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

[jc456]

Nevertheless, she persisted.

and went and sat down. right?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

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.

Four other Senators read King's letter. They did not read Kennedy's letter and THEN ignore the warning they were given to read King's letter.

WTF are you talking about?

Find someone who has reading comprehension to explain it to you. The rule was invoked because she ready Kennedy's letter, was admonished and warned as the 4 Senators who had previously read King's letter into the record had been admonished, but instead of complying with the rule, she continued by beginning to read Kings letter into the record.

Comprehension?

That's really quite funny as you are completely wrong. The four other Senators read the letter subsequent to Warren's removal. Both letters were already a part of the record and were used as evidence in his confirmation debate thirty years prior. If they were valid then, how are they now invalid when used in the same context?

You are correct, she read it first. However, did you notice that when the 4 Senators read the letter into the record and were admonished, they stopped and did not lose their turn to speak? The point is that the letter was not the issue. It was Warren's violation of the rules. If you were even slightly able to perceive the truth, you'd know that.

On the up side, Sessions has resigned from the Senate, so now she can read both letters into the record without breaking a rule.

The truth is easily perceptible. It was a republican overreach that they now regret.

The truth is that those letters were part of the very same debate thirty years ago and are in no more violation than they were then.
They are just as damning now as then. That's the real reason for shutting them down.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

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.

Four other Senators read King's letter. They did not read Kennedy's letter and THEN ignore the warning they were given to read King's letter.

WTF are you talking about?

Find someone who has reading comprehension to explain it to you. The rule was invoked because she ready Kennedy's letter, was admonished and warned as the 4 Senators who had previously read King's letter into the record had been admonished, but instead of complying with the rule, she continued by beginning to read Kings letter into the record.

Comprehension?

That's really quite funny as you are completely wrong. The four other Senators read the letter subsequent to Warren's removal. Both letters were already a part of the record and were used as evidence in his confirmation debate thirty years prior. If they were valid then, how are they now invalid when used in the same context?

because he wasn't a senator back then. just maybe eh?

That has nothing at all to do with the debate over his fitness for the position. He was unfit then and is certainly then unfit now.

 

[jc456]

Four other Senators read King's letter. They did not read Kennedy's letter and THEN ignore the warning they were given to read King's letter.

WTF are you talking about?

Find someone who has reading comprehension to explain it to you. The rule was invoked because she ready Kennedy's letter, was admonished and warned as the 4 Senators who had previously read King's letter into the record had been admonished, but instead of complying with the rule, she continued by beginning to read Kings letter into the record.

Comprehension?

That's really quite funny as you are completely wrong. The four other Senators read the letter subsequent to Warren's removal. Both letters were already a part of the record and were used as evidence in his confirmation debate thirty years prior. If they were valid then, how are they now invalid when used in the same context?

because he wasn't a senator back then. just maybe eh?

That has nothing at all to do with the debate over his fitness for the position. He was unfit then and is certainly then unfit now.

fitness? wtf does that mean? fitness. you got nothing about his policies. debating isn't calling someone racist. just in case you never have done that before.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

RACIST!!!

 

[Hutch Starskey]

WTF are you talking about?

Find someone who has reading comprehension to explain it to you. The rule was invoked because she ready Kennedy's letter, was admonished and warned as the 4 Senators who had previously read King's letter into the record had been admonished, but instead of complying with the rule, she continued by beginning to read Kings letter into the record.

Comprehension?

That's really quite funny as you are completely wrong. The four other Senators read the letter subsequent to Warren's removal. Both letters were already a part of the record and were used as evidence in his confirmation debate thirty years prior. If they were valid then, how are they now invalid when used in the same context?

because he wasn't a senator back then. just maybe eh?

That has nothing at all to do with the debate over his fitness for the position. He was unfit then and is certainly then unfit now.

fitness? wtf does that mean? fitness. you got nothing about his policies. debating isn't calling someone racist. just in case you never have done that before.

What's the subject of the letters we're discussing in this thread, dope.

 

[jc456]

Find someone who has reading comprehension to explain it to you. The rule was invoked because she ready Kennedy's letter, was admonished and warned as the 4 Senators who had previously read King's letter into the record had been admonished, but instead of complying with the rule, she continued by beginning to read Kings letter into the record.

Comprehension?

That's really quite funny as you are completely wrong. The four other Senators read the letter subsequent to Warren's removal. Both letters were already a part of the record and were used as evidence in his confirmation debate thirty years prior. If they were valid then, how are they now invalid when used in the same context?

because he wasn't a senator back then. just maybe eh?

That has nothing at all to do with the debate over his fitness for the position. He was unfit then and is certainly then unfit now.

fitness? wtf does that mean? fitness. you got nothing about his policies. debating isn't calling someone racist. just in case you never have done that before.

What's the subject of the letters we're discussing in this thread, dope.

yeah, what is the subject?

And oh BTW, the niece of MLK told her to shut the fk up!!!!

 

[Lakhota]

Comprehension?

That's really quite funny as you are completely wrong. The four other Senators read the letter subsequent to Warren's removal. Both letters were already a part of the record and were used as evidence in his confirmation debate thirty years prior. If they were valid then, how are they now invalid when used in the same context?

because he wasn't a senator back then. just maybe eh?

That has nothing at all to do with the debate over his fitness for the position. He was unfit then and is certainly then unfit now.

fitness? wtf does that mean? fitness. you got nothing about his policies. debating isn't calling someone racist. just in case you never have done that before.

What's the subject of the letters we're discussing in this thread, dope.

yeah, what is the subject?

And oh BTW, the niece of MLK told her to shut the fk up!!!!

She is an idiot. Google her...

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Comprehension?

That's really quite funny as you are completely wrong. The four other Senators read the letter subsequent to Warren's removal. Both letters were already a part of the record and were used as evidence in his confirmation debate thirty years prior. If they were valid then, how are they now invalid when used in the same context?

because he wasn't a senator back then. just maybe eh?

That has nothing at all to do with the debate over his fitness for the position. He was unfit then and is certainly then unfit now.

fitness? wtf does that mean? fitness. you got nothing about his policies. debating isn't calling someone racist. just in case you never have done that before.

What's the subject of the letters we're discussing in this thread, dope.

yeah, what is the subject?

And oh BTW, the niece of MLK told her to shut the fk up!!!!

Why in the hell are you posting here if you don't know WTF the thread is about?

 

[jc456]

because he wasn't a senator back then. just maybe eh?

That has nothing at all to do with the debate over his fitness for the position. He was unfit then and is certainly then unfit now.

fitness? wtf does that mean? fitness. you got nothing about his policies. debating isn't calling someone racist. just in case you never have done that before.

What's the subject of the letters we're discussing in this thread, dope.

yeah, what is the subject?

And oh BTW, the niece of MLK told her to shut the fk up!!!!

She is an idiot. Google her...

so?

 

[jc456]

because he wasn't a senator back then. just maybe eh?

That has nothing at all to do with the debate over his fitness for the position. He was unfit then and is certainly then unfit now.

fitness? wtf does that mean? fitness. you got nothing about his policies. debating isn't calling someone racist. just in case you never have done that before.

What's the subject of the letters we're discussing in this thread, dope.

yeah, what is the subject?

And oh BTW, the niece of MLK told her to shut the fk up!!!!

Why in the hell are you posting here if you don't know WTF the thread is about?

I was going to ask you the same thing.

Why in the hell are you posting here if you don't know WTF the thread is about?

 

[hunarcy]

Four other Senators read King's letter. They did not read Kennedy's letter and THEN ignore the warning they were given to read King's letter.

WTF are you talking about?

Find someone who has reading comprehension to explain it to you. The rule was invoked because she ready Kennedy's letter, was admonished and warned as the 4 Senators who had previously read King's letter into the record had been admonished, but instead of complying with the rule, she continued by beginning to read Kings letter into the record.

Comprehension?

That's really quite funny as you are completely wrong. The four other Senators read the letter subsequent to Warren's removal. Both letters were already a part of the record and were used as evidence in his confirmation debate thirty years prior. If they were valid then, how are they now invalid when used in the same context?

You are correct, she read it first. However, did you notice that when the 4 Senators read the letter into the record and were admonished, they stopped and did not lose their turn to speak? The point is that the letter was not the issue. It was Warren's violation of the rules. If you were even slightly able to perceive the truth, you'd know that.

On the up side, Sessions has resigned from the Senate, so now she can read both letters into the record without breaking a rule.

The truth is easily perceptible. It was a republican overreach that they now regret.

The truth is that those letters were part of the very same debate thirty years ago and are in no more violation than they were then.
They are just as damning now as then. That's the real reason for shutting them down.

You truly are stupid. 30 years ago, Sessions was not a Senator and the rule didn't apply. Today, he's not a Senator and the rule doesn't apply. But, the day before yesterday, he WAS a Senator and the rule DID apply. Go pound salt.

 

[hunarcy]

Find someone who has reading comprehension to explain it to you. The rule was invoked because she ready Kennedy's letter, was admonished and warned as the 4 Senators who had previously read King's letter into the record had been admonished, but instead of complying with the rule, she continued by beginning to read Kings letter into the record.

Comprehension?

That's really quite funny as you are completely wrong. The four other Senators read the letter subsequent to Warren's removal. Both letters were already a part of the record and were used as evidence in his confirmation debate thirty years prior. If they were valid then, how are they now invalid when used in the same context?

because he wasn't a senator back then. just maybe eh?

That has nothing at all to do with the debate over his fitness for the position. He was unfit then and is certainly then unfit now.

fitness? wtf does that mean? fitness. you got nothing about his policies. debating isn't calling someone racist. just in case you never have done that before.

What's the subject of the letters we're discussing in this thread, dope.

The thread is about why Warren was told to stop reading them, dope.

 

[hunarcy]

because he wasn't a senator back then. just maybe eh?

That has nothing at all to do with the debate over his fitness for the position. He was unfit then and is certainly then unfit now.

fitness? wtf does that mean? fitness. you got nothing about his policies. debating isn't calling someone racist. just in case you never have done that before.

What's the subject of the letters we're discussing in this thread, dope.

yeah, what is the subject?

And oh BTW, the niece of MLK told her to shut the fk up!!!!

Why in the hell are you posting here if you don't know WTF the thread is about?

That could be asked of you, because now you want to talk about the letters and not Warren's violations of Senate rules.

 

[OKTexas]

30 years ago that letter by MLK's widow was tucked away by the Dixiecrat bigot Strom Thurmond, who was supposed to officially enter into the Congressional record -- but the bastard OOpps disappeared it.

It should have been part of the Congressional record long ago, but for the GOP bastard. At long last, it finally is part of the record, and everyone should read it.

LIE! It was read into the record in 86.

LIE. It was never put into the Congressional Record.

If it was read in the committee testimony, it's in the record.

 

[OKTexas]

The U.S. Senate has tried to silence Coretta Scott King for 30 years:

<snip>

"As my colleague Christina Cauterucci noted last month, King’s letter didn’t make it into the congressional record three decades ago, and it wouldn’t have been released this year if Sen. Chuck Grassley had his way.


The chair of the Judiciary Committee is the only person with the legal power to release King’s written testimony into public record. In 1986, the chairman was noted racist Strom Thurmond, who unsurprisingly declined to make King’s letter public. The current chairman, Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley, could also have released King’s letter, but, as he believes Sessions is “very honorable” and a “man of integrity,” had little incentive to do so.


The entire document was made public for the first time by the Washington Post on Jan. 10, after an unidentified person leaked it to the newspaper. As BuzzFeed noted, before this year just one line from the letter had been made public, thanks to a dispatch written in 1986 by a Knight Ridder reporter. “For a century, the racial practices that characterized our region were established and enforced by men who, like Mr. Sessions, protested that they, too, were not personally hostile to blacks,” King wrote.

Thanks to the Post, we now know the full sweep of King’s remark. She warned that the “irony of Mr. Sessions’ nomination is that, if confirmed, he will be given life tenure for doing with a federal prosecution what the local sheriffs accomplished 20 years ago with clubs and cattle prods.” We can now add that the other irony of the Sessions nomination is that a woman was silenced for attempting to read a 10-page document that had somehow been kept out of the public record for 30 years."

So now you're admitting it is in the congressional record, it was just not made public?

 

[Staidhup]

Enough already, Rule XIX was adopted in the early 1900's, over 90 years ago. Senator Sessions until confirmed was a Senator. Elizabeth Warren was grandstanding, posturing herself as the champion of the progressive left, leader of the obstructionist movement. The ding bat is running for President, solidifying her base by slandering another Senator that was not present to defend himself.

 

[jc456]

Enough already, Rule XIX was adopted in the early 1900's, over 90 years ago. Senator Sessions until confirmed was a Senator. Elizabeth Warren was grandstanding, posturing herself as the champion of the progressive left, leader of the obstructionist movement. The ding bat is running for President, solidifying her base by slandering another Senator that was not present to defend himself.

don't you see, that rule is only to be used to shut a conservative up. duh

 

[OKTexas]

Do any of the Lefty Nutcases even know what King's letter was about?

Sessions found out that the Dem Party was defauding black voters through absentee ballots.
In a city of just 15,000 conservative blacks, there were more absentee ballots than people that lived there and nearly all the ballots were filed for The Democrat Candidate in 1984. Is anyone surprised at all by this despicable behavior of The Dems? Ask Bernie Sanders how he feels about Rigged Elections.

This case was about Blacks Defrauding their own people.
One of the people charged.......wait for it......was a personal friend of Coretta King's, Albert Turner who was an aide to MLK.

"Then, in 1984, black officeholders complained of voter fraud and filed an election contest, Sessions said. Perry County, one of the smallest Alabama counties with a population of 15,000, had more absentee ballots filed than Jefferson County, population 700,000, according to a local news article."

The facts about the voter fraud case that sank Jeff Sessions’s bid for a judgeship

But Voter Fraud is one of the hardest things to prove against someone even in a blatant case like this. The Complaints of voter fraud were made by BLACK OFFICE HOLDERS, and it was Sessions' job to follow the law investigate and prosecute if he could.

This is how The New Dem Fascist Party plays. They twist the facts, they lie, they slander.
They have no ethics, and will say and do anything to advance their agendas.

Sounds a bit like Detroit.

 

[OKTexas]

because he wasn't a senator back then. just maybe eh?

That has nothing at all to do with the debate over his fitness for the position. He was unfit then and is certainly then unfit now.

fitness? wtf does that mean? fitness. you got nothing about his policies. debating isn't calling someone racist. just in case you never have done that before.

What's the subject of the letters we're discussing in this thread, dope.

yeah, what is the subject?

And oh BTW, the niece of MLK told her to shut the fk up!!!!

She is an idiot. Google her...

Strayed form the commiecrat plantation did she?