Dems Put the Screws to Murkowski

0
163

RUSH: CNN is not happy. CNN is a little on edge out there. CNN just reported that the Turtle had lunch with Susan Collins, and that the Turtle came out of having lunch with Susan Collins and said that he’s optimistic, and the CNN reporter said McConnell doesn’t do that much. He rarely speaks to the press in circumstances like this, you know, just kibitzing with them in public rather than formal setting. I think for the Turtle to say that he’s optimistic? He wouldn’t put himself out there like that if he thought Collins was gonna turn around and do a 180 on him.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: I want to reread to you Kimberley Strassel’s tweets about Lisa Murkowski. Lisa Murkowski… By the way, this is another one that CNN obviously is nervous about because earlier today Lisa Murkowski was a definite “no” on Kavanaugh, and in announcing her definite “no” she said, “He’s just not the right man for the Supreme Court right now.” “…just not the right man…” So Kimberly Strassel says now she’s changing…

She’s not changing. She’s saying that her mind’s not made up. The link is a Reuters story, and it says essentially Murkowski has not made a final decision. You could have fooled me. It sounded awfully final to me this morning when I read it. “Brett Kavanaugh is not the right man for the Senate right now.” Now she’s saying it’s not her final decision. Something is happening in that regard.

Here are Kimberly Strassel’s tweets again. The first one here… Well, they’re both right on the money. “1) Just to be clear…” (interruption) Yeah, I’m trying to amplify these. I’m trying to make sure more people will hear about these tweets than will see them. Yeah! Absolutely. It’s worth it. Kimberley Strassel, Wall Street Journal columnist, editorial page editor and writer:

“1) Just to be clear on what @LisaMurkowski voted for today…” Lisa Murkowski, Republican, Alaska, voted “to legitimize and sign off on the most despicable tactics ever in a nomination.” Lisa Murkowski, Republican, Alaska, voted today “to stand with Dianne Feinstein, Cory Booker, Kamala Harris. –to leave Judge Brett Kavanaugh subject to claims of perjury/impeachment,” which they’re going to pursue by the way. Oh yeah, they’re gonna!

Another interesting thing. Hang on. Another new development. But hang on here just a second. Here’s a second tweet before it Kimberley Strassel: Lisa Murkowski, Republican, Alaska, today voted “to abandon due process and presumption of innocence. –to potentially leave High Court at a 4-4 deadlock, putting the loony 9th circuit in control of everything that matters to Alaska,” her state, “development, prop rights, gun rights, enviro rules, etc.” Lisa Murkowski has made “uite the statement.”

These are two devastating tweets, and they are right on the money. Legitimizing and signing off on “the most despicable tactics ever,” standing with Feinstein, Cory Booker, Kamala Harris — who is in a class by herself in mendacity and a number of other things. Just… Just… Not much redeeming there. But more importantly, Lisa Murkowski has voted to leave Kavanaugh “subject to claims of perjury and impeachment,” and then leaving the court tied.

If he’s not confirmed, the court stays a 4-4 deadlock. The reason that matters is that if the court votes 4-4 on any case, then the decision prior to the court hearing, it is affirmed. Nothing changes. And that means that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals would be the highest ranking court that could make decisions regarding fundamental aspects of life in Alaska, her own home state. It would be idiotic to put the Ninth Circuit in charge if you’re a Republican… By the way, she does believe in property rights and development and gun rights.

And to put the Ninth Circus Court of Appeals and a bunch of leftists in charge of those issues in her state? This is shooting herself in the foot, all to supposedly be in unison with the #MeToo movement. So I mentioned we had a couple of photos of Dianne Feinstein. It looks like she has cornered Murkowski. I don’t know when the photos were taken. Presumably, they are recent. We could found out.

We just check Feinstein’s wardrobe on particular days of hearings. But go ahead, Scott, and put it in the switcher. For those of you watching the Dittocam, there is a picture — and stand by ’cause we have a close-up. There is a picture of Dianne Feinstein literally with Lisa Murkowski up against a wall in a hallway at a Senate office building. They are chatting with each other, and Murkowski has a pained look on her face.

Feinstein looks like she is… Well, the picture speaks for itself. With that hand up, she’s got her cornered. Feinstein has got her hand up on the wall framing Murkowski. It’s an aggressive move. It allows Feinstein to lean into Murkowski. Now, let’s switch to the close-up of that photo. For those of you watching on the Dittocam, do you see the pained expression on the face of Murkowski and the expression of intent seriousness and you-better-be-listening-to-me on the face of DiFi?

Now, we’ll have these photos up on at Rush Limbaugh too. I’m not trying to leave anybody out. But I wanted you watching on the Dittocam to be able to see these. That close-up is the same shot, just a close-up of the previously televised photo. (interruption) Is that right? Well, Dawn looking here says, “Boy, Feinstein sure does look like a bully,” and Murkowski looks very uncomfortable, does she not?

I mean, it’s a really pained look on her face, and it looks like Feinstein is running this relationship. It looks like Feinstein is giving her what-for. We don’t know when the picture was taken, and I will acknowledge that our interpretation could be wrong. We have no context here other than the hearings and the way this has been going. (interruption) Well, I wouldn’t call that romantic. I take that back.

One of these is from California, and romance there has all kinds of shapes and forms. So you could be right. It could be a romantic interlude. I certainly… What’s the old saw? It’s not for us to criticize who loves who and why. So, yeah, it could be a lovers’ spat, lovers’ quarrel. We don’t know. But I’ve gotta get these photos up to Koko, unless Koko can find them. I’m sure Koko can find them himself. He may beat me to the punch.

Now, the other breaking story… Eh, it’s not a breaking story. But in the Senate campaign in Tennessee… This is kind of interesting. This is the Marsha Blackburn story. Here opponent is Phil Bredesen, and Bredesen is saying that he’s disgusted and that if he was in the Senate, he would vote to confirm Kavanaugh. Now, he’s a Democrat running against the incumbent, Marsha Blackburn. What is a Democrat doing saying that he would vote to confirm Kavanaugh?

This is in the middle of a campaign here. Now, I know it’s Tennessee and it’s deep red. I know Bredesen wants to win and so forth, but this? He expected this to pay off for him in his campaign. This is obviously a reaction and reflection of public sentiment for Kavanaugh in the state of Tennessee. Phil Bredesen is, by the way, starting to lose ground to Marsha Blackburn in polling data. This is for Corker’s seat.

Corker, by the way, has also tweeted today that it is outrageous to punish somebody who hasn’t done anything to anybody for all of these supposed to actions other men have engaged in against women. His point is: We have no evidence Kavanaugh did anything to anybody, and we’re gonna deny him a seat on the court because of that? And the next day we’re gonna deny because of judicial temperament? Then we’re deny because he committed perjury? Then we’re gonna deny him because he threw ice at a bar back when he was in college?

But Corker made it plain that he doesn’t think Kavanaugh should be held accountable for things he hasn’t — it’s kind of like the affirmative action argument. Why in the world are we gonna be punishing people here for racial discrimination when they haven’t engaged in it? “Well, we gotta make up for lost time,” the left says. Phil Bredesen, who is starting to lose grounds, fall behind Blackburn in the race to replace Corker…

I mean, this is a really strange time to go public against his own party. He’s a former governor of Tennessee, and he “issued a statement rebuking Democrats for hijacking the confirmation process as a license to indulge in partisanship. If he was on the Senate floor right now, Bredesen announced that Kavanaugh would be planning his swearing-in ceremony. Bredesen he said he was disgusted by the treatment Dr. Ford got and he’s determined to help bring about fairer and more respectful treatment of these issues.”

Now, see, he wants both sides of this. So he goes out and he rips into the treatment of Dr. Ford but also says that Kavanaugh would be confirmed. This is… I wouldn’t call it blockbuster, but it’s one of these things that you look at and you wonder, “Why now?” On the verge of the vote a Democrat candidate for the Corker seat beginning to lose ground…? It just tells you where, at least in Tennessee, where public opinion on this resides.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Okay. Throw that picture back up on the Dittocam. Okay, that’ll work, the close-up. That picture of the alien versus Sigourney Weaver. It’s actually Dianne Feinstein and Lisa Murkowski. This picture was taken the day Blasey Ford testified. It was taken the day before; so a week ago Wednesday this picture was taken, the day before Blasey Ford and Kavanaugh testified. So that kind of helps put the picture in a little more context, does it not?

Now back to the phones to Houston. This is Scott. Great to have you on the EIB Network. Hello. We lost him. So Scott in Houston is gone. Houston’s one of my favorite towns. Mark in Knoxville Tennessee you’re next. Greetings, sir. Hi.

CALLER: Good afternoon, Rush. Thank you so much for taking my call. Any time, sir. Any time.

CALLER: Longtime listener and first-time caller. It’s an honor to speak with you today. Would like to discuss Ms. Murkowski briefly with you. I believe it was during the Gorsuch hearings that Murkowski went to the administration, i.e., Trump, and bargained her vote for exploration rights in ANWR, and I worked up in Prudhoe. I know what that’s like. The revenue that that field brings to the state residents–

RUSH: — This is correct. You’re right. I remember that. You’re exactly right. I think I know where you’re going. This is a hell of a payback.

CALLER: Yeah. Well, you know, if it’s met with some resistance, is this her way to get the gotcha back on Trump, or why hasn’t that card been paid back to her to say with the stroke of the same pen it can all go away? You know, just something that makes you go, hmm. The other question —

RUSH: Wait a minute. The stroke of the same pen…. What could go away?

CALLER: Well, if the stroke of the pen can put ANWR in place for the state.

RUSH: Oh. Oh! You mean Trump could cancel ANWR as payback to Murkowski for going against Kavanaugh?

CALLER: Yes, sir.

RUSH: He wouldn’t do it.

CALLER: Oh. Okay.

RUSH: Too many people would be hurt. Too many people be hurt by it.

CALLER: You’re right. But that means a lot for her and her state. So I don’t know. The other quick question that I have for you, as you’ve mentioned earlier that if the Democrats regain the House that almost immediately impeachment hearings would start against Trump. But it would most likely include Kavanaugh. What does that do for Neil Gorsuch? Does that put him back in play again?

RUSH: Back in play, you mean to be impeached as well?

CALLER: Absolutely, sir.

RUSH: No. No. No. They wouldn’t bite that much off. If you get rid of Kavanaugh, get him back off the bench and stall Trump’s next nominees, win the White House in 2020… No. In fact I think my guess is that they would go after Kavanaugh first, in terms of impeachment proceedings. Be fresh in everybody’s minds. Go after him on perjury and sexual harassment.

I mean, serious, serious things for which a conviction could ruin his life as well. And then after they get Kavanaugh, then they go after Trump as the guy knowingly who nominated Kavanaugh. Then they add all the other things on Trump. Just my guess that they would go after Kavanaugh first. But Gorsuch they would leave alone. Gorsuch didn’t shift the balance of the court. Kavanaugh does.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here