Ted Cruz Spills the Tea on Backroom Democrat Campaign to Replace Dianne Feinstein

[GURPS]

Before we get to Cruz’s remarks, let’s set the stage for them.

In the immediate aftermath of the hearings, Schumer – who was then the Minority Leader – told the Washington Post in response to the Democrat outrage that “I’ve had a long and serious talk with Senator Feinstein. That’s all I’m going to say about it right now.” The paper also reported that he wouldn’t address questions about her position on the powerful committee.

A month later and after the media declared Joe Biden the winner of the presidential election, Feinstein announced she would not be seeking a leadership position on the Judiciary Committee. Schumer issued a conveniently-timed response a short time later, saying that he was “deeply grateful for Senator Feinstein’s leadership and contributions to our caucus and country as the Ranking Member on the Senate Judiciary Committee” and stating that she would “continue her work as one of the nation’s leading advocates for women’s and voting rights” etc.

Two weeks later, Senate Dems picked Durbin to lead the committee, whether it be in a ranking role or chairman (the two Georgia Senate runoffs had not been held yet, so Senate control was still unknown).

Here’s what Cruz claims really happened behind the scenes prior to Feinstein announcing she wouldn’t seek the leadership position:

Cruz had something to point out about that, especially about the noteworthy timing of it all. “Now, Dianne Feinstein was slated to be the next chairman of the Judiciary Committee if the Democrats took the majority. Because the radical left wing was so angry, within days, Chuck Schumer announced Feinstein is no longer in line to be chairman of the Judiciary Committee,” Cruz outlined, going on to mention quite the illustration. “Basically, he took Feinstein to a back alley and effectively shot her. And it was giving in to the most extreme left-wing voices the Democrat Party.”
This move, Cruz explained, actually went against Senate rules. Feinstein’s fellow Democrats have that much contempt for her. Durbin is the chair, as the next most senior member. He’s also the majority whip, though. “Under Senate rules typically, the majority leader, the minority leader, the majority whip, the Minority Whip can’t be a committee chairman also. There’s a basic principle that if you have one leadership position, you can’t have another one,” Cruz laid out.

What Cruz says makes sense, especially considering the liberal activist outrage after the Barrett confirmation and Schumer’s comments about having a “serious talk” with Feinstein. It’s almost like Schumer put pressure on her in public and in private basically forced Feinstein’s hand, giving her no choice but to make the eventual announcement.

Ted Cruz Spills the Tea on Backroom Democrat Campaign to Replace Dianne Feinstein

redstate.com

 

[Hijinx]

What Ted Cruz says most always makes sense , unfortunately nothing is ever done about it.
IMO Feinstein is no longer in a position to protect herself, nor is she mentally capable of leadership, she is another person suffering the pangs of old age and mental and physical decline. Schumer is probably right to replace her.
Just as Republicans would be right to replace Mitch McConnell another high placed old man in a position he never was good at and now is too old for. We need term limits and age and mental limits. Fetterman is young enough ,but his brain is mush.

 

[glhs837]

Another instance of gerontocracy being a Bad Thing

 

[herb749]

So because she is out it means the committee that nominates judges is 50/50 and no judges are going to a vote. The democrats want to replace her to continue their one vote advantage and are blaming republicans for not allowing it. When they should be asked if it was the opposite would they be doing the same in refusing. Other difference is if they did it the liberal media would be on their side.

 

[SamSpade]

While I think that Dems have nothing to gain - AS A PARTY - by pushing out their oldest leaders, it had not occurred to me this would have more to do with party infighting and the pressure from the much further left wing of the party.

Honestly, with the exception of the religious right in the 80's and 90's, I don't think the right has this much squabbling and pressure to cave to more radical elements of the party. Yeah, I suppose you might say, really, what about all those who support Trump wholeheartedly versus the ones who don't - but that's about A MAN. POLICY wise, I don't see a huge difference between Trump and the bulk of the right, with the exception that Trump wants to DO the things the right talks about, instead of simply going on the record as being for them.

 

[vraiblonde]

unfortunately nothing is ever done about it.

Exactly.

DiFi has always been a reliable liberal Democrat party hack, so I didn't really understand why they were trying to eject her. But now that the vultures are circling it all makes sense.

 

[Ken King]

So because she is out it means the committee that nominates judges is 50/50 and no judges are going to a vote. The democrats want to replace her to continue their one vote advantage and are blaming republicans for not allowing it. When they should be asked if it was the opposite would they be doing the same in refusing. Other difference is if they did it the liberal media would be on their side.

She might be out as the Chair, but is still a majority member and per the committee rules can vote by proxy.

 

[Kyle]

It's amazing how tightly these people grip that power, and cling on in Washington, when they could be relaxing and enjoying their golden years with family and friends.

 

[Hijinx]

It's amazing how tightly these people grip that power, and cling on in Washington, when they could be relaxing and enjoying their golden years with family and friends.

I believe it is the habit of having their ass kissed that they cannot break.
They love to have their minions flocking to their buttocks, they are treated as royalty when they go somewhere, They love their free protection and they just plain adore people coming to them for favors.

 

[stgislander]

It's amazing how tightly these people grip that power, and cling on in Washington, when they could be relaxing and enjoying their golden years with family and friends.

Steny doesn't have any.

 

[herb749]

She might be out as the Chair, but is still a majority member and per the committee rules can vote by proxy.

So why the complaint that republicans won't let them substitute for her .?

 

[Hijinx]

The democrats have more than Feinstein the need to get rid of. If they need to they can bring her in on a stretcher to vote---it's been done before.
But they don't need to Dick Durbin cast her proxy votes They have Lyndsey Grahams vote in the Senate and probably a couple more.

 

[Ken King]

So why the complaint that republicans won't let them substitute for her .?

Is that tidbit tucked away in one of the OP links?

 

[herb749]

Is that tidbit tucked away in one of the OP links?

I didn't read much of the link. I have read that's the complaint from democrats on Feinstein. They want a substitute for her so the votes on judges can continue. Pubs have said no. It takes a near unaminous vote to change.

 

[Ken King]

I didn't read much of the link. I have read that's the complaint from democrats on Feinstein. They want a substitute for her so the votes on judges can continue. Pubs have said no. It takes a near unaminous vote to change.

Yet the rules of the committee specifically allow for the proxy vote. Seems this might be nothing more than the typical Democrat projection trying to make people believe something that isn't true. Here is the text from the committee's site - "Proxy Voting - When a recorded vote is taken in the Committee on any bill, resolution, amendment, or any other question, a quorum being present, Members who are unable to attend the meeting may submit votes by proxy, in writing or by telephone, or through personal instructions. A proxy must be specific with respect to the matters it addresses."

Also, looking at the nominations sent to the floor on 4-20-23 all of them had recorded votes totaling 21 which comprises all members of the committee.

 

[herb749]

Yet the rules of the committee specifically allow for the proxy vote. Seems this might be nothing more than the typical Democrat projection trying to make people believe something that isn't true. Here is the text from the committee's site - "Proxy Voting - When a recorded vote is taken in the Committee on any bill, resolution, amendment, or any other question, a quorum being present, Members who are unable to attend the meeting may submit votes by proxy, in writing or by telephone, or through personal instructions. A proxy must be specific with respect to the matters it addresses."

Also, looking at the nominations sent to the floor on 4-20-23 all of them had recorded votes totaling 21 which comprises all members of the committee.

Unless there is a special rule for judicial nominations.

 

[Ken King]

Unless there is a special rule for judicial nominations.

What are you talking about? The proxy rule for that committee is posted above. The committee shows 21 members and all had cast their votes (including Feinstein).