The silencing of Warren and an old Senate rule prompted by fistfight

[Jacque67 7,328]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/02/08/the-silencing-of-elizabeth-warren-and-an-old-senate-rule-prompted-by-a-fistfight/

[Jacque67 7,328]

#Letlizspeak

[CaliCat 3,957]

She was reading a document from the Civil Rights era when she was reprimanded. It explains why they want Jeff Sessions as AG and why they want to suppress any truth about his past.  

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

Sessions V. Warren fistfight? I am betting on warren

[bcking 3,157]

While it doesn't seem to be expressly mentioned in the "Rule 19" that was invoked, I would argue she was not talking about Jeff Sessions, "The Senator", but Jeff Sessions, "The Nominee for Attorney General".

 

Senators are often nominated for cabinet positions. The senate needs to be able to be critical of the nominations, otherwise what is the point of a confirmation process? If they can't criticize a nominee just because they are also a sitting senator at the time, it defeats the whole purpose of the process.

 

EDIT: If anyone wants to see some fun insults, you should watch video clips of Parliament in the UK. They talk back and forth about each other all the time, which is all the more fun to listen to because most of them have very posh sounding English accents. After insults you often times also hear a loud "murmur" from other people. I just imagine all of them thinking "Oh no he didn't!"

Edited February 8, 2017 by bcking

[smilesammich 10,727]

lol senator turtle, censure this..

http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/02/jeff_merkley_reads_coretta_scott_king_letter_about_jeff_sessions.html

[bcking 3,157]

1 minute ago, smilesammich said:

lol senator turtle, censure this..

http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/02/jeff_merkley_reads_coretta_scott_king_letter_about_jeff_sessions.html

I'm a little confused. 

 

So they "censured" Warren, but then let him speak? Why wouldn't they just do the same thing to him and anyone else? Wasn't their complaint that the letter she was reading had "impugned" a fellow senator? Why does it matter who reads it?

(My browser gives me an error loading the link, something about flash)

[smilesammich 10,727]

13 minutes ago, bcking said:

I'm a little confused. 

 

So they "censured" Warren, but then let him speak? Why wouldn't they just do the same thing to him and anyone else? Wasn't their complaint that the letter she was reading had "impugned" a fellow senator? Why does it matter who reads it?

(My browser gives me an error loading the link, something about flash)

their complaint was invalid last night, and i assume they didn't want to push their luck using the same invalid argument today. that and i'm sure senator turtle loves to belittle hiawatha whenever possible.

[Transborderwife 4,666]

2 hours ago, ccneat said:

Sessions V. Warren fistfight? I am betting on warren

Can Cory Booker be the 'ring girl' who holds up the cards between rounds?

[eieio 1,594]

Article 19 may come into play over the confirmation the the Supreme Court judge. Rush was talking about it today.

 

Pochontas must be in her teepee sending out smoke signals over Jeff Sessions nomination this afternoon. Smokey tears.

[CaliCat 3,957]

11 hours ago, Transborderwife said:

Can Cory Booker be the 'ring girl' who holds up the cards between rounds?

 

Sessions might ask Booker to take a seat up in the balcony.

[Dashinka 23,209]

6 hours ago, eieio said:

Article 19 may come into play over the confirmation the the Supreme Court judge. Rush was talking about it today.

 

Pochontas must be in her teepee sending out smoke signals over Jeff Sessions nomination this afternoon. Smokey tears.

Can you imagine the screaming from the "progressives" if this happens?  Senator Warren will have to get some Depends as she attempts to keep debate open during one of her two speaking sessions.

[Dakine10 5,452]

2 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

Can you imagine the screaming from the "progressives" if this happens?  

  The "regressives" should let her speak then. They just spent the last 8 years in a perpetual filibuster. The republicans are coming off  looking like hypocrites here.

[smilesammich 10,727]

morning joe this morning they were talking about how trump wants to single out warren and put her on the path to run against him 2020. and mika said that was just as ridiculous as hillary wanting to run against trump (agreed). trump is going to go down as the president who strives to pick fights with women leadership, because he sees them as weak and an easy mark.. 

and i haven't watched morning joe since like 2008, lord help me.

[Dashinka 23,209]

8 hours ago, Dakine10 said:

  The "regressives" should let her speak then. They just spent the last 8 years in a perpetual filibuster. The republicans are coming off  looking like hypocrites here.

Is that an example of "progressives" progressing in the wrong direction?