. Sessions as a federal district
court judge for the Southern District of Alabama. my
professional and personal roots in Alabama are deep and lasting.
Anyone who has used the power of his office as United States
Attorney to intimidate and chill the free exercise of the
ballot by citizens should not be elevated to our courts.

Mr. Sessions has used the awesome powers of his office in a
shabby attempt to intimidate and frighten elderly black voters.
For this reprehensible conduct, he should not be rewarded with a federal judgeship.

I regret that a long standing commitment prevents me from
appearing in person to testify against this nominee. However,
I have attached a copy of my statement opposing Mr. Sessions'
confirmation and I request that my statement as well as this
letter be made a part of the?hearing record.

I do sincerely urge you to oppose the confirmation of
Mr. Sessions.

Sincerely,

Coretta Scott King
======================

Judiciary Committee Chairman & Dixiecrat Strom Thurmond - being the dink he always was, tucked it away and never put the letter into the congressional record. It took 30 years for that letter to come out.
 
Personally I think Democrats should be able to talk more, not less, as it only makes them look worse. But, the rules are the rules and this rule gives the chair the power to decide with the rules are being broken. And there is a rule about demonizing a fellow Senator's character.
 
NonoBadDog said:
He can apologize or continue the endless tantrum. She was warned and continued to violate rule 19. It's called "politics". Good for McConnell. He just came up a notch in my book. Warren couldn't get any lower. She was already at the bottom.
Click to expand...

I only wish they would enforce the rules on Reid who repeatedly and admittedly slanders private citizens from the floor.
 
Pocahontas and Shrillary do incredible damage to women everywhere.

Most women aren't that disgustingly irritating. Seriously.
 
Lutherf said:
He needs a fair and reasoned confirmation vote. It's a damned shame that the Democrats are treating the guy like a pinata just because they're pissed about Trump. Jeff Sessions is probably the one appointee most qualified for the position Trump is putting him in and rather than act like seasoned Statesmen, the Democrats have chosen to act like two year olds.
Click to expand...

Nobody wants to hear it. Remember Merrick Garland. Democrats should fight every single nominee at all levels with everything they have until Merrick Garland gets a hearing.
 
nota bene said:
From Fox News:

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., was prohibited Tuesday night from speaking on the Senate floor for the rest of the debate over Sen. Jeff Sessions' nomination to be attorney general.

...The drama began when Warren, quoting a 30-year-old letter by civil rights leader Coretta Scott King, referred to the Alabama Republican as a "disgrace."

...Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont. then advised Warren that she was out of order under Rule 19 of the Senate, which states that "no Senator in debate shall, directly or indirectly, by any form of words impute to another Senator or to other Senators any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming a Senator." Warren barred from speaking on Senate floor for rest of Sessions debate | Fox News

Mitch McConnell then called for a vote to affirm that Warren was out of order. That vote was 49-43, and then the Dems tried to restore Warren's speaking privilege. That vote failed. The Senate's Minority Leader Chuck Schumer isn't happy about what he calls "selective enforcement" of Rule 19.

But what can Schumer do about it?
Click to expand...

I wish McConnell had developed a backbone two years ago, but I guess better late than never.

And Chuck Schumer who has abruptly reversed himself on so many things doesn't have any leg to stand on when it comes to being 'selective' about anything.
 
digsbe said:
Warren was out of line, and I'm sure she'll play the victim.
Click to expand...

She definitely was out of line, and she has absolutely played the victim. I heard her whining with Rachel Maddow last night. McConnell was mean to her because she couldn't disparage Sessions using the 30 year old words of Coretta King.
 
tres borrachos said:
She definitely was out of line, and she has absolutely played the victim. I heard her whining with Rachel Maddow last night. McConnell was mean to her because she couldn't disparage Sessions using the 30 year old words of Coretta King.
Click to expand...

Twitter nailed it with a slightly different take than yours:

White men stopped a woman from reading the words of a black woman who dared to speak out against the racism of a white man nominated by another racist white man who said we should "Grab 'em by the *****."

IMO, the GOP are running their Titanic straight into the proverbial iceberg.
 
Four more Democratic Senators have stated the same passage on the Senate floor today, yet no rule 19 invoked against them by the 'so-called' hypocritical Majority Leader McConnell.

Mitch has now joined the 'so-called' president trump/Bannon in their trashing of the 1st amendment .
 
jonny5 said:
Personally I think Democrats should be able to talk more, not less, as it only makes them look worse. But, the rules are the rules and this rule gives the chair the power to decide with the rules are being broken. And there is a rule about demonizing a fellow Senator's character.
Click to expand...

No, they shouldn't. At this point they are trying to delay the process from being completed, which in turn limits the amount of things congress can do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom