Elizabeth Warren Barred From Reading Coretta Scott King Letter About Jeff Sessions On Senate Floor

[Clementine]

This is amusing. The Senate voted tonight to reprimand Chief Looney Toons during the debate on Sessions' nomination.

Elizabeth Warren barred from Senate debate for 'impugning' Jeff Sessions

It is about time somebody stood up to this little petty tyrant!


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Republican Snowflakes

Upholding laws and senate rules does not make people snowflakes.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Obviously, you haven't either. I even posted it in #52 and you still didn't read it.

I guess you didn't understand #2 of the rule, Warrens motive was to personally impute another Senator, that's a no-no.

No, the motive was to bring evidence of her concerns with the nominee for AG in the most appropriate time to do so. During the debate period.

She should have brought it up in the Judiciary Committee hearings where it was allowed.

What part of debate don't you understand?

the part that says she must stay within the rules of the chambers.

Four other Senators read the same letter. The purpose of the session was to debate the merits of Sessions as AG. Invoking that rule was stupid and shortsighted.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Mitch McConnell, the Republican majority leader, objected that Warren had broken Senate rules that prohibit one member impugning the conduct of another. Senators then voted 49-43 to uphold a ruling in McConnell’s favour.

THIS^^^ is why she was shut out. She broke a rule that she had been warned about several times.

Except four other Senators all read the same thing.

so it was needed again?

You are slow, aren't you?

Why was Warren shut down and no one else was?

Because McConnell realized he fucked up.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

In the letter, King wrote that Sessions “used the power of his office as United States Attorney to intimidate and chill the free exercise of the ballot by citizens.” Among other things, Sessions attempted to “intimidate and frighten elderly black voters,” King added.

McConnell said that, by quoting Martin Luther King Jr.’s widow, Warren “impugned the motives and conduct of our colleague from Alabama.” He then invoked Rule 19 to force Warren to stop speaking.

The rule is intended to encourage senators to be polite to each other. But McConnell used it squelch debate about a man nominated to be the next Attorney General of the United States.

More: Elizabeth Warren was just silenced on the Senate floor. Her crime was quoting Coretta Scott King.

Unbelievable!

The exact same evidence used in the 80's that led to Sessions not getting a federal judgeship. It was relevant then and it's just as relevant now given the scope of cases the AG will need to oversee.
How far we have fallen.

Yes, how far have we fallen, but not for the reason you ctrl-Lefties promote.

You mean whites losing control?

 

[sartre play]

Just another distraction from the real point , should Sessions get this job. as I have friends and relatives in Alabama. who would be happy to tell you yes we discriminate, but quietly now. Alabama was one of the states that the fed government had to over see until 213 due to there voter rights problems. He may be the right man for a job, but maybe not this one.

 

[Lakhota]

McConnell Silencing Warren Shows What Women Put Up With Every Day

The sad truth.

 

[waltky]

Granny says, "Dat's right - she was tellin' a whopper an' ol' Mitch stopped her...

Warren Falsely Claims That Republicans 'Silenced Mrs. King's Voice on the Senate Floor'
February 8, 2017 | A liberal advocacy group is already fund-raising off Tuesday's Elizabeth Warren kerfuffle, urging fellow Democrats, "Let's turn this outrage into a fiasco for the GOP."

Warren had been speaking on the Senate floor for more than 45 minutes Tuesday night -- and she had already been warned once -- when Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) invoked Senate rule 19 to shut her down. "The senator has impugned the motives and conduct of our colleague from Alabama, as warned by the chair," McConnell said. "Senator Warren, quote, said, 'Senator Sessions has used the awesome power of his office to chill the free exercise of the vote by black citizens.'" Sen. Warren was actually quoting the words of Coretta Scott King, who wrote a letter 30 years ago objecting to Sessions' nomination to a federal court.

She had already finished reading King's letter in its entirety -- and had been warned once before about Senate rules -- when McConnell interrupted her again. McConnell invoked Senate rule 19, which forbids a senator “directly or indirectly, by any form of words, imput(ing) to another Senator or to other Senators any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming a Senator." By quoting Coretta Scott King's letter, which Warren read in its entirety, she was "indirectly" imputing Sen. Sessions' conduct and motives. Warren objected: "I am surprised that the words of Coretta Scott King are not suitable for debate in the United States Senate. I ask leave of the Senate to continue my remarks."

"I object," McConnell said. "The Senator will take her seat," the presiding chairman said. McConnell later noted that Warren had been warned, "but she persisted." In her blistering speech against Sen. Jeff Sessions' nomination to be the next attorney general, Warren not only read from long-ago letters and speeches imputing his motives and conduct. She flat-out accused Sessions of harboring "dangerous, toxic hatred."

MORE

See also:

Warren violates arcane rule, sparking Senate dustup
February 8, 2017 | WASHINGTON (AP) -- Sen. Elizabeth Warren has earned a rare rebuke by the Senate for quoting Coretta Scott King on the Senate floor.

The Massachusetts Democrat ran afoul of the chamber's arcane rules by reading a three-decade-old letter from Dr. Martin Luther King's widow that dated to Sen. Jeff Sessions' failed judicial nomination three decades ago. The chamber is debating the Alabama Republican's nomination for attorney general, with Democrats dropping senatorial niceties to oppose Sessions and Republicans sticking up for him. King wrote that when acting as a federal prosecutor, Sessions used his power to "chill the free exercise of the vote by black citizens."

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., speaks on the floor of the U.S. Senate in Washington, Feb. 6, 2017, about the nomination of Betsy DeVos to be Education Secretary. The Senate will be in session around the clock this week as Republicans aim to confirm more of President Donald Trump's Cabinet picks over Democratic opposition.​

Quoting King technically put Warren in violation of Senate rules for "impugning the motives" of Sessions, though senators have said far worse stuff. And Warren was reading from a letter that was written 10 years before Sessions was even elected to the Senate. Still, top Senate Republican Mitch McConnell invoked the rules. After a few parliamentary moves, the GOP-controlled Senate voted to back him up. Now, Warren is forbidden from speaking again on Sessions' nomination. A vote on Sessions is expected Wednesday evening. Democrats seized on the flap to charge that Republicans were muzzling Warren, sparking liberals to take to Twitter to post the King letter in its entirety.

Warren argued: "I'm reading a letter from Coretta Scott King to the Judiciary Committee from 1986 that was admitted into the record. I'm simply reading what she wrote about what the nomination of Jeff Sessions to be a federal court judge meant and what it would mean in history for her." Warren was originally warned after reading from a statement by former Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., that labeled Sessions a disgrace. Democrats pointed out that McConnell didn't object when Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, called him a liar in a 2015 dustup. The episode was followed by lamentations by Senate veterans, including its most senior Republican, Orrin Hatch of Utah, about how the Senate is too partisan.

Warren violates arcane rule, sparking Senate dustup

 

[jc456]

That isn't his record.
It is an opinion of one person that is unsubstantiated. I think we should stop using articles derived from a biased source as evidence and stick to the facts.

It is part of his record

Both documents are public record pertaining to his fitness for office

How can you have a Senate Confirmation hearing without being allowed to provide negative information on the candidate?

cause there are rules. learn something for a change.

dude, you can't yell bomb on a plane. and there is a first amendment right?

Kind of a flakey "rule" that you can't say anything about a Senator who is up for confirmation in another job

so you don't believe in rules? I actually believe you don't.

Well, sparky, if rules matter - why was a male Senator allowed to read the letter on the Senate floor?

LATER: GOP Lets Another Dem Read Letter On Senate Floor

Only Difference? It Was A Man This Time

there could be a reason. I wasn't there.

 

[jc456]

Just another distraction from the real point , should Sessions get this job. as I have friends and relatives in Alabama. who would be happy to tell you yes we discriminate, but quietly now. Alabama was one of the states that the fed government had to over see until 213 due to there voter rights problems. He may be the right man for a job, but maybe not this one.

then dude why is this out there then?

Black pastors rally in Washington for AG nominee Jeff Sessions

"WASHINGTON — A group of black pastors Monday criticized African-American opponents of attorney general nominee Sen. Jeff Sessions for demonizing the Alabama Republican, instead characterizing him as someone who shows “respect and care for people of all races.”

The ministers are holdout Sessions supporters in a much larger crowd of opponents among Southern black clergy and African-American and civil rights groups, including the North Carolina Southern Christian Leadership Conference, the Alabama NAACP and the activist group PICO, which uses congregations and churches to help in community organizing."

 

[jc456]

I guess you didn't understand #2 of the rule, Warrens motive was to personally impute another Senator, that's a no-no.

No, the motive was to bring evidence of her concerns with the nominee for AG in the most appropriate time to do so. During the debate period.

She should have brought it up in the Judiciary Committee hearings where it was allowed.

What part of debate don't you understand?

the part that says she must stay within the rules of the chambers.

Four other Senators read the same letter. The purpose of the session was to debate the merits of Sessions as AG. Invoking that rule was stupid and shortsighted.

why did so many need to read the letter? isn't it a chamber and everyone there? Do they feel they are all hard of hearing, or lack comprehension skills? why four times?

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

They are picking on Jeff Sessions because he is a "Nose picking Red Neck Racist Bastard" who wants to execute marijuana traders

 

[mudwhistle]

They are picking on Jeff Sessions because he is a "Nose picking Red Neck Racist Bastard" who wants to execute marijuana traders

No.....because he's a Republican.
50 years ago he would be called a Democrat less racist than Jimmy Carter or Robert Byrd.

 

[Clementine]

Warren and the other libs forgot about this-

 

[mudwhistle]

It seems the big sin Sessions committed was catching and prosecuting blacks that had altered and mailed boxes full of absentee ballots.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

It seems the big sin Sessions committed was catching and prosecuting blacks that had altered and mailed boxes full of absentee ballots.

Racist!!

 

[paperview]

The damn letter was 20 years old, and was nothing but an attempt at Obstruction and Character Assassination back then.
It was read by Democrat Senators 3 times previously, and each time each one of those Senators were given a warning that they were violating Senate rules, but the Senate let the letter be read anyways all three times.

Elizabeth Warren decided to test the patience of The Senate one more time and try to read it a 4th time, you know, so CNN could get a convenient sound bite out of it, because they missed the first three times.

Well, in my book, that is down right ANTAGONISTIC, and she should have not only been asked to sit down, they should have censured her and removed her from the chambers.

She and three other Senators were warned and told to quit reading the damn 20 year old letter, which again I remind you was written to Obstruct, and to Character Assassinate Sessions 20 years ago, and had already been read 3 times that day. The accusations had no merit or proof back then, as they have no merit or proof now. It was nothing but pure unadulterated slander and read out lout with malice and reckless disregard for decency and decorum.

So what do the Dem Fascist Liberal Nazis do?

They do what all Dems do. They refuse to reform, and they double down on stupid. It's all they know.

So they got what they deserved.

You are so full of shit.

 

[paperview]

It seems the big sin Sessions committed was catching and prosecuting blacks that had altered and mailed boxes full of absentee ballots.

Hey fucknut. That case the confederate-loving Beauregard Session prosecuted found the defendants not guilty of all charges.

 

[The Original Tree]

The damn letter was 20 years old, and was nothing but an attempt at Obstruction and Character Assassination back then.
It was read by Democrat Senators 3 times previously, and each time each one of those Senators were given a warning that they were violating Senate rules, but the Senate let the letter be read anyways all three times.

Elizabeth Warren decided to test the patience of The Senate one more time and try to read it a 4th time, you know, so CNN could get a convenient sound bite out of it, because they missed the first three times.

Well, in my book, that is down right ANTAGONISTIC, and she should have not only been asked to sit down, they should have censured her and removed her from the chambers.

She and three other Senators were warned and told to quit reading the damn 20 year old letter, which again I remind you was written to Obstruct, and to Character Assassinate Sessions 20 years ago, and had already been read 3 times that day. The accusations had no merit or proof back then, as they have no merit or proof now. It was nothing but pure unadulterated slander and read out lout with malice and reckless disregard for decency and decorum.

So what do the Dem Fascist Liberal Nazis do?

They do what all Dems do. They refuse to reform, and they double down on stupid. It's all they know.

So they got what they deserved.

You are so full of shit.

Coming from a Lying Liberal, that simply means I am dead on.

I do like that Sessions successfully went after the KKK, something Dems refuse to do to their racist brethren
.
And he won against them too.

That had to make Lefty awfully mad.

 

[Clementine]

You are so full of shit.

No, you guys are full of shit. The facts don't support your narrative.

Worth posting again-

 

[Silhouette]

Hmmm ^^ that seems to fly in the face of what the critics are saying about him..