Mitch getting into the Christmas spirit. 🎅 🌲
Posted on 12/22/2018 10:14:12 AM PST by conservative98
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Dec. 22 spoke about the impasse over funding which has triggered a partial government shutdown.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
which has triggered a partial government shutdown............that nobody will even notice
This coward is so far deep into his globalist masters pockets he won’t as much as lift a finger to help this country!
McConnell doesn’t want to force his never-Trump, open borders coalition to vote until they water down Trump’s demands.
They don’t want to be on record opposing the wall as they know it’s political suicide.
Of course, we’d all like to see that roll call vote on the House bill, forcing a real filibuster and forcing the Republican toilet scum to out themselves.
McConnell? I rest my case...
Have a very unmerry Christmas Mitch, and an unsavory New Year.
Just vote it up or down so everyone’s on record.
He wants the shutdown to last until the new House is sworn in. Then he can officially fold and do what he really wants to do: NOTHING!
Why are you blaming the Democrats? The GOP has had control of Congress for 2 years. You should change your graphic to say “Democrats and Republicans won’t fund a border wall and won’t block sanctuary cities”
Trump should just use 5 billion out of military budget for wall. It’s part of National Security. Congress should not be able to decide the projects the Executive Branch spends on for security.
Trump already offered a compromise, asking for only $5 billion.
I had a different take on Mitch’s speech. I thought he was telling the Left that they own the shutdown and nothing is changing until they come up with a bill that is acceptable to POTUS. I got the vibe that he wasn’t putting up with more histrionics and brinkmanship. The shut-down would continue until the Democrats did their job.
From related thread …
The so-called requirement of 60 votes in Senate is a politically correct, smoke-and-mirrors procedure which effectively nullifies constitutionally guaranteed equal representation for each state in the Senate imo. Equal representation is possible only with simple majority voting, simple majority voting for Senate protected by the following constitutional clauses.
From Article I, Section 3:
"Clause 1: The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, (See Note 3) for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote [emphases added].
"Clause 4: The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided [emphasis added]."
Corrections, insights welcome.
Patriots, elections have consequences. But until patriots clean up Congress were dealing with taxation without representation.
Why is the Turdle protecting RINOs and RATs from voting on a wall.
We all know the answer.
In reading the two clauses you posted I seen reference to how issues or votes are decided except each senator gets one vote. Requiring a 60 or 70 vote majority doesn’t not negate the 1 vote per clause.
I agree that it should be 50% plus 1, but I see nothing in your post that “requires” it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
