Jeff Flake: I probably wouldn’t be blocking these judges if I weren’t retiring

[mystery-ak]

Jeff Flake: I probably wouldn’t be blocking these judges if I weren’t retiring

AllahpunditPosted at 2:01 pm on November 30, 2018

Says David Rutz, “I continue to not understand Flake’s closing argument in elected office of ‘I would normally be a spineless opportunist but now I’m not.'” It is strange. Flake made the same point during the Kavanaugh wars, when he was asked whether he would have paused the confirmation process for an FBI investigation if he had to face voters at the polls in November. “Not a chance,” said Flake. What he meant by that, I take it, is “There’s not a chance I could have done it and gotten reelected.” It’s a criticism of the ferocious partisanship that dominates the electorate right now.



But that makes it sound like he’s saying that he wouldn’t have taken these stances if he personally stood to lose anything by doing so. Which is … some admission. Sure, it’s important to find out if the next Supreme Court justice is lying about a youthful rape, and sure, it’s important to try to stop President Loose Cannon from firing the special counsel in a fit of anger. More important than a Senate seat, though? Nah.

more
https://hotair.com/archives/2018/11/30/jeff-flake-probably-wouldnt-blocking-judges-werent-retiring/

[DB]

Jeff Flake: I probably wouldn’t be blocking these judges if I weren’t retiring

AllahpunditPosted at 2:01 pm on November 30, 2018

Says David Rutz, “I continue to not understand Flake’s closing argument in elected office of ‘I would normally be a spineless opportunist but now I’m not.'” It is strange. Flake made the same point during the Kavanaugh wars, when he was asked whether he would have paused the confirmation process for an FBI investigation if he had to face voters at the polls in November. “Not a chance,” said Flake. What he meant by that, I take it, is “There’s not a chance I could have done it and gotten reelected.” It’s a criticism of the ferocious partisanship that dominates the electorate right now.



But that makes it sound like he’s saying that he wouldn’t have taken these stances if he personally stood to lose anything by doing so. Which is … some admission. Sure, it’s important to find out if the next Supreme Court justice is lying about a youthful rape, and sure, it’s important to try to stop President Loose Cannon from firing the special counsel in a fit of anger. More important than a Senate seat, though? Nah.

more
https://hotair.com/archives/2018/11/30/jeff-flake-probably-wouldnt-blocking-judges-werent-retiring/

What rape. Even if it was what she claimed it wasn't rape.

Flake is a flake. His bitterness is making it more likely the Democrats get to pick judges.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Likely the most cowardly, selfish Senator currently sitting.

And that includes the Democrats.

[skeeter]

Miserable bastard. At least rat socialists, as ignorant & disgusting as they may be, have the courage to tell you what they stand for up front.